##VIDEO ID:r50qt8oNRNE## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e good morning it's 8:30 and I'm going to call the Clay County Board of Commissioners meeting for November 19th 2024 to order first item on the agenda is approval of the agenda I'll offer a motion to approve the agenda as presented have motion second any discussion not all in favor say I I same sign uh next we have citizens be heard are there any citizens present who wish to address the commission on any item that's not on today's agenda Steve we got anybody I do not have anyone Mr chair okay uh next we have approval of payment of bills and vouchers I'm Mo to approve second have motion to Second any discussion all in favor of the motion say I I oh same sign and next we have approval of minutes from November 5th 2024 move to approve second motion second any additions or or uh discussion if not all in favor say I I oppose same sign okay moving on we have our audit report for 2023 and remote we have Karen stacken Minnesota state audit director and uh Steve are you gonna okay Mr chair she'll just take take it from the from the top okay Karen you hear us good morning good morning go ahead and proceed my name all right my name is Karen stacken I'm with the Minnesota Office of the state auditor and I'm here to present the results of your 2023 audit um so first I want to make sure to thank uh management and staff of Clay County for their cooperation and assistance during our audit um we did audit Klay County for the year ended December 31st 2023 and we've issued our opinion on the County's financial statements and also issued a management and compliance report and that's the report that you should have received a copy of um we performed our audit in accordance with auditing standards that are generally accept in the United States of America um the governmental auditing standards and also the uniform guidance and that uniform guidance are the federal requirements that are related to the federal um award programs so our opinion on the financial statements was dated December 20th 2024 it's included in the County's annual financial report um and it's an unmodified opinion which is a clean opinion it's the best one that you can get this means that the financial statements are fairly presented and conform with applicable Accounting Standards um we also audited the County's major federal Awards and have issued an opinion on compliance for the federal programs um that we audited we audited the covid-19 um coronavirus state and local fiscal recoveries funds which received an unmodified opinion we also audited the Medicaid cluster and that one did of a qualified opinion um a qualified opinion means the county has complied in all material aspects um with the compliance requirements that were directed material to the financial statements except for um in this case it was the eligibility compliance requirement had one finding and we'll talk about that in just a moment um throughout our audit any findings related to internal control compliance uh Minnesota legal compliance Federal program internal control over compliance or federal program compliance were discussed with management and staff and then at the end of the audits um we discussed those written findings um which are the ones that are included in the management and compliance report that you received in detail with members of both management and governance um our management and compliance report includes a corrective action plan and a summary schedule of Prior audit findings um both are provided by management of Klay County the corrective action plan is just Management's plan for resolving the current year issues and we do not audit that information that's in that corrective action plan um but we will be following up on it next year um and testing those items again to see if that plan was implemented um the summary schedule of Prior audit findings lists all the findings that were reported in last year's management letter and provides us the status of each of those and the status could either be fully corrected partially corrected or not corrected um so for the 2023 management and compliance report um we did have two findings and we were able to resolve one from the prior year so um in the schedule of findings and question costs it's going to include information about each of the findings it's going to have the criteria which tells you what we measured the finding against um the condition is a description of the issue the context will provide additional information or give you more perspective effective um the effect is what could happen or what it could lead to the cause is why management believes that this existed and then the recommendation is our suggestion for improvement um so if you do look at page six of that management and compliance report um the bottom of that page it does have the first finding which was related to segregation of Duties um so for this one um just because of the size of a couple of the County's departments the county doesn't have um proper segregation of Duties and it can have like one person that would be responsible for potentially doing the billing the collecting the recording depositing as well as in some cases it could be the bank reconciliation in an ideal situation you we'd like to have those um duties segregated um the effect would be that you could um an employee just doing their normal job may not find um a misstatement in a timely manner and our recommendation for the future would just be that management and board be aware of the lack of segregation of Duties and try to implement oversight procedures where possible and then the second finding is right below that it's um on starts on the middle of page seven and it's related to eligibility and this is related to the Medicaid um cluster and for the condition there um we noted that this is specifically related to eligibility that's determined through the maxus program and when we do the testing We compare um the information in the case File to what's been entered into Maxis just to make sure that the information matches and we found a few items that didn't and those are listed in the finding um what could potentially happen is that if the information um if the lack of of updated information and Maxis to document the verification of the key eligibility determining factors increases the risk that somebody could um receive benefits when they're not eligible and our recommendation would be to implement additional procedures to provide reasonable Assurance um that documentation is obtained and properly updated into Maxis so those were the two findings that we had for this year um there was one finding um from the previous year that was resolved and that was actually related to the state and local fiscal recoveries fund program and it was a finding in the past that was related to suspension and deartment so that one was resolved um does anybody have any questions any questions no it appears not all right well thank you for your time today and we look forward to working with you again in the future thank you thanks Karen thanks before we move on any any comments or discussion on this issue okay next up we have request approval of changes to benefit elections for elected officials and Darren Brooks currently our our current HR Director act all right thank you I'm not usually uh used to being early in the agenda here so I have to get cured up um so last month uh as you recall the board authorized uh human resources to add $488 a month to the non-grandfathered single County contribution for the year of 2025 and also at that same meeting the board authorized dual married couples who both work for Clay County to opt for just one family plan instead of having to carry two family single plans and at that same uh last insurance subcommittee we also discussed the possibility of researching the and allowing the elected officials the option to opt out of the uh County health insurance um and that this is if they have some of insurance as well um through talking with our benefits consultant at NIS and uh it was determined that the option to opt out of the county health insurance was possible if done as a whole group and that whole group would be all the elected officials within Clay County um this is is an option only um if an elected official wants to keep the county insurance and receive the county contribution that's perfectly fine um nobody will be forced out of the county coverage and um that would certainly be be a allowed um the Personnel policy also already allows County Commissioners to opt out of that coverage and what we would do is we would have to change the Personnel policy to include um all elected officials because the policy right now only says County Commissioners um that change would elect would allow the elected officials to continue to be paid the county contribution to pay for their own insurance or their other insurance um those that elect to opt out would have to prove that they have other coverage before they would be um given the county contribution and the county contribution at that point if the this the decision is to opt out would be taxed at the normal rate um elected officials uh still can purchase all other forms of ancillary benefits from Clay County if they would like to so if they want to keep their dental insurance or whatever this is we're just dealing with uh health insurance right now um the only one that we have the Commissioners and elected officials still in the contract would be the single um life insurance so they would you would have to continue to pay that which I think is $2.88 a month or something like that and single Dental that's single life isn't single Dental required to by all by everybody um you wouldn't you wouldn't you could opt out of that if you wanted to okay because that that's separate than the health yes we're just talking Health right now okay yes um and finally this would be no cost to the county um since all the Commissioners and all the elected officials already get a county contribution they would continue to get the same county contribution as well um um for new elected officials uh if they want to uh have a family plan and get the family cont contribution they would have to have the county um uh health benefits but if they wanted to go out on their own and and have the option to opt out of our County um health benefits they would get the single um non-grandfathered County contribution as well so with that being said I'm open for questions Mr chair go ahead you know as we talked as we talked about at our um other meeting the you know there's there there's several other uh differences between elected um people be than the people that we have who are full-time that receive benefits um and I talked about those before uh elected people are are not really considered full-time permanent positions like like most of everybody else when we hire them they're they get on as full-time employees um we get a reduced amount put into perah than all other employees we don't Bank sick time like all other employees that they can then use to help to cover some of their um medical costs down the road um you know and I I think you know as having been on the insurance committee for a long time one of the one of the ways always looking at and that's just what what exactly you talked about where we allowed that change and the multiple people working for the county and having one policy there are some things there that are the right thing to do and then there's we also have to um in all good faith we need to be watching out how we can um how our claims might be you know premiums to claims and and um if you take a look at the 87 counties and the number of Commissioners that might be higher up an age it's no secret that there might be more medical costs involved with that but that's that shouldn't be part of our decision here but you know and it but it's still is a it's a factor in trying to reduce future premium increases for everybody that's that's the goal behind this um and and again I think an important factor too and somebody might say well boy if you if we don't do this we're going to we're going to be able to buy it and then we're going to pocket a lot of cash s to speak one of the one of the issues there and you you know you brought it up is that all newly elected people whether it's the Commissioners whether it's the County Attorney um or whether it's the sheriff all newly elected people would fall under the non-conforming use of of for health purposes for the cafeteria plan which means they you know if they're a family they get family coverage and if they're single they get a a single cafeteria plan contribution if a newly elected person decides that they want to go opt out they are going to get the single cafeteria contribution not the family one correct so you know and it'll be taxed and it'll and and it'll be tax and the difference will be taxed yes so I I I support this I I think it's uh and again I I I do this as from the standpoint that I look at the potential of also how it can reduce future premium increases so commissioner krabo um I I yes I I can't articulate as well as you just did Kevin but uh anyway I've been part of these uh subgroup committees also are the insurance committee right along with Kevin uh for the last year or so and and um this has come up a couple times uh we finally brought it toward the assignment full support of it um and just um I don't see any part of it that is negative to the county um I think it gives flexibility um for especially electives that don't know how long they're going to be here some security the fact that perhaps they they uh may want to um be keeping some of the health uh programs that are already they come in with and uh this is forces some of those elected people to pay for two insurance premiums also so um that's the only thing I would add but again strongly in support and and uh I don't know where at what point we asked for a motion uh so that we can discuss it but I would do that at this point so I'll make a motion to allow elected officials the option to opt out of the Clay County insur insurance benefits and to purchase their own health insurance while continuing to receive the county contribution second have motion a second further discussion commissioner moso thank you I see um some concerns that I had with this during our work session so I'll be voting against this today any other discussion if not we'll move to a vote all in favor of the motion say I I I oppose same sign I okay the motion passes okay thank you next up uh request approval of change order number seven for withdrawal management detox facility uh thank you Mr chair Commissioners uh before you this morning is change order number seven uh this uh change order came about due to a city Fire Marshall inspection uh the request uh the request is to provide uh additional funds of uh of excuse me of uh let's see am I in the right one um here we are of the $829 190 uh for fire alarm modifications that that were brought forward uh making sure that we have additional strobe notifications in our Ada U rooms within the within the facility with that ideal for any questions questions for Steve we have no questions I'll entertain a motion well I I Mr chair I would I would just say that all of these things have gone through through the committee too and all of these are recommended for approval so I would I would move to approve change order number seven I'll second the motion have motion to Second any further discussion Mr care commissioner mjo thank you there was a a story on the news last night about this and it kind of left a cliffhanger that it's it seemed like the opening was going to be considerably delayed and I I just want to assure the public that we really aren't that far out from um getting open I talked to Gertz this uh weekend on the project and there's just minimal components that we're waiting on to get folks transferred um over there to start uh serving them there obviously we're still serving uh the public at the detox facility across the road but I just want to State and maybe clarify that that delay is not as substantial as it was maybe um alluded to in a news story last night commissioner Campbell yeah I I agree with those comment I I I do think that we should um if we Steve if we could could be constantly updated too you know it's it's one thing for the incidentals that might need to go on uh through the contractor and those items it's another issue on uh the permitting process and wa and waiting uh for St Paul you know so I hopefully hopefully that doesn't just draw this thing out for weeks and months at a time as I mentioned before a long time ago um we approved hiring an awful lot of additional staff with the idea in mind that we're going to be open in October and and here we are know so we have all these people hired and we're not the facility isn't actively in place so you know so there there is a um there's there's a cost to us by not getting taking full advantage of this facility and it's certainly not at the fault of us so if we can just be updated and we'll do that I don't know I don't know uh what strings we can pull or people we can call in St Paul that can help maybe expedite this because it's it's costly to us for every day that those doors are locked so any further conversation entertain a motion Mr chair we have a motion and I think we're ready for the vote okay I'm sorry okay all in favor the motion say I I oh same sign motion passes we've got a public hearing at 9: but we have time Steve if you want to I have several in a row several in a row here I could move forward the next item uh then would be uh agenda number six a change order in in regards to the DMV project uh in a total dollar amount of $18642 uh if you take a look at the uh the second page uh we had several uh credits uh a accent ban material substitution allowance uh dedu deduct which we had didn't we had an allowance set aside that we didn't spend uh and then window sill substitution these three together are about $5,000 uh we had several additional costs a kiosk countertop addition uh they made a decision to move to uh to iPads uh uh in our in our kiosk area and so that required an adjustment uh and then uh we had a um exterior canopy lighting and then also we were about nine baffles short when they got uh got everything up in the ceiling for that cloud effect and so that was an additional $830 uh total uh total a net of $18642 again just note the board's already taken action but we wanted to make sure that it was uh addressed within a change order as the LW being staff chairs uh of $1,793 leaving a remaining contingency of $ 164,165 I deal for any questions allot for a motion to approve change order number five I'll I'll second that and and if I can Mr I would I would offer the same deal where our committee did agree with all of these change orders and and recommend recommend that this be approved any further Frank have a question on the baffles why weren't the why do they need additional baffles why wasn't that figured in I mean that should have been part of the original bit shouldn't it um my my understanding it was part of the original bid but when they got the baffles up and they were spaced the way that it was set up through uh through the the I guess the process we were nine of them short in order to complete the whole process so I realize it's a minor deal but I just feel was up to the bid get half that done I mean if they were short they were short they Supply them but evidently not any other comments or questions not we'll move to a vote all in favor of the motion say I I I oppose same sign motion passes if you want to go for a trifecta Mr chair I have uh I have the next two but I was wondering if just from a timing standpoint we have members from the chamber that are here uh could we slide uh slide number up to number nine uh and that way U they wouldn't have to stay through a public hearing absolutely ladies um thank you thank you Mr chair last uh last uh Tuesday I think that uh we had a work session and as we're preparing ing for uh for our budgets uh several agencies that we provide funding for are also preparing for their budgets as part of our preliminary Levy we were asked by the greater Fargo Morhead econ economic de development and the Fargo Morad West Fargo chamber uh for a combined request this year totaling $250,000 for for the new innovate 28 program uh through our budgeting preliminary budget discussion uh we made made the determination uh that we would provide the the same funding that we did uh in 2024 of $100,000 uh uh for the chamber $85,000 for the EDC um uh through some discussions with members of the EDC and the Chamber uh we felt they felt that it would be beneficial for uh for uh the uh the county to consider a combined uh combined gift or allotment of $185,000 and so we had some discussion last week and uh heard from Shannon full on the position of the two agencies uh and are here before you this morning looking for your guidance and Direction so they're able to best plan uh for their for their budget for 2025 that ideal for any questions thank you commissioner Campbell uh Mr chair you know again I guess I I support what they what they're trying to do jointly on this um but I I just just from a technical standpoint we can't make a motion to fund innovate 28 because that isn't an entity sure so there's there has to be some fiscal host that's this money would go to and I'm assuming that's the chamber what's the EDC okay so you know so I so I guess then you know Steve from my standpoint you know what motion we'd have to make would be to fund through EDC the innovate 28 program and then the check would have to go through that and that you know I I think that's important to understand and I think it's also important to understand that that this isn't an ongoing uh this is this is a onee at of time deal because we we can't be committing to Future years on this but but I but I think if we have we have to we have to give the motion based on an entity and you know so I don't know if there's people that think different than that but I'm assuming that that's what we'd have to do further discussion commissioner Mojo thank you I had the opportunity to talk with Shannon last night and I appreciate that she has staff here but uh just really wanted to reiterate from her how much she appreciates the collaboration and the leadership that we've had together on these projects and she really feels that moving forward holistically is really in the best interest of both entities uh my only uh caution if you will is is as we move into subsequent years in budgeting I don't want it to look like there's a significant decrease for the chamber right and an increase in one because because then that's where we get questioned well you know you had a 40% decrease to the chamber and all of a sudden you're asking for a 40% increase when really it would be um they would offset each other and I know we do that with different grants and we just really have to it's more an educational piece but um I work more with the chamber um with my portfolios than the EDC I know those of you um work with EDC more but uh just our money is so well spent working with this entity um the the presence um the lobing the advocacy the the meetings that they're willing to host and and pull together for us I I've been I've talked to staff um from the chamber uh four out of the last seven days on serious and important issues for Klay County so they continue to represent us so well so I will really lean into what their advice on this component is but um uh I'm a fierce advocate for what the work that they do Mr chair commissioner Campbell well I I at this point I guess I I would like to make a motion that um that we authorize $185,000 um through the EDC um as a recommendation by both the chamber and EC to fund the new innovated innovate 28 program for 2025 I'll second that okay we have motion second um I want to Echo commissioner Mojo's observations uh the chamber has been indispensable to us in a lot of ways along with uh downtown Morhead Inc and other entities they've really addressed a lot of the issues that impact our community and the side of the river I know there's been some concerns and EDC is in my portfolio um this in no way reflects uh a decision on this commission's part to not fund the chamber and to F transfer These funds to EDC I'd like that to be on record uh the chamber has through their actions and their support and their activities in many many factors on this side of the river has supported our community and we don't want this to detract from that so for this year um I'm I'm comfortable in the motioning as it's worded that this is simply a clerical shift to uh the priorities that both the chamber and ADC have any further uh Frank I got a question the M did we originally apply 185,000 and they just want 85,000 more no M so uh commissioner gross the in previous last year we had 100,000 went to the chamber and 85 went to EDC and they're just asking that that last year's number be combined and put in towards one entity to cover this new innovate program that they're both requesting so that the dollar amount doesn't go up or down from last year okay thank you m crab did you have something okay Mr chair I and I agree with you and that's kind of why I put in my motion that it's important to understand understand that that that 185 is at the request of both entities to do and you know I agree with what they both said about the chamber uh going all the way back to their hard work and efforts and helping us even when we went through the sales tax deal for for our new law enforcement center and Correctional Facility they were they stood behind a strong on that and they and they haven't stopped issues that are important to Clay County uh so I I don't want this to appear that we're not funding the chamber by any means so is this going to affect our budget then no no it will not M Mr chair commissioner commissioner gr this is the dollar amount that we have in our preliminary budget okay any further discussion if not we have motion to second on the floor all in favor of the motion say I Mr chair can I just get a clarification who was the second I commission I have commissioner Campbell as the making the motion I don't have a I don't krain KRA yeah thank you okay any further discussion if not all in favor the motion say I I oppose same sign motion passes and thank you ladies for coming over here representing the chamber okay next on the agenda agenda we have uh public hearing Metro flood diversion Authority uh to acquire an obstruct Road right away an approval of Revol resolution 2433 to take over Road right away and authorizing the permit permanent obstruction thereof do we have chair move to open the hearing second have motion second all in favor of uh moving to a public hearing say I I I post same sign we are in public hearing Justin get away good morning so the purpose of the public hearing is a request that was received from the diversion authority to acquire an obstru obstruct Road right away on 170th Avenue South so that's the area that will be crossed by se4 so essentially what this public hearing is doing is just kind of notifying the land owners around and then also acknowledging that the county will take over that small stretcher road that will be permanently closed and obstructed by se4 any questions or comments um Comm Campbell maybe maybe just a little brief history seeing H in a public hearing too and I I think in this in this process and this goes back in having um several dialogues with Holy Cross Township and and land land owners there and for the longest time um the Corp of Engineers had wanted to close both 150th and 170th and um the township was adamantly opposed to that as a matter of fact they wanted both of those to remain open and um the county uh stepped in on behalf of the township and tried to convince the core that we should keep those both open uh the core was uh did did agree to keep 150th open but they would not agree to 170th that was that was their form of compromise and I think they had several reasons based on alignment and those other factors and not doing that and so uh you know then there was um and I know Chris bigard and Katie are here uh as well from the diversion Authority and part of what we're were hoping for in this whole process is that Holy Cross Township would come to an agreement through anou with with the diversion Authority and is my understanding now that that has been completed and that there so there is a there is a mutual agreement uh in place which is um I'm glad to hear uh and both parties were able to work that out and really so really what this amounts to and this is the County's responsibility to do we have all this legal jargon that's that's in our packet and really what it boils down to is we're vacating a very short section of Road and that's really what it amounts to um and you know so I think I I I while we're in this public hearing I just want to say thanks to Chris and Katie and Jody and everybody else who worked in this regard along with Holy Cross Township to uh be able to work out this agreement and I'm really glad to see that happen that's my little history I was I was part of those discussions as well and it was uh it's gratifying to see that although not everybody got everything they wanted um the Corp yielded on on 150th and that kept that road open and I'm glad there's been a compromise on 170th and uh we can move ahead with the project any other questions observations commissioner Mojo thank you Mr chair I also want to I just really appreciate the flexibility and the willingness to come to the table for Holy Cross Township it's um these are um there are uh winners and losers in some of these components of the projects and uh it's taken a long time to to get to this uh position and I know there's been a lot of hard conversations I really do feel like this is a good uh compromise um particularly um to get uh it finished in southern Clay County so thank you than you any land owners here kind I don't see any but any further from the uh the county side or the diversion we've covered it any comments or observations from from the uh board move to close hearing okay all in favor closing the hearing say I I I oppose same sign motion passes Mr chair I would move the resolution 202 24-33 to take over right of way and authorize permanent obstruction thereof do I have a second second okay any further oh yeah any further discussion if not we'll have a roll call commissioner Mojo yes commissioner Campbell yes commissioner eer yes commissioner gross yes commissioner krainov yes hey motion passes thank you thank you and thank you for the hard work thank you okay Steve I guess we can Jump Ahead to uh agenda 8 before the break we're running well ahead of time thank you thank you Mr chair members of the commission uh as you recall this last year uh the board felt that it was important not only to work closely with uh with our AMC uh committee members and policy groups but also to identify specific issues that are important to to Clay County and uh this past uh past Tuesday uh this board met in work session to talk about uh the possibilities of what those legislative priorities could be for the 2025 session um we' heard had different discussions heard different presentations uh and uh through our through our discussions three three areas uh came forward uh as they did last year the first uh area was flood mitigation uh flood diversion funding uh we also had 911 emergency response funds and the third item was mental health Acuity of the psychiatric Residential Treatment Facility uh and uh in replacing our current non-secure facility uh with uh uh with the prtf and looking for funding for a non-secure detention uh and so um with that uh I would open it up for for some discussion from this Commission discussion commissioner Campell these are all these are all equally important in their own way obviously and I and I I I think that each of them our our approach to the funding on each of them is likely to be different uh and again we have we have our two board members here who are act as our working Representatives with legislative issues in St Paul with commissioner Mojo and commissioner kinof and and I you know and I as obviously number three is and I I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't I don't think these are listed in a ranking order so to speak it's because they're all equally important and they all have to be funded through their own sources through St Paul one may be bonding you know obviously the flood diversion stuff the likely and only option for that would be through bonding whereas with our mental health that one is is you know hopefully through the governor budget are through Health and Human Services and 911 could be through Public Safety dollars so they're all they're all different in themselves and I just don't want it the way we have it listed here that there's a priority sequence to them that um they're all equally important for us that's my comment I think we've seen energy from some of our legislators and certainly from uh members of this Commission uh that don't indicate that this is a a list of priorities I think all three of them are important as commissioner Camp will pointed out really they're coming from different resources different uh variations of State funding and we need to focus on all three any further comments U I'm kind of repeating that again it's about timing and when our legislators and and when that priority gets the highest level whether it's us toward them or or whoever we're reaching out to that's again uh then that's the timing of that priority but um yeah so it's not waited in any one way we we do know uh up and Forefront at this moment you know the prtf is being talked about a lot and that development will still uh take shape over the next month and once once uh you know if I I look at diversion funding you know that'll most likely be after the session opens and if they have bonding or whatever to be advocating and and the 911 you know um representative Joy is speaking toward that continually so let them do their work yeah 911 is definitely a work in progress right now there's been a huge internal shift in supervision of the various components within a Department of Public Safety and we're still I think the priority this year is to get a mediator hired and get the 911 legislation updated and um I don't know if we're going to be able to identify the 911 funding and get it to the P apps but that's ultimately our goal so I don't know how much um focus there's going to be on getting any 911 funds uh paid out to the to the various baps within our state uh there's so much basic work to get our legislation straightened out that that I think is going to be the priority the flood diversion obviously is important and our P the p app that we're working on has got huge support from across the state across this part of the state and has taken a lot of energy from commissioner Mojo Mr kravinoff and our local legislators so that's got life of its own and funding sources that go beyond just bonding so that's an exciting uh opportunity for us and I think obviously we need to state that is a priority any further comments commissioner Mojo thank you Mr chair thank you for the um long conversation that we've all had regarding our legislative priorities I really appreciate the discussion we had at the work session but even more encouraging is the amount of partners that we have in all three of our legislative priorities anywhere from um our our local Partners to different counties to our Statewide uh partners and then representatives in um in St Paul really excited that Klay county has taken such a bold step in in prioritizing these and making sure we're having discussions not just in legislative session that really helps us to um further the cause and the resources you know at some point we'll have to figure out on a calendar really when how we um when whoever will be in St Paul because we've heard from um those that are sponsoring the bills that we need to have a weekly presence down there so I think that's a discussion more about calendar alignment but um really hopeful that we can continue to elevate the needs that we're seeing and I I just want to say for the the public it's it's exciting to be in Statewide meetings and hear from so many different people that are problem solving Statewide wow Klay county is really proactive in taking on um these issues bringing awareness to issues being um such active problem solvers and and it's it is really exciting to these are not uh issues that we're um really excited to say that we have to deal with but it's something that we're going to deal with I think commissioner girl said uh last week um if it's something that it's need needs to be done why aren't we doing it it needs to be done so um I'm excited about the conversations that are going to come in the legislative session and hopeful that we are able to um raise um maybe get some dollars this way or some some um language and bills uh to represent these changes I do want to say to the public too that um this is not um the only items that we will be advocating for at the State uh often projects come forward to us that we they're asked for Resolutions of support and um certainly we have the platforms through the association of Minnesota counties and so we will continue to elevate all of those issues as we need F the comments I do want to point out I attended the first meeting of the restorative justice program the grant we're seeking through the state last week and the comments the observations made by people within the our community and outside of the community about the focus we have on juvenile Health this this Pro this uh attempt to get a prtf put together for juveniles and West Central's role in providing really good services to people in this part of the community U we've got a reputation it's well well earned but that doesn't come easily it takes a lot of work on the part of our staff on the part of our legislative bodies including this commission and I think uh we really need to give a nod to the energy that commissioner Mojo commissioner Krab off put in and Steve and the and our staff have put in on on uh the issue of the mental health any further comments we got a motion is there a specific language here we I don't believe we have motion we just had discussion okay well may uh without seeing any I don't see their guidelines but anyway I'll make a motion bottom motion be adopted by C for is that a motion you go ahead I didn't you make it oh I I thought you already did I was just second oh no I don't see the paperwork for it but anyway that's all right you need it right there thank you all right I'd move to approve flood diversion funding mental health Acuity psychiatric Residential Treatment funding facility and the 911 emergency funds as Klay County Board of Commissioners uh 2025 legislative priorities second okay have motion second any further discussion now move to a vote all in favor of the motion say I I I poose same sign motion passes okay and uh right now we take a 10-minute break e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e and then call the meeting back to order and next on the agenda is going to be a request approval to hire accounting technition for the auditor's office due to a resignation uh thank you Mr chair as you mentioned sitting in for Miss Johnson uh this morning she's looking to to replace uh a accounting technician due to the recent resignation uh this H position is included within her budget in fact uh the employees has been with her County for a number of years and so we'll probably be looking at uh uh Savings in the in the rehiring with that i' yield for any questions any questions for Steve move to approve the request second okay motion to Second any further discussion all in favor say I I post same sign motion passes we have a public hearing that we've got to wait uh 27 minutes for so that'll give us time to do some of our committee reports and we're going to start with commissioner krabo thank you Mr chair uh going back to last Tuesday that in the afternoon we had our commission work group meeting uh discussing the issues I guess we' mentioned everyone today our priorities uh our uh our collaboration our investment with the uh innovate 28 and then also the uh that the Med full insurance opt out possibility so well discussed uh that evening I was uh at the Buffalo red um Watershed monthly meeting and uh uh you get this time of year where um before the rain came you have a lot of fuel work going on uh it's where drainage is reanalyzed by a lot of uh land owners um so it it started out a little unusual but it happens from time to time we had uh there were three citizens uh speaking and uh and it was about drainage and how it was affecting some of their ditches or um kind of uh conflicts between neighbors so anyway they they were addressed and then and and uh there was one in Clay County and then two down in Wen one in Becker and one in Wen and anyway long sh of it uh there's no action taken it's just that uh uh the the the board hears it then also staff speaks to it and then they try to come to some resolution to help them move forward in in in their area of concern uh also uh there was one uh one dra drain toel permit there too was um two neighbors trying to block out someone from draining water and and um not being able to have drain tow put in and anyway the uh the board did uh move to Grant this gentleman his uh grain tile that was also down and woken and then uh the last comment I'll make about the meeting we have they have their citizens visory committee set up every year that uh those appointments will be made in January so um that's what I have to say about that and then uh we had a we um commissioner Mojo myself Steve and others um our small group on the um on the prtf uh plan uh we had a Le uh weekly meeting with representative Keeler um ongoing discussions on that uh how we simply keep moving forward to advance the cause of funding um the next day was uh uh an event put together by the uh uh Family Resource committee or u center excuse me Family Resource uh Center yeah uh bringing forward uh their ideas updating the plan um and so in doing so it's kind of come to a point uh where the planning's pretty well in place the ideas and they want to get it out to uh stakeholders um I was very impressed with the numbers so it was held at the mcom center uh very good two two and a half hour meeting a lot of input from other nonprofits mainly from our schools and and what this Resource Center could be and again I'll just reexpress this is not about a physical location it's about at this point a hub a na Navigator of all the resources that uh can help with accessibility and and U The Knowing of the programs that are created in Clay County not Clay County entity but the in in the county of clay Clay County uh that all these nonprofits and and people are involved with uh and anyway so they gave a presentation on that that was mainly done by um uh uh Megan Jensen who's a creative uh uh communities Consulting um Quinn uh speaking for the um uh Clay County Social Services they are the fiscal host for this money comes through the state to go out toward uh these programs and then also uh caplp who's been identified uh if everything moves forward they would be the Navigator of the whole thing and uh so those three spoke um didn't know how many to expect I thought maybe there'd be around 2025 and just short of 60 people showed up so it just shows the en energy behind it one more update on that is that there are grants that pay for all this work that's being done and um there was one initial rant $80,000 from um uh Sawyer Grant uh Sawyer Foundation excuse me any a grant and uh so having done the work there there the second phase of the sour Grant is um uh it's called The implementation phase and that funding was approved uh in the last couple weeks so uh they now have $86,000 to spend over two years on implementation the other Grant was a bigger one that's through the state the HS and that one there is an exact exact number to it but it's up in the range of $680,000 over three years and I think they're uh very close to having that approved so again when all these things happen uh I'll be um Steve will be aware of it and uh maybe what we can do is get Quinn to come and give a presentation updates and uh perhap cap LP and uh Megan might join them just to give us a full picture of uh what that may look like and the funding behind it um and that was my meetings for the week thank you commission Mojo thank you last week I also attended the work session group with all of you I virtually attended the Buffalo red Watershed District as reported on by commissioner krainov well I worked on the prtf uh task list that we had before that meeting on the uh with representative Keeler on the Wednesday I attended the fmda Land Management committee meeting we basically dealt with recommendations for excess land that has been acquired smaller remnants um the vast majority of which were um recommended for approval actually all of them were recommended for approval sorry last week I took several calls in regards to um issues that are ongoing talked with Kurt stubstad our representative on the Buffalo red Watershed about um working with a couple land owners on some ditch concerns uh clean out concerns followup conversations with kale Dunwoody on the um benefactor hotel stay um issue that was brought to our attention for homeless folks and then also uh followed up with him on legislative conversations that were had in a meeting that was held here with our legislative Representatives yesterday I attended the fall Township meetings that were held at the LEC grateful to the Sheriff's Department for allowing the use of that facility such a great space for something like that and due to the construction of the Dorth fire hall it sounds like we'll host them again in the spring great updates uh thank you to all the staff that were able to attend and provide highlights of the work that they're doing there um just one item that kept coming um to my attention is uh all of our staff were so open to receiving comments and questions for from Township officials and and all of them gave out their personal cell phone number said if any issue comes up call me directly we'll deal with this and it just really speaks to the um Spirit of collaboration between the townships and the the county of as well so thank you for that opportunity yesterday I also attended a tour with our prtf um subgroup of the Dakota Boys Ranch prtf facility and school that exists in South Fargo grateful for the opportunity to discuss with uh the staff there on on highlights and opportunities that that facility um has there and how we can um Implement part of those components into our new vision for um what we're discussing and then after that was able to attend part of the Planning Commission or planning planning meeting for that prtf uh with um Solutions and the architect and County staff as well and I believe that concludes my report thank you commissioner Campbell thank you on November 12th in the afternoon after our work group that's been discussed and I believe there's minutes that they going to be out on that um I did attend along with commissioner kbn we talked a little bit more about our inter government committee and the planning of the retreat and there's been based on their most recent committee meeting there was some changes to the um lineup for the or the agenda for the 2025 January um agenda and prior to that we had uh we had listed as one of the topics as the opioid issue and the other was we were going to receive an update on Heartland trails with all the recent developments and and where the Heartland Trails is on everybody's docket right now with Metro Cog and everything that we decided that that would probably we could delay that conversation and focus instead on some of the homeless issues that are before us now so uh there's and also bringing in a conversation about our prtf and so just a maybe a little advanced warning for um commissioner Mojo and commissioner kraban I think that I think the two of you and myself and Steve are going to probably be asked to be on a panel to talk about the prtf I think the two of you can handle the legislative part and I'll be there more to talk about the design piece of it and using the current facility and how we're planning to do that and Steve will kind of moderate that I think so so that would be you can probably anticipate that and I think that has been move to probably the late morning agenda item and then um Steve and um I don't know if it's Sarah if it's Jackie whoever is work is assisting with that afternoon uh we do intend to have a a panel which will include Quinn um and I think the a couple of others in in regards to the some of the homeless issues there will be a an agenda on that as well then on November 13th I attended the Land Management committee meeting and that one we recom we actually recommended um at this point in time several Parcels of L excess lands to go up for sale and um in this particular case we're actually looking at having revenues come in uh for excess lands of about $2.5 million so it's lands that had been purchased before that now we now with where we are in the project we know they're not going to be needed so we're going to sell those back to the public at least that's the recommendation that's going to go before the diversion authority to make that decision this week on Thursday um Thursday morning I did attend the um dispatch board meeting uh I'm going to defer to our board chair he also chairs that to give the update on on that one and um I there was some exciting news on some savings I think about to the tuna about $700,000 in savings U I'll let commissioner aringer fill in the details there on his report and then in the then I did attend the Lakes Country service Cooperative um board of directors meeting that day as well um there's 's an election coming up uh for officers for that board and then I was pleased to find out that one of our uh Morhead school board members has put his name in the in the Hat to to be elected to that and that's Scott stus and so it's um and it sounds like there there's four openings and I think there's four applicants so there's a high likelihood that we'll have two people from Clay County that'll serve on Lakes Country Service coopertive Board um and they they did talk about there's a they do have a regional school crisis volunteer network that's very interesting and and can be very helpful for if there's ever a a crisis situation in any school they're they all they all have numbers to know who they can call and there is a a an instant rapid response um or team that's put together uh through Lakes Country that can go anywhere within our uh County membership to help in handling a crisis situation so that's really no nice to know that's available in all school districts are aware of that on the um and then on the 18th yesterday we had our commissioner moo talked about the tour of the Dakota Boys and Girls per prtf in Fargo that was a nice tour to be on um I was kind of focused on the on the living quarters that are there um in addition to the education it it's a little bit different over there because they also open up the education to um folks that are outside of the prtf you know in our particular plan will have a education system within that building just for the um prtf people people that are there kids that are there then we came back here and we had uh some extensive discussions regarding the design we focused on awful lot on the non-secure building uh through the process we we did receive a preliminary design uh and after having several discussions we noticed in there that there were only two classrooms uh designed in there and uh after discussing it further we felt that it would be more appropriate to have three for the number of kids that would be there and so we were able to through alter you know just altering some stuff we were able to fit those three classrooms within the within the same footprint that's currently under design um we also uh talked about doing some internal modifications to the I'm going to call it a restricted pod I don't know Steve maybe you can help me out but it's it's one where where we have one pod that's going to be designed to be more hardened correct yeah uh the exterior the doors will be locked in that in that area yeah yeah so we you know because obviously they there's a portion of those kids that are a little bit more troubled and and we so in that regard but what we were able to do in making a few adjustments to that is it will allow us uh through Quinn's budget to be able to be reimbursed by the state for up to $250,000 a year in additional funding that we currently our non-secure unit does not qualify for so when you when you think about that that that's that slight adjustment to our our plan will bring in that extra Revenue that will really help um in the funding of that um yeah I think and and we then we did get a preliminary look at how that proposed structure would fit on our campus uh so that we got to First Look at that and there will be more to come on that that concludes my report thank you Mr gross um I last Tuesday I also attended the work session we had it's been reported on uh Thursday I had the beyond the yellow ribbon uh I think at this time of the year most of the veterans programs most of them are discussing discussing Christmas programs they're going to have but um there's um one thing with the mor State University they have a representative they're in U on their staff and he's this Thursday he's going to have a at 5: to 6 o' at Barry Auditorium he's going to have a coffee and talk question for anybody I think they got 1700 17009 veterans going to the school at Mor state so he's got quite a bit of people that could get involved with stuff that he's got going on there that there's also the mor American Le is going to have a Christmas program December 8th for children grandchildren if you're interested in that um uh there's also another group going to uh I don't know where they're going to be sent to whe is Ukraine or where anybody veterans that are getting ready to be to go across SE somewhere then yesterday afternoon we had the C of officers meeting which was I'm just appreciate the people that came from our staff to talk about that give give information I think those Town job officers interested in what's going on and the more we can help them out I feel it's good to pass on that information that's our only opportunity we have oh we don't I mean I guess we can email them all but I it's really a good contact we have with our to of officers and I really appreciate that meeting those are the three I had thank you okay thank you um let's see last Tuesday on the 12th uh following our commission meeting met with Steve uh Quin edger and commissioner kraban off and we had a meeting reference uh some of the churches United issues that are coming up and some options uh that the county has always had for getting some State funding directed to them uh after that we uh Steve and I met with Kathy McCay just having a discussion on the P4 community and and commissioner gross uh discussing the P p4h Community Health board meeting that we've got this coming Friday and then I attended the board work session which was uh addressed by other Commissioners uh this morning uh or the issues that we covered were addressed this morning by the commission and following that I had the final and I'm happy to say final meeting of safe and secure U courts Grant reviews and we have successfully spent the half million dollars of legislature designated to harden courtrooms um and cour houses across the state we issued 24 grants and we spent the grant money down to the last nickel and everybody who submitted a grant request although many of them didn't get their entire request everybody had some of their needs met it was a very good process on Wednesday the 13th we had our first restorative practices advisory committee meeting um really impressed with the people in the community that are part of this process our County attorney um Mr Melton was there we had a we had a great starting meeting on this and uh going after is it a $500,000 Grant yes 500,000 will be the maximum maximum well with the with the response we got and what the uh commissioner who's over this saw he was there remotely I think he was pretty impressed with the engagement that your staff in this community and the schools and everybody else are part of this it was really gratifying to see the the turnout we had I think he pointed out he was working from home and he said that he had to call his wife in to take a look and see the amount of people had shown up there and just wanted to point out to his wife that he was just so impressed with the uh the amount of people that shown up so it was a great turnout yeah just having completed a state Grant process that matters when you have Community commitment like we've got here and as I indicated earlier that the reputation this county has for addressing the needs of our juveniles uh I think that can do nothing but add to the credibility of our request for grant funding so I'm excited to look forward see where we're going to go with that um on Thursday I attend to beond the L ribbon meeting with commissioner gross and he covered that and later that day I attended the Red River Regional Dispatch Center uh Board of authority meeting and we did have some good news uh as everybody knows we're building a new Dispatch Center and one of the critical costs in that is always a technology and in our technology budget it's broken down into two categories that we got a report on one is the consoles and that is not just the furniture that's the equipment that goes in to each workstation of the dispatchers and the call takers and we had budgeted 1.99 million doll for that and the final version looks like we uh say we came in about 379,000 under our budget um we also we upgrading the Lumen call handling system that we're getting the one that uh we have is not going to be worth transporting and reinstalling in the new center and it can't handle the load that we're anticipating so the up grade we had uh 9,000 in the budget we came in 380,000 under and Brian Zill and U the staff of the of the Dispatch Center I'm going to give them all the credit they have really done a good job on this and it's good news to see something coming in under budget instead of over on all these projects were involved in so that was the good news commissioner Campbell spoke of um yesterday I attended the township officer meeting and we've got a public hearing coming up so I'll keep it short but it is just gratifying the staff we've got and The credibility they have the township system and I wasn't aware how critical it is to the county all the years I worked for the city we never really dealt with townships but they are the the boots on the ground in government and they need to communicate with with us and we need to communicate with them these meetings are great but to see the sheriff Justin just everybody on our on our our staff uh you know you can't the you cannot underestimate and I'm leaving people out I'm trying to think uh I'm looking at my notes oh Matt who's here I mean they trust our people our people work with them they make themselves aail ailable it's a very good place makes our job easy as Commissioners we look real good because you guys work so hard so I appreciate that and that completes my report and oh I just have one addition my report on the meeting yesterday Lauren angerton gave a good U contribute to the flag again he always gives good uh talks on that and he did another great job again yesterday so thank you Lauren and Steve do we want to squeeze you in here if I think it probably be all right my report's not too long um much of it is similar to the meetings you guys have attended I'll just touch on maybe the ones that I didn't uh was on on my own um met uh on the 12th had a conversation with darly uh in regards to Shared issues with the HRA on the 13th we had clay we had Clay County management we talked about legis elections legislative priorities heard to update from HR um on the 14th participated in the MCC jpa pre meeting we talked about property Acquisitions litigation updates relocation reimbursement uh solar garden release agreement and 2025 Farm leases that will be on the agenda uh this coming Thursday um on the 14th and 15th I participated in the AMC Futures uh we had an election debrief we heard from the commissioner tar tomes and chief security officer John Israel from um Minnesota it or minute uh I think one of the things that it was important to talk about in our in our one of the things that we talked a lot about with them was the importance of updating Maxis the Social Service uh platform that that you that all Social Service uses as we heard through our audit process from the state many of our errors uh uh that uh the errors that we've seen on our audit are often attributed to in that program I'm not suggesting that they're all the the systems problems but they that update certainly needs to to happen and so uh we were able to share that concern uh with them we also heard from Rita Reynolds CIO uh on cyber security from noik uh and shared some different programs already with Rory uh that we heard about there uh we also heard uh had a update on the from the AMC um citizen League group uh working making sure the work working getting to done uh in keeping employees looking towards local government as a career and then heard from um Sarah Hennessy Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court uh and just a note next week uh we are scheduled to meet at 5:00 pm with for our Board Room uh board meeting and truth and Taxation is at 6 PM that concludes my report thank you Brian do you have anything Jackie um just real quick uh tomorrow is g day so there'll be um um open house basically from 9: to 3: so come on stop by there'll be some new online that will be displayed okay all right moving back to the agenda um have a public hearing scheduled for a petition for rezoning do I have a motion move to open second a motion and a second all in favor moving and public uh hearing say I I poose same sign okay we are in the petition for rezoning public hearing Matthew take it away good morning Mr chair and Commissioners so this uh item before you today at this public hearing is a petition for rezoning of a parcel from agricultural General to Highway commercial uh the location of this parcel is just east of Holly and on the south side side of Highway 10 address is 24297 Highway 10 Holly Minnesota 56549 uh this is the property the base District again is agricultural General uh the request by the applicant is a petition to rezone from agricultural General to Highway commercial a bit of property history for you um as far as we know this has always been a commercial property the original structure was built in 19 1965 and there were additions in 1975 and 1999 so it was historically an electrical contractor shop in business and my understanding is the the gentleman who ran the electrical contractor shop lived in the house across the street and he would go and walk over to the to to this business um they did receive a cup so a conditional use permit in 1999 to convert from uh one non-conforming use to a different non-conforming use I will explain non-conforming use in just a a moment here um and since then it's been a floral business and it's also been a briefly was a craft store the current business in this location is Car King Auto they also have a location in Holly in within the city of Holly as well so for non-conformity non-conformities so the definition of a non-conformity is a structure or use or a premise which was lawful before the passage of an amendment of a zoning ordinance regulation but is no longer in conformance with the existing zoning regulations so this is often kind of I think interpreted as oh I have a property that's grandfathered in um it's grandfathered because it existed before the current zoning um regulations one of the kind of differences or the misinterpretations of grandfathering and non-conforming is if you're grandfathered you think you might be able to continue your business or expand your business or if you're business is destroyed in any way by a fire or something like that you can rebuild it and exactly or even bigger than than how it was and actually how it works is uh non-conformities are allowed to be continued but they might not they must not be expanded or intensified in any way and so and this is in State Statute um and also in our our our ordinance uh with this business um they did receive that conditional use permit in 1999 um to go from one non-conforming use to another and despite the um I guess the prohibition against expansion or intensification of a business they did they did get a building permit to expand 1500 square feet um of this business after 1999 so they would like to continue to rent the property as a retail or a commercial space I know it's you know that's the the property owner leases this this um this property um it's changed hands a few times um um businesses a few times throughout the years um and and currently um allowing it to go from an egg General to a highway commercial um would might fit the proper the his history of the property a little bit better uh just going to go through some standards um Highway commercial standards the the minimum lot size is the required minimum lot area for permitted permitted and conditional uses of the district um there are some yard requirements as well got to have 100 ft AB budding a public R of way um have to have uh 50 ft front yard set back um 40 ft rear yard set back and then um in this case a 24t um sidey yard setback uh the lot coverage regulations are you can't have more than 30% of the lot area occupied by buildings and you also have direct have to have access to a public right of way some additional property information so this current business there are aspects of it that are operating outside of the property boundary and in the right of way so it's a pretty small property it's only about a half acre um this front yard area here is actually primarily right of way in its Township right of way and a little bit of state right of way as well uh as up to this hearing we have not received any comments from egland Township or the city of Holly we have received um a letter and have had some meetings with uh uh the Minnesota Department of Transportation just about the aspects of this business um that are in the right of way um there was testimony from neighborhood residents at the Planning Commission public hearing they were opposed to the rezoning basically due the due to the appearance of the business um there's just a lot going on outside of the building uh that maybe hasn't been as as prominent in the past um and then also the use of a residential street for test driving power sports vehicles and um I should note too that this neighborhood is primarily residential so some considerations for this reone um the resoning would bring the use of the property into compliance um some aspects of the of the use would still may be required to additional permitting the structure itself would remain non-conforming and the reason why would M remain non-conforming is that it does not meet any of the highway commercial zoning setback standards but it does meet all the other standards um and the resoning is really only for this property it's not for any right of way or anything like that so um the business M must be located entirely within the property looking at the compatibility with other um uh plans uh this is the city of Hol uh kind of future land use plan as the city grows and expands and this little the red is uh what they have for zoned and would plan to Zone as commercial uh this property right here uh they do have it in their future land use map as being a commercial property um when considering this request It's always important to look at it through the lens of our comprehensive and transportation plan goals and objectives uh we do have a goal to encourage commercial and Industrial Development that is in harmony with the agricultur and Rural character of Clay County um we have an objective to valid value added agricultural commercial industrial development in a in our agricultural service center zoning district and along Transportation corridors and hubs uh we also have an object objective to avoid or mitigate against commercial and Industrial Development that increases the potential for land use conflicts with rural residential or agricultural uses and so this is I think where a lot of the Planning Commission had some pretty good discussion uh in their hearing in October um just with the fact that this property property does have a a long history of being a commercial retail property um but it is kind of size limited it's not a very large property um you could argue that the current commercial use of this property which is Auto and powerport sales is probably not the right fit just due to the size of the paral and proximity to residential um properties a lot of the concerns that the Planning Commission had was were related to the impacts of this um this use or this business on the nearby residential uh neighbors we also do have parking standards um in our code and this is just something else to cons consider that um parking on this on this parcel is limited due to just the size uh we do have a minimum area requirement for parking spaces um and depending on what type of business you would have at this location parking requirements can kind of range from either 7 to 21 spaces it's highly unlikely that you'd ever be able to fit 21 spaces on this slot uh this is just kind of a uh parking plan scenario here where you have about seven spaces so that that minimum um there uh the staff did make a recommendation to the Planning Commission to approve this but to relocate the off- prise sign in the right of way and then move all other aspects of the business onto the property where the business is located um the Planning Commission did make a motion um to recommend approval to the board but did not include those two conditions um to relocate some of that those aspects of the business off of the onto the back onto the property and so you know you can see from the time of that hearing which was in mid October um to just a few days ago uh just looking at the property you can see that there are several items on display the sign is still there um these are all in the right of way this would be looking South um you can see the the more vehicles are are were added um these vehicles are all in the right of way as well an additional sign and then just on the on the south side of of the structure and the south side of the property just a lot of storage of outdoor storage of vehicles I'm not entirely sure if these are just being worked on if they're for sale um or if they're just being stored um that's unclear at this point see more of those here and then just another shot of the front um some potential next steps for you to consider so um the board would have according to our code in State Statute you have 60 days from the public hearing to make a rezoning determination so 60 days that would be um January 18th 2025 so the way that I see it is you have kind of three options you could approve the rezoning um you could require the property owner and business to remedy these issues without outdoor displays signage provide detailed site plan a parking Narrative of all the business activities occurring on the property um and then hold another public hearing no later than I think your the next meeting before that um January 18th date would be Tuesday January 14th to make that determination or you could just uh deny the rezoning and any decision that you if you choose to make a decision on the rezoning today approval or denial it would require a super majority of the um board to approve that so you'd have to have four out of five uh voting in favor of whatever decision is made any questions for me at all questions from Matt one question on the RightWay if there's equipment on the RightWay does the State Highway Department have a right to confiscate that material my understanding and talking from them is that they do have the right to confiscate that material they have not taken that step yet okay one oh go ahead one other thing I should note too is um with a decision if you decide at some point to um approve this rezoning um this is a very commercially oriented um zoning district and so there are certain things that um that are just permitted by right in this zoning District retail and Commercial businesses are are permitted by right um it's kind of the top example um Auto Sales would be permitted by right um but there are some things that do require Planning Commission oversight uh one of those that would I think in my opinion pertain to the business that is currently in this location is um just the outdoor storage um or outdoor anything out outside um that would be accessory to the commercial use so you know you look at the pictures of of the vehicles and the things on display that would be something that would be if you choose to move forward with Reon either now or at a later date um would require a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission uh the Planning Commission could put um specific conditions to address concerns um there are some just general standards in our code uh some of the standards being that anything outdoors um would have to be screened from adjacent Residential Properties there is a area requirement so it's 10% of the lot area or 10,000 ft whichever is greater uh and you cannot store anything in the setbacks as well so consider ing just the size of this lot they really if you are if they were to be in compliance there's really not a lot of space for outdoor storage just considering the setbacks and and things like that any other questions from me at all Comm Campbell Matt you went over a little bit of the history of this property and I I'm a little bit interested so at one this has had multiple different commercial uses um yeah at some at some point in time was was there ever a permission granted for that to be commercial use you talked about non-conforming so so the non-conform the type of business that was in place that was probably prior to um any zoning new zoning that came out is that correct correct this is it this the commercial use of this property predates um County zoning okay and so the county zoning that is in place now as long as that business did not change in terms of its original purpose uh and it and it stayed in existence uh that would still stand yes if it if it continued to be an electrical contracting shop it would still be able to continue this and once that electrical type of business stopped for one year that non-conforming goes away correct and they and then that they'd have to meet all the new standards yes that if it goes away for a year great for a year yes um if and in as has happened in the past too you can change a non-conforming use to a different non-conforming use it just cannot be of Greater intensity and there can't be any expansion so my understanding is that since the floral business was in this location and the craft business was in this location there has been a year where there was not um a business in this location so it couldn't go from one non-conforming use to another and can you pull up for us again that there were in in staff's recommendation there were two considerations that should have been dealt with right um do you want to speak to those yeah the first would be to relocate that off- premise sign that's in the right of way to the property and then move all other aspects of the business onto the property where the business is located and I think even going a step further with that is is um if you were to consider at a later date a approving this I would want whatever is I would recommend whatever is outside to meet the standards of um both the highway commercial zoning district and that outdoor storage of of materials and so going to that component of what you just talked about we have had we have had other highway or zoning changes requested for Highway commercial right that we've that we've changed the zoning from egg to Highway commercial that has happened in the past and and when we've done that we've also put stipulations on there in terms of fencing and those types of things on those on those uses correct for a rezoning um not necessarily um but for like a conditional use permit in the future yes you could do that so talk to us about If This Were to be approved would this then still require to go back to the Planning Commission if it were to remain this business my opinion is yes it would have to go back for a conditional use permit to address the outdoor storage aspects of the business of which you would probably include these correct which then though is not not outside of the recommendations that we deal with with other businesses correct that's right and and that's I was not commissioner krainov sat in for me at this meeting but I did attend virtually and so I think that's been part of the conversation that the Planning Commission has tried to align most of the applications in the most Fair uniform way yes that's correct part part of part of in reading this hey were you done so part of in part of reading this one of the things that that troubles me is is the fact that you know or why why it's hard for us not to maybe look at this as a commercial use because that's how we're taxing it right current we're currently we're taxing as a commercial use yeah and Mr chair and commissioner Campbell I did have talk with the assessor and get the assessment history of this property and it has been assessed as a commercial use always been assessed that way well it's kind it's kind of hard for us to to you know suggest that this this is should be something other than that when we've been taxing it at that right and that's that's my personal opinion that I that I bring up there but um I I do have I do have some concerns about some of the issues that you've raised that uh I'm hopeful that depending on how this works out could be H still handled through a conditional use process but I I I guess I'll we going I want to hear maybe we have some we have people here anybody wish to address this here that's applicant would you step up to the microphone and give us your name and address please my name is Scott manthy uh my wife and I own the property in question and uh I've always wanted to own the property I've driven this route since I was a young guy in in going to college and from the time I was 18 I wanted to own this property for whatever reason I thought it was a neat property because it was a business right within the houses and uh Someday my idea was to own a house next in that development next to the business and and have a business out of this location um I bought it uh it was for sale by Carol and Buzz saral they owned the flower shop there and they were the ones that were granted the conditional use permit um expanded and intensified the the business uh activity there by doubling overd doubling the size of the business uh in 1999 and uh there was a conditional use permit granted and they came and viewed a site plan and the site plan actually was okayed and there was a property pin within that cut off the corner of the business and I I uh noticed that and so when it was um looked at when the platting was done by Matt can you help me out who did the platting uh Rob Roberts yeah Rob Roberts he uh he cut off this the corner of the building when he did his um RightWay and his RightWay was uh 110 ft there it should have been 66 ft and so I applied to the county and paid all the the fees to have the proper meetings and things like that so I paid over $4,000 or 5,000 I think it was over $4,000 to um correct the RightWay to 66t RightWay and then uh therefore having the the proper line there and I don't think your your diagram shows it right on the southide there it goes over to the West a little bit but uh so there's the other part is that I own the land in front of the houses to the West there I thought I I was told that I had the whole works in front of there and apparently Matt had said that it's just the area right in front up to the uh Highway 10 RightWay and so it goes right up in that area there there was just an easement granted years ago because the person I have the Auditors Lot 24 out in the bigger chunk of land and uh the person owned it deed off certain Parcels of land and uh the houses were to the West were inclusive of those Parcels but he retained the ownership of the land underneath it so he could have access to uh the West there and so i' I've got ownership of the land right next to the highway 10 RightWay and when when the uh auditor subdivision was done by Rob Roberts uh he platted that the township have a right away in front of the building there I don't think that ever existed there and uh I was on the town board with folks from egund Township I'm not on there any longer um from as near as we could tell there was the roadway was never adopted it was set up as a a RightWay but I believe the township never formally adopted that right away and so it's dedicated but I don't believe it's adop Ed and it isn't a it isn't a 66t RightWay going to the West it's only a 30 foot which is not per statute I don't think you can have a 30 foot rway for a Township Road and so it's really gray what Rob Roberts platted there uh because I don't believe that there was ever a a retraction or uh granting any right away on the next to Highway 10 RightWay and so I own that land up there and I believed and I haven't had an attorney review but that area in front there was dedicated to the township but I believe I actually own that because the land was deed away from the auditor Lot 24 and the residual um retained Scott can we talk really quick on that piece just have we been able to research into what the the dedicated yeah Mr chair and commissioner Mojo we I do want to hear what the rest of what he has say we have researched that and really um as far as what's recorded um it's we see it as a Township right away um Mr manthy would have to consult with an attorney or a real estate professional um to figure out if he to to truly determine order so you've worked with the the rep's office yeah okay so where I'm getting my information is uh Barb uh Delaney from The Abstract Company Cay abstract she's abstracted for 30 years she said you have ownership of that property um in front of those houses and and she drew me a diagram and I had that diagram I don't know if you have that up at all Mr chair we did receive a diagram but it was essentially just a drawing there's nothing in a deed at all that shows that we have shows that as right of away this lawn area so there is area in front of the lawn but what he's talking about is the area just to South of the land that I have adjacent to the highway 10 R so there's two rideways here one is Highway 10 right away and the other is the township right away and so the the area in the front lawn is Township right what they show is Township right away according to the the plat that Rob Roberts did thanks mat yep so this is our GIS parcel map note that the parcel lines are not going to exactly match with the underlying imagery but it's just a representation um this is that highway state highway right of way and then this is the um Township right of way we did find a deed and Drew out the deed that basically this is uh Mr man's lot over here um and it shows we did find a deed that shows him owning essentially this area right here but however we are not attorneys or real estate professionals we cannot make that determination it would require a an attorney to review these Deeds to make make that determination um as far as this resoning request is concerned really we are only dealing with this lot right here we're not here I don't think to adjudicate any sort of RightWay ownership um questions or discrepancies or disputes the matter before us is the resoning as it pertains to this lot and I guess the reason I'd asked is you I've been on the Planning Commission the entire time I've been on this board and Mr man's had um other other issues that have come forward particular clearly the larger buildings and I do know that front edge road ownership was brought up and and it jives with what he what he'd said you know I I you know I don't want to argue what the legality is of who you know who claims what ownership on the other piece but just for the record I think it's important to state that the board did um acknowledge if you will that Frontage component so what my overall intent was with buying the building was to someday have a spot for me to do our crop insurance business and my son who's 21 just is coming into the business with us now and so someday I wanted to be able to have that potentially for us to do the crop insurance business out of there and have Highway 10 Frontage uh we're not ready to do that yet at this time uh we've been operating out of our our uh shop office on our our Homestead site and uh in so in the meantime we bought it in 2016 when it was a flower shop I I bought the business and the land and excuse me I bought the building in the land uh the other gal that was working for the flower shop Carol Aral um she bought the flower shop business from Carol the refrigeration the inventory the fridges the displays all the interior stuff and uh she was renting from us for I believe a year and a half or so and then she gave notice um so we looked for a different tenant uh we had golden Treasures which is a craft uh retail space in there for about a year and then it sat empty for over a year uh in looking for a tenant and I had been renting to Levi and uh Levi delir and Kristen bur bery in Holly and they were very successful at uh Car Sales business they uh move a lot of inventory and you took some pictures when he just uh bought all his inventory I looked yesterday cuz I was out building the building and he was down to only about three cars on the lot in total now the the stuff out front he has had that out on display cuz it's a Highway 10 Frontage uh Highway commercial type of business you you're trying to attract customers as they're driving by and catch their attention and so I think it's very consistent with what what a business would try to do based on having Highway 10 Frontage uh there's probably about when I first checked in 2012 when we bought the property the the big property auditor Lot 24 I I seem to remember 12 to 13,000 daily traffic count by there I think now I would guess it's probably closer to 16,000 I think I heard some comment of and so to me a retail business off a Highway 10 it's always been there to try and capture the visibility of Highway Town that's the reason for the location like they say location location location and so that's what he's trying to capture I wasn't invited to the meeting uh with the dot Highway 10 uh people so I don't know what was said at that meeting but um it's been uh tried to kept to a minimum as far as what activity is outside the township right away there the grass area up front um I think at one time they when they were moving the grass they moved some stuff forward in front of the the the road to get to the houses and then they moved it back and uh but I I haven't heard what the outcome of the meeting would you be able to share kind of the general outcome of what the meeting was with the dot gentleman yeah Mr chair and Mr manthy the outcome of the meeting is there can't be any commercial activity in the state right of way they will move to confin skate um anything that is within the right of way for the As for the township right of way that is completely up to the township but we would not basically anything that's happening outside of the property is not it's prohibited it's not allowed all the business has to happen within the bounds of the property has to meet the setbacks and the standards for the zoning District that it's in and any if there is a conditional use permit it would have to meet those as well so when you were there there was nothing in the highway right away correct Mr chair commissioner krainov may I ask it he speaks to you okay and and so we don't get into this and then and then I do have a question so when Matt was there with the person from the do was there anything in the highway right away uh Mr chair and Mr manthy I was not with anyone at the do on site we our meeting was over the phone okay didn't know that you have anything else sir so I like I said the inventory that Levi has come in and go out changes very readily like I said if you take a picture today there'd be probably three cars behind the building hidden by the building and whatever people were there working um you know parked in the parking area uh the I didn't know if I should have them move the stuff back until we had this meeting so if that was if that was an issue that that's my on on my side of things I was never directly told here's what you got to do you got to move that stuff out today type of thing I thought we're were waiting for this meeting to make the decision so if that's a problem I apologize for that and uh but uh you know we can look at remedying that how however best necessary the area in front if if I Gra to ask him a question before he sits down and has to come back up um so simple question so the way you have your business and you've been running it whether it was with the pictures that we saw that I believe we're on the 13th or as you state they are today is this how you see yourself running the business for the long term so I don't run the business I I rent the space out to Levi and Kristen so the blames on him if it isn't correct not well I'm just I just want to know what is allowable and what you know CU we talked about at the Planning Commission if there needs to be a fence there on the South Side from Greg crowy the next door neighbor to the South that's something we'd look at entertaining or or what have you but I I'm guessing that he intends to try and um display vehic these uh ATV uh Power support type vehicles as best he can to to gain attention from Highway 10 but the cars that he's working on would typically be parked and back and try to be lined up as best they can and and they they roll through fairly quickly you know they'll be there for probably a week or less and then they're brought into the lot and Holly and um and then they're sold as a landlord I okay put it that way then you feel where the signage is things out front cars in the back from time to time is um is okay well I think it's going to be in order to have that type of business there it's going to be what's going to be happening there and it's hard going to be hard to say that there's only supposed to be one vehicle because he's trying to make a living selling cars and without any cars you can't make sales his his business model is that he buys cars that need a little bit of fixing up he fixes them up he's an ASC Certified mechanic and he fixes them up brings them to T to the lot in town and sells them he averages probably five to eight cars a week on on a sale some weeks he can't buy any some weeks he can buy 10 or 15 at this time I think he bought 15 cars and one one sale at New York Mills and he's down to no inventory right now when I visited with him two days ago cuz they're all sold the cars that were in front of the of the building there were pre-sold cars that they hadn't picked up because they needed to come back and line up a different ride and uh so you know we look at this bu building as a kind of a small business incubator where he wouldn't be able to buy the building or the buildings uh outright if he were to if they were put up for sale but he can pay the rent and it works for both of us so we have a person that lives in Clay County in hital Minnesota working his dream job of owning a car dealership in in Clay County instead of taking on and going somewhere else to work for somebody else in Fargo or or wherever thank you commissioner Melle thank you Mr chair uh Mr manthy clarify for me again do you have two um two businesses leasing that building no it's just caring Auto but he has the he does the ATVs out of there so can I just ask you know I think it's probably common knowledge that you also own the commercial zoned stuff to the West right similar to where you've been selling implements yeah just my stuff just my farm stuff right sorry but if you were would it be available to store and I know it's a different lease so I'm just hypothetically asking though those vehicles on that other Frontage space I mean is that an allowable storage on that piece even if he wasn't the owner let's just say is that allowable Mr chair and commissioner Mojo that'd be something that would have to research more um one thing I will say is that in the state of Minnesota you do have to have a dealer's license to sell vehicles and it's location specific and we did check with the state of Minnesota and there is not a dealer's license for this property but he doesn't retail them there he only fixes them there and that's that was my next question I guess is if there are no sales happening there does that matter but it was identified that some of them were already pre sold um that is something Mr chair I'd have to research more as well the signs if you could bring that picture back that are in question open open for them to bring the vehicles into repair or to sell the equipment that's on display there I'm sorry the the signs in question open uh look I assume it's open to sell the vehicles that the signs are located next they just sell the ATVs there okay so they are selling retail sales of ATVs yep that's their because if you look in the inside of the building I don't know if you took any pictures of that but they've got all nice lineup rows of these small vehicles I think when I talked to him in August he had sold 110 of these small ATVs and dirt dirt bikes and Gokarts and different things like that and that was between the locations of in Holly and out here cuz I think they I don't remember I think July 1st was the start date of the of the rental on this building um most of their other sales had you know those 110 units was uh at the Holly location but the showroom out here is what attracted him because it has a double door that they can bring the ATVs in on the west side and uh so they have most of them in in the inside storage there's probably I would guess 30 units inside in that 1500 squ foot retail space but to get catches people's attention he puts a few units out by the by the road to catch people's eye and get them to stop on the way to the Lakes commission commissioner has there been any complaints from the city of holly or Mr chair there I did check with the city there have not been any complaints um from from the city of Holly um nor have there been any complaints made to the city of Holly concerning the the the business that is within the city of Holly um just the note that there is a lot of on street parking parking happening outside of that of that that business there has not been anything from the city of Holly pertaining to this particular business likely just because it's not within the city limits so um with with this business with having the indoor display primarily being an indoor display selling the power sports maybe having some limited outdoor door display that's on the property meets the setbacks um would probably not be any I don't foresee any issue with with that um I think the issue lies in the business is essentially spilling out onto the right of way commissioner Campbell I I do want to address and I I appreciate your comments about uh somebody wanting to have a successful business in Klay County I we get that we try to we try to accommodate that in everywhere we can in this particular case we have a a business that has been in existence and it had been operational in a completely different type of a format than this current business model and when you go to make a significant change in a business model you also have to take into consideration what does it do to the existing neighbors you know and and so we we have to we have to be realizing that I mean we we don't we don't want commercial at any cost if it's going to if it's going to make a difference to some of our neighboring deals but so when I read some of these comments and there's some concerns about the activities that go up and down the roads that that deal with the neighbors and and it and that is being done as a result in this change in business use I so so you know I think we have to be taking some of that into consideration that's why early on we talked about I don't have a problem in the world with changing this to Highway commercial but still there has there has to be that you know that way to satisfy the concerns of others so that it doesn't harm their way of living that they've grown accustomed to because of a new type of a business being brought in and that goes to conditions you know so I I just wanted to bring that up that that you know I I'm not suggesting that I'm not in favor of a commercial business there chairman Campell can I make a comment to that certainly so there there was one person that attended the meeting and expressed concern otherwise they had never had a complaint correct Matt prior to the meeting address me please oh uh uh chairman they never had a complaint um prior to the meeting uh about this this business here um the only that that's the first the time when they opened up the discussion to the to the public there was one one family next door to the South Greg and I forget her first name krowy and um otherwise there was nobody in the neighborhood that that came and expressed any concern either in person or online for that and his concern was you know just mostly regarding the uh the cars in back you know and uh how much in density there was on that and like like I mentioned we talked about alternatives for fencing or different things like that and the one thing I do want to mention too is when arals had the business it was not as clean as it it was when we had the golden Treasures in there um there was a flower um Greenhouse attached to the front of the building and uh there was a bunch of when we took ownership of it we had to clear out all the backyard because there is junk from one end to the other in the backyard there and so that was a lot of cleanup on on there and our part because they were collectors and uh so you can see the the greenhouse attached there and that was a the greenhouse was bought by the lady that bought the interior stuff and we it was moved off the building Frontage but prior to this when I prior to 2016 when we bought it that whole area where they pile snow to the South was all kinds of junk from the argal so it wasn't that it's it was perfect and pristine then when Greg crowy worked for the flower shop and now it's got stuff there it it had a history of having stuff there and uh Carol Aral had the same type of fan signs in the front uh right where uh Levi and christens are located because she it was always to try and get people to come in and participate and and use their business it's just to draw attention to get them to come in and support the business because they're moving fast at that point in time the speed lims up to 65 and they're trying to catch their attention and get them to slow down and stop so I mean it wasn't that the whole neighborhood was upset with the business there it was one neighbor to the sou I we understand one neighbor testified Matt any other complaints other than that we Mr chair we've just had a couple comments between the planning Comm commission hearing and this hearing just from other neighbors that they just consider it to be kind of an iore okay it's the general comment that we've received could these issues be addressed with conditional use permit if we approve the rezoning Mr chair I think we could address the outdoor storage specifically the outdoor storage of vehicles um um on on the property I would and then also between now and any conditional use permit hearing um could work with with um Mr manthy and and and Levi as well to um address some of the issues with the right of way as well and the township of course too would so if if this resoning is approved what what would require him to go to the Planning Commission it would for this it would be for the outdoor any outdoor storage that would be accessory to the commercial use so the the primary use would be the auto sales or power sports sales um in our code we have standards for outdoor storage of storage yards materials Vehicles related to a a commercial use um and that in the highway commercial zoning District does require a conditional use permit so it' be pretty limited to the that so he'd be required to go before correct if if Levi wants to keep them there yeah right right yeah if he doesn't want to keep them there it's if if he can make some other arrangements move point but then then the issues of some of the neighbors goes away and of course RightWay would be enforced yeah the RightWay would have to be enforced but it would be um ultimately from the county perspective it would be not the business not operating on where it's permitted um and then you have the state right of way and the township right of way as well so it' be kind of working with those um units of government Comm grabing off we are pre you know I I get most of this uh the question I have seems like there's a conflict he mentioned Auto Sales I I understand the uh AV U part of it all good with that on the auto sales I think someone said they are not allowed there Auto Sales would be allowed as a permitted use um they would have to have a dealer's license from the state of Minnesota right yes which they don't have yet no yeah they do at the location in Hol but not at this location but the ATV is fine I would need to do some research on that to determine consultation with the state on that on the ATVs is there any public there any members of the public that wishes to speak yeah anyone else here wish to address this you would state your name and address sir uh Steve rodkey egland Township supervisor we're here just to observe and to listen about the RightWay we as a Township understand we have the RightWay to the south of the flower shop off of Highway 10 South we have nothing to the West in our understanding and we have never adopted anything that way so thank you okay thank you any other questions any anybody else wish to address the uh the commission on this issue we have a motion to move at a public hearing move be Clos second have motion a second all in favor of the motion indicated by by saying I I poose same sign okay we're at a public hearing Mr Campbell uh Matt um I noticed in your uh presentation to us you talked about a timeline for us to do this do you you is do you believe that um it's in the best interest of the county to take between now and January 18th to to review this or what what are your thoughts sir um Mr chair and commissioner Campbell I I think that if you were to choose one of these three options that would be my recommendation then I can work with the um with the Mr manthy and with the the the business owner um we can get a better understanding I think of what they would plan to do with the site it would just allow us to bring I think before you a more um more detail about how to get from where it currently is to um um to where they where they should be in terms of um complying with the code uh otherwise if you do choose to approve the rezoning I think the conditional use permit for the outdoor storage I think that would be acceptable as well um and I can also work with um Mr manthy and the business owner on on that and getting getting that that taken care of and and the township as well well I certainly I certainly don't like the third or the fourth bullet on there I don't think that that should be an option for us I think we need to try to come to some sort of a a a good conclusion to this it's been it's been commercial so I think continuing that is commercial is appropriate and then it's just a matter of of uh working through what our current policy is in terms of when something is required of conditions that it go to the Planning Commission and if there's if there's you know I unless there's any other interest then I would suggest that we move forward with the zoning change and that does not preclude oh excuse me I'm that does not preclude a conditional use permit that to address all these other issues for it would address the Mr chair the outdoor storage issues yeah and and and and based on the information that we have to us the outdoor storage and maybe this driving of these vehicles up and down the road are the two issues that that were raised of concern that is correct so I mean it's hard for us to tell somebody they can't drive up up and down the public roadway right you know so so it really it really then becomes what is you know what is the appropriate use uh on that and I think that can be done through condition use so Mr chairman I would move that we um approve the request requested change from agricultural General to Highway commercial for that property second have motion a second further discussion Mr chair commissioner moso thank you I'd like to talk maybe a little bit about the outdoor component that's a potential next step and and um you know Scott if I have four children and a husband that loves ATVs and so if if you've ever driven with anyone who likes those types of things it doesn't matter if they're set an additional 15 ft back or not they seem to always notice them and um you know I I think that this this parcel is unique as you said it it does fit a a a commercial um cutout if you will um for business in Clay County I I do have concerns with the storage component of the the auto pieces in the back and the reason is is um whether they're they're screened from the road or not they're still not quite screened from the residences and even in rural Clay County we've permited businesses similar to um by the racetrack the drag strip uh north of Sabin we would not allow that type that amount of cars to be parked out how many vehicles they can maybe have outside but I think that that is a little excessive and it will be a problem once it comes to the Planning Commission if this pass I will just I will say that um I I really appreciate that um you are looking at different areas throughout the entire County as places to be commercial um I'll support this going to commercial because if we if we didn't rather I would suggest we um assess your property differently you know be right because I I do think that's that's maybe an unfair component but I will say there is a give and take um and I I I have problems with the vehicles parked back there and I would probably suggest moving those ATVs back a little bit from the road just anything else okay and to I might follow up I I also have no interest in regulating how folks um test drive vehicles or others on public roadways I think that's a dangerous slope but I I would suggest that we have the correct lier in place for the facility too you you were thinking like a cop because that was my after all the years if don't get upset about that they're doing something legal lure is always the issue and so we're not going to have a deputy come out and sit on the road and watch but uh I don't think the sheriff would but it is an issue particularly when you look at liability okay any add additional if not we have motion the second on the floor and we'll need a roll call vote on this commissioner Mojo yes commissioner Campbell yes commissioner ebinger yes commissioner gross yes commissioner krainov yes okay motion passes thank you appreciate it Matt and unless we have some additional business we've gotten through all our committee reports and everybody else so any additional business commissioner moo thank you thank you I might just State there is a public meeting that metrocog is having in regards to the extension of the 15th Avenue um Paving Paving suggestion uh to 336 that's this evening at the Dorth Elementary School um from 5:30 to 7:30 there's a presentation at 6 is that on the 15th or the 8th Avenue 15th that is the F the 15th I thought there there's one tonight and then I believe Thursday but you can go to the Metro Cog website to see anybody have anything else all right we're adjourned --------- ##VIDEO ID:jDvOdNlCbUo## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 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 speak on something that is not on the agenda one more time is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda thank you look for a motion to approve the agenda 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 15th motion to approve 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 here if you're online would you be please unmute and identify yourself I know we do have a representative from Central Specialties online GM and 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 Central Specialties make a motion motions are 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 can hear you thank you and then could you identify yourselves please if you are online just for the meeting minutes yes 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 landowner 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 s stewardship of agregate 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 means 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 in the rural character of Clay County one of those objectives under this goal is to consider the cumulative impacts of existing nearby 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 the adjacent landowner uh for this type 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 biolog logical 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 and in our code um basically all mining activities um structures storage of excavated materials and excavation Edge have to be set back 100 feet 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 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 setback 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 setback from these property lines right on the the northwest corner and the southwest corner for after Thea 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 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 so 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 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 Wai 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 LC yeah they'd 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 web 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 2813 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 any members of the board have 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 the 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 corre 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 variant okay so it's and get written consent for from you as well we're not talking 100 feet from that Gravel Road then from this Gravel Road no really just talking about this property line here that's but and 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 yep thank you anyone else online or in the audience wish to speak on this one more time anybody in the audience or on line 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 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 would the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Clay County Land Development code deprived 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 landowner yes landowner 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 do 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 Varian mining activities can only occur within the 100 foot setback of the property line shared with parcel 28. 0144 the southeast quarter Northeast quarter and Northeast quarter Southeast quarter of section 14 Township 137n range 44 W and so Mr chair that that condition um I think outline or addresses some of the concerns that 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 the um the applicant or the operator was looking at mining potentially within any other 100 foot footstep X 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 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 yeah it's not really a condition it's more of clarification yeah yeah essentially okay so motion has been made and seconded to approve the variance with condition number one um all 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 public hearing for Jacob morac make a motion motions a 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 residents from the center line of a public road um brought forward by uh Jacob Mur and uh the owner is Sheila M 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 down or 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 Acer 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 my mouse kind of get a sense of the location here just south of south of Glendon and east of the interstate so the applicant is Seeking a variance to the road Center Line setback for a res residence that would encroach approximately 75 ft into the 125 ft Road Center Line setback um of 60th Avenue North the um setc represents a 60% reduction um the residents 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 PR teal 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 are 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 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 and they 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 drain there also is a Grove of trees and they would make 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 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 7 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 granted it would place that dwelling about 17 ft from the road right of way um the Practical diff difficulty would be that location of the shelter belt drain attes 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 it's likely that placing the dwelling 5050 ft from that road Center Line would not be the minimum minimum variance request necessary to relieve the or alleviate the Practical difficulty as there is approximately 75 ft between that proposed 50ft setback in the 125 foots in 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 affor order but really want um 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 The Watershed ditch that's right run along the south side of that road there I believe I believe so the Township Road it is a Township Road yep has a Township weighed in we've not heard from the township on okay you're on the Township Board okay no no I yet 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 the applicant like to state your name and speak to us please I guys I'm Jake mirak we did uh preemptively talk to the Glendon Township 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 right of way 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 we did I did get a a sign letter from uh the Glendon Township with no objections on their side anyway can we can we see that sure okay yep 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 yeah they 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 feet Mr Shar be from the it would be 50 ft so if you're assuming a 33t from the center line would be the the right away and then yep additional 17 ft from that would be that 50t set back from the center line that 125t road center lane 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 Dash line pretty close it looks like that's the top of the ditch is that right looks very close 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 it 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 okay have 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 okay 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 we talking about promoting Public's health safety we we'd be given permission to build a house right next to that ditch correct yeah 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 there winging snow in the winter 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 poost that was really close yeah Mr chair with the if you if you as a board would like I mean you could certainly have have that 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 com 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 modifi I thought that would have happened in the last part where you can put conditions okay would really would make sense would it y yeah 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 all I opposed motion is carried will the applicant care to come up State his name again and Sh us a compromising distance Sher Jacob mirac 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 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 think so Glendon Township you're going to have you're going to have more coming by in 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 bat snow got 2 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 cuz they're winging in 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 chucking along there it's going 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 and the the 125t set back line yeah it's about 75 ft 75 ft 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 40t from the trees where would that where would that put us right here Mr chair what does that get us from the road so it be make completely different than what so the that would roughly be 85t from the center line of the road versus versus 50 so it' be 35 35 more feet that's that's definitely better you 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 be 90 feet 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 to 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 fur it would be can you go in the center of the road and measure out 90t yes that's what you're trying to do right you somewhere in there it would be like roughly right where that kind of bear patch yeah does that seem workable I think I think we probably could yeah okay I mean the summertime that's those gravel roads get super Dusty too I mean we would throw some uh anti yeah sodium claride 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 yeah um 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 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 125t setback has been in place since at least the 70s okay I don't still something 35 ft that seems 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 90 foot setback so you have to kind of look at it through the L look at the findings of fact through that request the 90 foot request with a 90 foot request considering everything else uh about the property as well with the drainage and things 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 TA findings look for motion to close the public hearing make motion close public I second motions made in second and to close a public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed 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 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 in 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 want to am amend that finding at all and just maybe remove the um just screw 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 amend this finding essentially well I am personally I'm not seeing any reason to okay amend that changed it 40 feet um okay okay moving on to number five with 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 a variance being granted the minimum variance that would alleviate the Practical difficulty yes does a variance request meet all the blow criteria no variance 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 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' 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 okay the B the plate of landowner or hard is not due to circumstances created by the land owner yes the current land owner 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 well 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 yes there would not be significant adverse effect on public health or safety I think moving at that 40t we accomplish that yes Mr chair I think we need to read uh item D about essential character what did I skip D is it 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 it yes f okay 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 land structures or buildings in the same district yes yes single family residences are allowed and allowed use within the zoning District yes they [Music] are hey 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 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 osed Varian is granted next public hearing look for a motion to approve the public hearing for Bradley Berg make a motion second motions am made at seconded to open the public hearing for Bradley Berg all those in favor say I hi proposed 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 give people in all life stages of all economic means viable choices for safe stable and affordable homes um we have 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 General is the base zoning there's resource protection Aggregate and resource protection biological biologically significant areas overlay zoning on this parcel a lot of zoning going on um and all the IM 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 resident 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 order 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 cons this 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 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 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 and 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 other questions for M no 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 you have anything to correct me at all on okay what township is this tansom all 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 extraordinary circumstances exist 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 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 yes does a variance request meet all the below criteria no Varian shall be granted where any of the following conditions are not met adequate sewage or Water Systems can be provided yes plate of the land owner or hardship is not due to circumstances created by the land owner yes the variance would not allow a use that is not already allowed in the zoning District yes the essential character of the locality 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 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 the Minnesota rules chapters 4725 governing Wells for isolation distances essentially okay anybody have anything to questions for m after 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 unfinished 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 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 helping 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 admin SOA 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 one yeah just the only inspections that would happen would be the just the state ones for like Plumbing an electrical 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 um so I just want to make sure you have that and and review that as well what is happening with Ezra bear then when he becomes a commissioner he's no longer to be on this board on the plan yes yep okay so it would be the new 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 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 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e to the agenda Mr chair I'll offer a motion to approve the agenda is presented so moved second Mr Sher can I get clarification on the who made the second Laura all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried number five amend minutes for meeting from April 8th of this year and Mr chair I can just provide some context for that um in the in the meeting minutes for the Knife River materials request for an interim use permit uh the minutes stated that the um maximum allowable acreage one of the conditions uh was 30 Acres but in the in the meeting and looking at the meeting recording um the motion made with the conditions was actually for 39 Acres so it would be amending that 30 acre to 39 I'll offer a motion to approve the minutes with that Amendment second motions and made and seconded to amend the minutes from April 18th any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried thank you Matt is there anybody in the audience or online that wishes to speak to something that is not on the agenda is there anybody in online or in the audience that wishes to speak to something that is not on the agenda is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak to something that is not on the agenda hearing none like to look for a motion to open the public hearing for Grady BG second motions been made and seconded to open the public hearing for Brady Berg all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried M yeah this is a request um the applicant seeking an inter amuse permit for a second dwelling on a parcel at 13293 Street South Pelican Rapids Minnesota 56572 on partial ID 28121 1800 part of the southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of section 12 Township 137 and range 44 West in tansom Township um so the relevant uh goals from our comprehensive transportation plan that pertained to this request we have a housing goal to support additional um options that give people in all life stages and all economic means viable choices for safe stable and affordable homes we also have a residential goals and objectives uh in our comprehensive plan to recognize the diversity of living and working Arrangements in the unincorporated areas of Clay County and recognize multigenerational temporary agricultural working living arrangements by permitting accessory dwelling units on properties that can be adequately provided for water and and Sewer so the subject property uh and all immediately adjacent properties their zoned egg General is the base zoning District uh and then the overlay zoning districts on this property are resource protection Aggregate and resource protection biological um this is a approximately 45 acre parkle parcel and it's located on the county line it's about one and a/4 mile south of um County State a Highway 6 on 300 Street South that County L is otter tale County that it's shared with so it's primarily grazing land and residential there is currently a single family home and a manufactured home on the property so the applicant owns this property with his brother um brother lives in the single like his own residents to live on um the original intent was to split this parcel in half but market conditions the applicant um doesn't want to to do that at this time um and then also do to the Topography of the property the mobile home and with the intention of splitting this um uh in the in the future um the applicant did play on South End of the parcel so this is the primary dwelling up here and the secondary dwelling is down here the manufactured home uh the applicant did receive a um well I'll go through the standards first so for a second dwelling on a parcel to be used by parents grandparents childr siblings um any other special relationship um the dwelling has to be a manufactured home can't be on a permanent foundation must have a septic system must share a common well with principal dwelling uh the this particular um residence does have its own well they were just granted a variance uh earlier this evening to have a second to not have to share from the standard that they have to share a common well uh and then you can't have one more more than one additional dwelling on a parcel and the parcel must be at least 5 acres in size so with this variance being granted it um the request would meet that those standards um and the dwelling would is currently meeting all setbacks from property lines uh the permit would expire when there is an need for a second residence for a family member or if the ownership of the parcel were to change or if the parcel were to be split any questions for me at all if nobody has any questions for Matt would the applicant care to speak to this thank you anybody in the audience wish or online wish to speak for or against anybody in the audience here online wish to speak to this request anybody in the audience wish to speak on this request hearing none look for a motion to close the public hearing thank you motions and made and seconded all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried thank you in granting an interm use the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health safety morals and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands existing and anticipated land land uses traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets and land and the effect on agricultural usage and values of property and Scenic views in the surrounding areas and the effect of the proposed used on the existing comprehensive plan ample distance lots of distance between the two homes and I don't believe that there is a any any issues there use and enjoyment of other property the interm use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted and not substantially diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity development of surrounding property the establishment of the interm use will not impede the normal and orderly develop velopment and Improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area utilities access roads drainage off street parking and loading spaces adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide utilities access roads drainage off street parking and loading spaces and Matt has a note here that it meets the County requirements nuisance conditions adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor fumes dust noise vibration water pollution and soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result burden on public services this use will not create an excessive burden on Parks schools streets water suppli sanitary sewers storm sewers and other Public Utilities or facilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area compatibility the use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent agriculturally zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to agricultural use of said land appearance of site and structure the structure in site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent Residential Properties relationship to overall needs the use is in the opinion of the Planning Commission reasonably related to the overall needs of the district and to the existing land use in the case of the flood plane areas the proof that the location is necessary for for facility operation and that alternative sites not susceptible to flooding are not available consistency with ordinance the use is consistent with the purposes of this coordinance and the purposes of the zoning District in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use con conflict with Comprehensive plans the use is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan if any of the township city or county traffic hazards congestion and flood plane area the use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion and in flood plane areas has access during flooding for ordinary and emergency vehicles existing businesses existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of noise glare or general unsightliness anybody have any questions or hearing none is there a yeah Mr chair I do have three conditions proposed okay three conditions um applicant must abide by the provisions of the Clay County Land Development ordinance uh method of waste disposal approved by Clay County Environmental Health the Perman expires when any of the conditions are not met change in ownership second dwelling is no longer occupied by family or any other conditions as a Planning Commission deems necessary hearing no questions or comments would look for a motion to approve or deny with conditions that staff has provided Mr chair I'll make a motion to approve the request with the recommendation provided second I have a motion and a second to approve permit any discussion any further questions hearing none all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried thank you I'm sorry who made that second Kurt next uh on the agenda is the a Benedict request for an iup look for a motion to approve or to begin the public hearing so moved I'll second the motion motions a made and seconded to approve opening the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried thank you Matt thank you Mr chair yeah this is a um request brought forward by Isaac and Benedict and Blaine Benedict um for an inter amuse permit for a second dwelling on a paral at 6775 50th Avenue South Sab zero onal ID one31 um or sorry 1.03 1.124 in part of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter section 31 Township 139 North range 47 West West in Glendon Township so the um comprehensive plan goals and objectives uh relevant to this request are the same as in the previous hearing uh this property and all immediately adjacent properties are zoned agricultural General as the base zoning district and then resource protection Wellhead as the overlay zoning district and it's approximately 7.7 Acres on the south of 50th Avenue which is county state 8 Highway 13 and west of 70th Street um which is county state 8 Highway 11 so there is a single family residence and a detached garage on the property currently the applicant is the son of the landowner and he would like to place a temporary second dwelling on his parents parcel so this is the parcel looking to place that kind of here in the back corner again going through um the standards that the the dwelling must be a manufactured home must not be placed on a permanent foundation must have a septic system that meets County Health requirements must share a commonwealth principal dwelling and that there' be no more more than one additional dwelling on the parcel and the parcel must be at least 5 acres in size and this request does appear to meet all of these um standards looks like it also could meet all the setbacks from the property lines um looking at um the permit potentially would expire when there's no longer a need for the second residents or family member or if ownership of the parcel were to change the applicant has indicated that they plan on subdividing this sometime in the future as well just not sure when I did speak with our County engineer about this just because there is kind of an intersection um and I can bring this up bear with me for one moment but this is the second meeting today you're just like whipping it out on the website improvised yeah like jazz I need some like training on where to find these things I'm impressed um so with our access standards um or access management stand standards in our county code um there is a 500 ft um spacing requirement from an intersection and then 300 uh feet from a uh another access and this they're looking at placing the driveway kind of right along here um it would meet that request they would need to get a um access permit from the highway department as well any questions for me so just so you're saying they they would not meet the 500 they would meet the would they would yep yep but they would just need they would just need a a access permit for the for the access anybody have anything further for matk you would the is the applicant hearing with the applicant car to speak thank you bla um anybody in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter anybody in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter anybody in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter hearing none look for a motion to close the public hearing so moveed second motions am made it seconded to close the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried thank you findings a fact effective use in granting an interm use the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health safety morals and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands existing and anticipated land uses traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets and lands and the effect on agricultural usage and values of property and Scenic views in the surrounding areas and the effect of the proposed use on existing comprehensive plans use and enjoyment of other property the interm use will not be injures to the use and enjoyment of other proper vinity for the purpose already permitted and not substantially diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity development of surrounding property the establishment of the interm use will not impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area utilities access roads drainage off street parking and loading spaces adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide utilities access roads drainage off street parking and loading spaces nuisance conditions adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor fumes dust noise vibration water pollution and soil erosion erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other lights in such manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result bir on public Public Services the use will not create an excessive burden on Parks schools streets water supply sanitary sewers and storm sewers and other public facilities or utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area compatibility the use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent agriculturally zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depre appreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to agricultural use of said land appearance of structure in site the structure in site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent Residential Properties relationship to overall needs the use is in the opinion of the Planning Commission reasonably related to the overall needs of the district and to the existing land use in the case case of flood plane areas the proof that the location is necessary for facility operation and that alternative sites are not susceptible to flooding are not available consistency with ordinance the use is consistent with purposes of this ordinance and the purposes of the zoning District in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use conflict with the comprehensive plan the use is not in conflict with the comprehensive to plan if any of the township or city or county traffic hazards congestion in the flood plane areas this use will not hazards or congestion in the flood plane areas as access during flooding for ordinary and emergency vehicles existing businesses existing B businesses nearby will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of noise blare or general unsightliness Matt has staff has some conditions up there number one that applicant must abide by the provisions of the Clay County Land Development ordinance zoning and subdivision regulations um that the waste disposal septic system must be approved by Clay County environmental health and that this permit expires when any of the conditions are not met Mr chair I'll offer a motion to approve the request with um conditions one through three thank you second motions and made in seconded to approve the permit with conditions one through three as provided by staff any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried permit is granted thank you next on the list is Travis mosure request for an interm use permit I'm look for a motion to open the public public hearing so moved second motions of made and second to approve the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried thank you Matt thank you Mr chair this is request from Travis uh moer to for an interm use permit for a dog kennel at 6371 170th Avenue South Morhead Minnesota 56560 on parcel id0 1 2102 in part of the Northeast quarter the Northwest quarter section 31 Township 137 North range 47 West West Alliance Township so a relevant um Clay County comprehensive plan goals and objectives we have a objective to recognize diversity of living and working Arrangements in unincorporated areas of Clay County and allowing for home occup in unincorporated areas that are in harmony with the rural character of Clay County we also have a commercial industrial goal to encourage commercial and Industrial Development that is in harmony with the Agricultural and Rural character of Clay County um so this is a 5.79 acre parcel it's on the south side of 170th Avenue um they're all the all zoned agricultural General kennel is allowed as an interim use the property does have a steel building that's used for the kennel business and a utility building as well as Seven Grain bins uh the use does appear to meet all the required setbacks for a kennel so that setback would be that 600 foot residential setback um there's really isn't any residence within a half mile this request is for Great Divide kennel um it's actually on the property adjacent to um the residential property and so this lot has 400 feet of Frontage on a public roadway um just made aware of this um business when it was um during a a building permit basically um obing an after the fact building permit so the kenel building is used for training and boarding for hunting dogs um from roughly May to August they don't board dogs unless they're training them uh the dogs no dogs are permanently housed at the kennel um the structure built for the kennel has eight outdoor kennels and each is about 25 square feet and includes indoor and outdoor um so a total of 50 square feet for each dog uh they do not train or board more than eight dogs at one time um the owner is also planning on doing uh breeding and sale of of dog uh they do have a waste management plan uh so regular collection bagging of solid waste and then any liquid waste is disinfected and rinsed into a holding tank that is pumped out as needed um not really any noise mitigation needed just because uh the closest residents are half a mile away and dogs are restricted to indoors from 10 p.m. until 7 a.m. any questions for me at all are there any County restrictions or regarding number of dogs allowed on property is there that's a good question I don't think there are anybody else have anything for Matt hearing none would the applicant care to speak if he is here if you could come up to the podium and introduce yourself and then we'll have it for the record Travis Moser does anybody any have any questions for him no I've actually um my husband's worked with Travis and some training of dogs and um I think this is just a case of um literally not knowing that something was required and so there's no malice behind it but Travis just wants to um get everything up to date so we can continue being a business in rural Clay County yeah purely a case of ignorance on my part I went online and looked on the State website and I didn't need a permit to operate the kennel based on their requirements I had no idea that I needed this otherwise this would have been done a long time ago so purely ignorance on my part I guess live and learn I would blame his father-in-law his father-in-law was longtime County Commissioner John Evert yeah it definitely is his fault he should have told me anybody else have any questions or comments for Travis thank you sir thank you sir anybody in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter anyone in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter anybody in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter hearing none we look for a motion to close the public hearing so offered motions and made and seconded to close the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried public hearing is closed effective use in granting an interm use the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health safety morals General Welfare of occupant of surrounding lands existing and anticipated land uses traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets and land and the effect on agricultural usage and values of property and Scenic views in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed use on existing comprehensive plans use and enjoyment of other property the interm use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of any other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted and not substantially diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity development of surrounding property the establishment of the interm use will not impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area utilities access roads drainage off street parking and loading spaces adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide utilities access roads drainage parking and loading spaces nuus conditions adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive oder fumes dust noise vibration water ution and soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result burden on public services the use will not create an excessive burden on Parks schools streets water supply sanitary sewers and storm sewers or other public facilities or utilities which serve are proposed to serve the area compatibility the use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent agriculturally zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to agricultural use of s land appearance of structure and site the structure in site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties relationship to overall needs the use is in the opinion of the Planning Commission reasonably related to the overall needs of the district and to the existing land use in the case of flood plane areas the proof that the location is necessary for facility operation and that alternative sites are not susceptible to flooding are not available consistency with ordinance the use is consistent with the purposes of this ordinance and the purposes of the zoning District in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use conflict with Comprehensive plan the use is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan if any of the township city or county traffic hazards congestion in flood plane areas the use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion and in flood plane areas as access during flooding for ordinary and emergency vehicles existing businesses existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected because of the curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of noise glare or general unsightliness staff has five conditions permit shall terminate upon transfer of the property kennel shall operate a waste system within regulations of the County ordinance signage shall meet the requirements of Clay County Land Development ordinance owner shall operate under all applicable state federal and local laws and obtain All applica State applicable state and federal licenses for commercial breeding these licenses shall remain current through the existence of the kenel and breeding operation any other conditions commission deems necessary such as maximum number of dogs um on site any any time parking plan requirements staff hours of operation been around for a while and then they have all their appear to have all their bases covered already I have a question can we talk about the number of dogs just for a moment if he's talking about breeding his own I mean sometimes there are litters that are larger than eight and so I just wouldn't want someone to be out of compliance because of something like that me so Mr chair and commissioner moso I don't think there would be a need then to put any sort of limit on the number of dogs um uh at the facility just keep that open open-ended um especially considering just the distance from other Residential Properties um things like that so and there's Ample Ample certainly ample room on the property as well well I have a question regarding the number um I know that I know a business that I'm connected with that we do have a fixed number but we are strictly boarding not breeding where we have a hard number that we this is what we allowed to I'm not just it has been done in the past um yeah Mr Cherry certainly can yeah speak speak state your name for the record again please Travis Moser so I currently own four of my own dogs I have two males two females two of my females are used for breeding I have one litter per year is what my standard operation practices are for the business purposes itself um that's why the kenel building is there my dogs do not stay in the kennel building they stay in my house which is the adjacent property so within my kennel building I have eight separate kennels so that I can't will not take more than eight dogs at a time um I guess in the future if it was to become my full-time job you know I would like to have the flexibility to maybe increase the capacity to board and train I don't board specifically to board I only board the dogs that I'm currently training so and there's are only given for you know through the months that I described earlier in the thing so thank you anybody else questions or concerns to give to Tris thank you okay look for a motion to uh approve or deny this permit with conditions 1 through four or if somebody wants to put a hard number but I don't think that's necessary this situation move to approve I'll second the motion m and made and seconded to approve the interm use permit any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried thank you next okay Matt how do you say that whome um next on the agenda is an interm use permit from wholesome dmwr comma Inc formerly known as aggregate um look for a motion to open the public hearing second second motions am made and second to open the public hearing all those in favor say I I I opposed thank thank you Matt thank you Mr chair the this is a request to renew an interim use mining permit for an existing gravel mining operation on parcel ID 27.2 3.04 z z in the East half and Southwest quarter of section 23 Township 140 North range 47 West Spring Prairie Township so this is approximately 482 acre parcel it's located about 3 Mi north of US Highway 10 and 3 Mi east of trunk Highway 9 and immediately south of the spring Prairie huite Colony uh its uses are pasture and gravel mining it's been mined intermittantly since 1954 probably even earlier um there were interim use permits that were granted in 2011 uh and 2018 for this property uh these inter imuse permits were grant were even though the site has been mined for such a long time it's had it was inactive for a period of time which necessitated the interim use permits essentially to to resume mining uh existing conditions and natural resources on this property it's pretty low um topographic relief the depth to water table uh is high it ranges from 1 to 10 feet uh throughout the property there are several Wetlands on the property uh many are the result of previous mining activity the property is not prime Farmland but uh according to the um aggregate um resources inventory um that's been produced by the state of Minnesota it does have high gravel potential so the mining plan of of this this is kind of difficult to see um looking at all the red areas here Focus points would be to occur um intermittently they're of the currently active areas there's only three new Acres that would be proposed to be opened and um top soil would be stripped and stockpiled the material would be excavated processed using conveyor screeners and Crushers and the proposed Hall routes uh would be um South and West either pit 21 or the faram Morhead market so we've got um County Road 86 comes up here and um stops right here and then goes uh West here this is a Township Road 170th Street South uh there is an active bald eagle nesting site up in here so they would avoid that um the mined areas would be sloped to the interior to prevent runoff from uh exiting the property uh eventually it's going to be Contour to Rolling Hills with a central water feature um which is right here I should note to that what they're I think primarily mining their initial targeting area for mining is this red um deposit right here the future land use would be past year the estimated Reclamation cost is $2500 an acre um the 2011 permit uh had a requirement to reclaim the entire previously mined area and then the 2018 permit had a 39 acre Reclamation requirement on it uh from the township meeting last Tuesday there's some comments that were made about Hall Roads being maintained and dust controlled haulers adhering to U recommended speed limits of 25 miles hour and complying with all traffic control signage uh engine brakes not being used 170 Street North does have year- round weight restriction restrictions on it so the access would have to be um from the south and not from the East this is a year round weight restricted Road and the township did Issue a permit um with the following seven conditions um it would be for a 10-year period beginning in May 2025 ending December 2035 uh they would require a bond of $200,000 uh and adhering to a road maintenance agreement to include the following that the axis would be on County 86 on that South Side uh one hauling chloride from the pit entr must be applied and maintained to provide dust control speed limit signs would need to be put up for 25 mph on the Hall Road a regular grading of the roads would be required to maintain the road Crown from time to time and or at the discretion of the Township Board engine brakes are not allowed uh the applicant should comply with all federal and state laws pertaining to mining traffic control and County ordinances including environmental assessment worksheets and environmental impact statements if performed federal and state laws apply to safety fence placement the owner and operator shall assess the saf exercise discretion of the placement of the safety fences around the Mind area a Reclamation of previous areas needs to be completed in the hours of operation 7:00 a.m. to 7: P p.m. Monday through Friday uh unless the spring Prairie Township Board approves a temporary variance any questions for me at all more of a clarification for uh the 25 an hour on a County Road did Justin was Justin's comment on that he did not comment on the um speed recommended speed limit but that would have to because it's a County Road it would have to any signage would have to go through the County highway department um the only thing he commented on was just ensuring that when there's hauling that's happening that the roads are and maintained by the uh operator of the pit that was the main concern the only reason I bring that up is I think if we start posting specific Hall routes for 25 M hour on County roadways there's a a gray area than on all of our other County Roads I mean we try to be as consistent as possible on that mean there can be a recommended speed surely um but it's It's tricky to spot one specific area for such a drastically slower speed yeah and I would I think the main signs that are put out if if any are just that there's trucks hauling ones that are are put out and I'm not saying that the township doesn't have the right to encourage it to be lower I just mean from a jurisdiction yeah and we would I think we have put a recommended truck speed for okay and it would just it would not change the speed limit of the road for trucks it would just simply be a recommended speed sorry don't we usually have a hours of operation for a Saturday too is that just going to be over this is for the this is the township permit so just use that then instead um I know that the the applicant did want to make a request for for hours and I'll I'll let them do that um um in terms of deviating from the 7:00 a.m. to 700 p.m. but I'll just uh defer to the applicant to to make that that request hearing no further questions would the applicant care to come up and speak state your name for the record please good evening my name is Sheree ersson I'm in the environment and land Department with whome I submitted the application so um to speak to the comment on ours we had a meeting with the township last Tuesday night and um received a copy of their draft or their permit today and exchanged some emails with both the township and Matt's office requesting um an expansion of those hours we had in the application indicated uh request to continue the hours from the 2018 permit which were 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. um in the the email exchange back and forth I just want to bring it out here so I say it correctly uh we were wondering if we could expand the hours from have the crushing screening conveying processing hours stay at the 7 to 7 that which were proposed but um expand the hauling to be 5:00 a.m. to 700 p.m. uh also that Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. hauling and so and actually I have with me here our operations group The we have le Al our plant manager on the side there um Chris Forest our operations manager and Justin Flack our general manager here with me tonight so um I was gonna let Justin speak a little bit further to the to the issue of ours if that's right all right good evening um as sh said my name is Justin Flack I'm with whome I'm the general manager up here for this region so I think the main point that I want to come through is just on the hours I won't belabor the other points but some of the some of the concerns we have with it that I want to go on record with are and I know a lot of this is is obvious but I did want to restate it so one of the biggest challenges we face as a gravel producer is our short construction season it's just a reality it's a harsh business up here so we have this short construction season road restrictions in the spring restricted further that really limits how much material we can get to the market so what drives the intensity of the hours at times is these there's there's these construction projects in town that have deadlines given by the municipalities the cities the the hospitals you name it and then the short season that's what drives that intensity so we're supplying to contractors who set these schedules and and the market really drives how much material is needed in that time frame so if you think about it 7 to S does sound like a fairly long time but one of the challenges is if we can't fire up our equipment till 700 we're then loading a truck scaling it ticking in it driving it to town it might be 8 or 8:30 before it's at a job site in Fargo Morehead or in Clay County Morehead you name it so the challenge with that if you can think about it you see the hours to complete the construction projects with the deadlines given to the contractors and and not having material on site till 8 or 8:30 can present a a very big challenge um so we would request the longer hours for that it's not our desire to work them continuously but um to have the flexibility to do them in our in our short season we view is very critical and and the only other thing I'd be cautious of is there could be ill advised ramifications of shortening hours too so we don't prefer to haul on Saturdays but it it obviously happens in the industry but the more we restrict the hours during the week the more you might have to haul on a Saturday too and I don't I I don't know if that would be the goal of this either but that's the market will drive how much material it needs so it could re it could increase tons coming in from other counties with less restrictions over in North Dakota all those sorts of deals and I and I hope that's not the intent of this so that's that's our biggest struggle with that is just that short season I wanted to to reinforce that and and respectfully request um a consideration of different hours thank you thank you Mr jar Matt um it's did so they requested the 6:00 a.m. to the township and the township went was 7 is that what I'm hearing yeah I just know what the the Planning Commission has been consistently um with permit conditions that have or permit requests that have become before this board for mining um putting consistent hours of 7: a.m. to 700 p.m. um with the ability to deviate from those hours if proper notice is given and so at the township meeting they I think matched up with what we've done in the in the past and the township is here tonight and where representatives from the township are here tonight can speak to that as well mat can you enlighten me is the uh what a lot of times a Township has no they had no formal input on what they want us to do we just do our thing when the town ship has got very specific things they like is that just an advisory to us or can we go beyond below whatever um how how much do we need to follow what the township uh recommends versus what we have normally done so Mr chair and Mr Sten I think it's it's um nice for the applicant in this case because in in this spring Prairie Township they have their own separate permitting process from the county um and so essentially they this is a permit that they have granted to um the applicant our permit can be different from that um because we were independent of them um but they would still have to follow the conditions of both permits um so when they're more in sync I think it's a lot easier for the the operator to follow the conditions so say if a if um the Planning Commission decided to grant the 6 a.m. to um 6 PM hours that um were on the previous permit um tonight um they would still be bound by the hours of the township permit so they're completely independent but it's nice if they're someone in line thank you or consistent could you uh bring up again what what our standard Saturday hours have been for other for other pits it's been 7 a.m. to 2 p.m hauling only anyone else have questions for Matt um but somebody in the audience okay um Russ Russ Ward Jean Ward would one or both of you like to come up to the mic and introduce yourself and speak I'm for I'm the chairman for spring Prairie Township and we agreed with this permit last week on the hours of 7 to 7 they used to be 6 to6 and we changed it as their request for 7 to S now they want to change it again to 5 to 7 and we don't feel it's right for the people in that area to be distrupted by the extra truck traffic at 5 o'clock in the morning so that's what we I talked with the other two supervisors today and that's what they felt to is they don't want to go 5: in the morning till 7 at night thank you anybody have any questions for Mr Ward Mr Ward are you open to Saturday hauling yep we agreed with that previous you know if they needed to go on Saturday that we'd go along with that but they didn't know if they how much they were going to be using that just if it was emergency like they needed extra material generally it's kind of laid out there it's available and but you want them to come to you if they need yep that's what we asked them to do yep thank you Jean would you wish to speak also I'm Jean Ward I'm the clerk for and we've dealt with wholesome a lot and my son is actually driven for Aggregate and I know for a fact that when they say that they're starting at 7:00 the trucks are in the pit between 6:00 and 6:30 getting loaded ready to leave the pit at 7:00 thank you anybody in the the audience are online which to speak more to this matter um why don't you come up we' did done that in the past introduce yourself again and uh I'm Sher eer and I'm with whome I just wanted to clarify that our application uh was made to match the 2018 um application so it wasn't that we were seeking the the 7 to7 that came up amongst discussion uh that that's something that you all as a Planning Commission had moved towards um and so we requested our permit with the township hasn't yet been we haven't signed it yet so we um requested just further discussion in that regard for to before the permit got finalized so just wanted to do that and then I was just curious if I wasn't sure the pit that we're talking about that Jean was mentioning so questions need to be re go ahead Jenny I was just going to say discussion needs to happen through the chair so okay sorry about that yeah ask him he okay anyway I'm I'm just not quite familiar about the reference that was made by the prior speaker well I what constitutes opening hours or hours of operation is it when they'll first loaded mean uh I believe her point was that in your mind hours of operation began when the first loaded truck went down the road okay not when the first truck arrived in the pit okay and I honestly say I've never had that conversation so on this board Mr chair I know for for this the the the permit that they're currently permitted under the hours are 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. so they could start at activities at 6:00 a.m. at the specific pit so if it if the permit if click the one that they're currently operating under right now that expires at the end of this year yes they are allowed to operate 6 so if we align with if this we Grant we also L with spring Perry they will not be allowed under the new permit then to load to arrive at the pit until 7 a.m. is correct yes unless they receive prior for e leave I mean you need to you need to check air pressures and oil I mean you need to do all of that otherwise we're really going to be delaying those components I've just never I never heard of hard and fast what constitutes starting so yeah I think it's important to say though anybody in the audience or online wish to speak to this matter and another other points anyone in the audience or online wish to speak for or to this matter anyone in the audience wish to speak to this matter hearing none look for a motion to close the public hearing Jo move motions made do we have a second to close the public hearing motions made and seconded all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried effective use in granting an interm use permit the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health safety morals and general welfare of occupants suring lands existing and anticipated land uses traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets and land and the effect on agricultural usage and values of property and Scenic views in surrounding areas and the effect of the proposed use on existing comprehensive plans use and enjoyment of other property the interm use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in an immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted and not substantially diminish or impair property values within the immediate property development of of surrounding property the establishment of the interm use will not impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of surrounding vacant property uses or uses predominant in the area utilities access roads drainage off street parking and loading spaces adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide utilities access roads drainage off Street hardening and loading spaces nuisance conditions adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor fumes dust noise vibration water pollution and soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other lights in such a matter manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result result burden on public services the use will not create an excessive burden on Parks schools streets water suppli sanitary sewers storm sewers and other public facilities or utilities which serve or are proposed to serve in the area compatibility the use will be sufficiently compatible are separated by distance or screening from adjacent agriculturally zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to agricultural use of said land appearance of structures in site the structure in site shall have a appearance which will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent Residential Properties relationship to overall needs the use is in the opinion of the Planning Commission reasonably related to the overall needs of the district and to the existing land use in the case of flood plane areas the proof that the location is necessary for facility operation and that alternative sites are not susceptible to flooding are not available consistency with ordinance the use is consistent with the purposes of this ordinance and the purposes of the zoning District in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use conflict with Comprehensive plans the use is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan if any of the township city or county traffic hazard congestions in flood plane areas the use will not cause traffic traffic hazards or congestion and in food plane areas have access during flooding for ordinary and emergency vehicles existing businesses existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of noise glare or general and S liness his staff has 17 conditions and Mr chair there are just a couple of um just small changes um there was a condition on there condition 13 about trees being removed um that was an error that probably should not have been on there so I struck that um did add a suggested condition number 17 that trucks must not be staged on any public roadway I don't think it's going to be a problem with this pit I've talked to the applicant they don't think it's going to be an issue with this pit but it has been becoming an issue specifically in the last summer or last hauling season or construction season it's been more of an an issue that our office has seen more complaints about and the highway department has seen more complaints about as well not with not with this company um just with other operators okay that uh and I'm assuming since we haven't talked about it there are no residences within reasonable or very close there are uh along um there are three residences right across the street from where this pit is being proposed um and this has come up in past hearings it was in your um your meeting materials um mainly the main concern being with where the access would be on the Southside so having a specific condition um to keep that access that's at condition 16 um located midway between uh the two residential these two residential Parcels so this residential parcel and this residential parcel so roughly right here that something that's come up in the in the past as well well I don't know Mr chair any other members of the Planning Commission if with regards to the discussion on the hours of operation if there's anything that you want to add to in the findings about that or discuss that condition condition proposed condition a little further um right now kind of have it reading operations at the site are limited to April through November Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Hauling only on Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 2: p.m. unless prior approval is received from the planning department and spring Prairie Township and I can also walk we can walk through all these too and I can we can also discuss them as they come up got a couple questions whatever time we set doesn't really matter because it's what spring Prairie chooses to pick for hours of operation correct you have toide by that there they would yep whatever they choose would have to Y they'd have to abide by that that's an independent separate permit it says operations at the site are limited to seven so you know with commissioner Mojo I mean Ian we can't go against what spring prayer wants I understand that but it's not like you can't even enter the pit until 7 if that's how they want it but that that be as it is but in 2018 there was 39 Acres approved now they're still talking about 39 is it the same 39 Acres that's they're limited to 39 acres and it's not a rolling 39 they you understand that so Mr chair and Mr staken this because this pit is kind of been mined since 1954 the 2011 permit was for 200 Acres um the 2018 permit was for 39 Acres I'm um proposing that we just go to 190 Acres they're not going to use 190 Acres but there's already been about 190 Acres of previously mined area on this parcel and so it's already been Min to you know that that extent um they're really only going to open three additional Acres on this is their their plan and to just utilize the existing acreage that's that's open essentially so that's why my proposal would be to kind of go closer to that 2011 um uh acreage which was 200 acres and just call it 190 but under number seven under spring prairies restrictions it talk 39 Acres yep and that would be again independent of that's an completely separate permit to be independ of that um I the 190 I mean it's already open essentially it's already been mined but why are they limiting it to 39 on their number seven restrictions likely because their previous permit had 39 as well the previous spring Prairie Township permit was 39 our previous permit was 39 the original orig 2011 permit that we granted was 190 um in my recommended conditions it makes more sense for it to be closer to 190 from our they would still have to abide by the spring Prairie Township permit regardless but it's already essentially been mined really in reality there's going to be the existing open areas are going to be be mined which I think equates to about 42 some acres and then an additional three acres and the fact that uh Wetlands were created that doesn't create any issues the I know that they do intend to do a wetland delineation in the spring they are they have worked with our uh coordinator on that and he has been out to the site think we need to go through each individual condition okay condition one operate within the pro provisions of the Clay County Land Development ordinance two operator shall control dust and provide necessary maintenance on any and Hall gravel Hall Roads three operator shall control fugitive dust within the mining area four all burms and top soil stock piles must be seated to Perennial vegetation five operator shall provide proof of npds SDS storm water management and air quality permits as required to the planning office and shall be in compliance with any and all local state federal regulating agencies prior to commencing mining operations six operations must comply with all provisions of the wetlands conservation act seven mining operations including the open pit staging and stockpiling areas internal Hall Roads and Associated structures must not exceed 190 Acres eight operator must control noxious Weeds on site nine operator must post a Reclamation Bond of $2,500 an acre 10 operator must reclaim mind out areas as mining progresses previously permitted mined areas must be reclaimed require areas to be restored to pasture native grassland 11 applicant shall provide parking screening lighting drainage and portable sewer facilities consistent with County regulations as a termined by the planning department and County Health Department 12 require oper operator to present a detailed mine plan the planning office indicating exact area to be mined current topography final topography phases of mining operation equipment locations locations of hazardous material storage and sanitary facilities and storm water management plan prior to commencing any operations at the site for there should be 13 actually because I deleted one so 13 operations at the site are limited to April through November Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Hauling only on Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 2: p.m. unless appr prior approval is received from the planning department in Spring Prairie Township 14 permit shall expire on December 31st 2024 15 applicant shall apply for an access permit through the highway department for new access onto 43rd Avenue just County Road 86 said access shall be located between the located midway between the approach located on parcel number 27026 . 10004 and the approach located on parcel 27261 Z1 and then um 16 trucks must not be staged on any public roadway if there's any conditions that you want to discuss further I will say that at this site I mean it's um ever since I've been um employed by Clay County as a um I have not had any complaints about hours of operation or or anything for for this specific site not received any I don't think it's been mined very actively as some of the other sites in Clay County I think it's more intermittent but anybody have any further comments or questions hearing none look for a motion to approve or deny the permit with conditions 1- 16 am I allowed to make a motion Mr chair I'll make a motion to approve the request with the recommended um components and I think the most important part might be that unless prior approval is received from the planning department in Spring Prairie I believe not only um affects the Saturday hours but also the Monday through Friday can you clarify what you just spoke about I just said exactly what's up there but I think for the public and for the applicant when we talk about additional hours may be available with prior approval um I think that applies to the week as well as Saturday correct um yeah Mr chair and commissioner moo that's how I would read that too so we have a motion to approve second and second to approve the permit with conditions 1 through 16 with an emphasis on hours and asking permission um any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I I opposed permit is granted thank you okay next on the agenda is the Clay County Land Development ordinance update um this needs to take place in the form of a public hearing okay uh look for a motion to open a the public hearing to discuss the Clay County Land Development ordinance update so moved second motions in made and seconded to open the public meeting us on Matt is there a vote on that opening that pardon was there a yes motion made in first and second but you have to vote on vote was there a vote on that oh sorry all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried public hearing is open sorry about that all right thank you Mr chair and Commissioners so just um kind of pleased to uh state that we're close to having a full draft of our uh update to Our Land Development ordinance um chapters 1 through four are essentially in complete draft form and chapters 5 through eight um will be available likely in early December I was told at the end of this week they'd be made available to me and then I'll review and and send them out um uh to you all for review uh just want to provide a some information on where the public can find this um I think this did go out as well um so this is located on the County website um under Land Development planning zoning Land Development code update and so we do have the first four chapter chapters are available chapters 5 through through 8 would be forthcoming um so I'm just going to walk briefly through these I'm going to give a high level overview I think um it's it's a lot I think to go to go through and we'll likely need to uh dedicate our December or a good portion of our December meeting to this as well just to give you all more time to review this material um to give the public more time to review this material and provide provide comment as well um so and because we you know I was hope because we don't have a full Planning Commission here tonight uh I think it would be good if we kind of hold off on doing a full kind of Deep dive into this until December when we can hopefully have more of our planning Commissioners uh here to provide input but um I just do want to give the opportunity for any public um that might be here to to weigh in on this um I think I'll start just by providing a high level kind of overview of of the first four chapters um the first chapter essentially is the the introductory Provisions uh this is going to lay out kind of the statutory authorization for zoning uh the purpose of of the ordinance um jurisdictional Authority so kind of explaining um where this ordinance applies to and also some different types of um relationships uh for land use for zoning and for sub subdivision um control specifically around Municipal areas Township zoning and then areas that are fall under joint Powers agreements like um oakport uh and then um in the Barnesville area as well uh what we uh Define as development is is included in here and I think one of the things that um um one of the changes that we've had a lot of of comment on from from folks and the study Review Committee that was kind of the committee formed to to help draft and provide uh input on on this ordinance was um what a structure might be considered as development or not development um so one thing we're looking at doing with in this draft is with accessory structures and so essentially saying if you have an accessory structure with a foundation in a floor area of 144 square feet or less um you would not have to get a permit a development permit or a building permit for that if it's not on a f if it's on a permanent foundation if it's not on a permanent foundation that would increase up to about 400 square ft where you'd be exempt from from having to get a permit uh looking at maybe making a change here just a slight tweak to this I'm stating that you should you still would need to meet the structure setbacks so you wouldn't have it on the property line or anything like that um but a lot of other communities do this where they have exemptions for smaller structures and and that's something that we don't we don't have so if you're buying like a garden chedd or you're building like a shed or something like that um or if you have something that can be moved around your property we see that a lot especially um uh with people with working with livestock you wouldn't necessarily need to get a building permit for those types of structures it's kind of the big one of the big changes there or proposed changes uh and then non-conformities one thing that we did clarify with non non-conformities it's something that came up at our last uh Planning Commission meeting so a non-conformity is a use or a structure or a property that was in compliance with the code or predated the code at some point in time um but with code updates and things like that no longer does those things are allowed to continue on um through um but they can't not be intensified or expanded there is an exception exception for um seasonal recreational and residential Homestead and residential non-homestead um that say if you're structure is destroyed or something like something happens to it you can actually replace that that structure um and um so we did not have that in our previous code and in the proposed code is is to include that uh and that's from um from state statute on nonconformities so in the if under under our current code if you had a house and it was not set back correctly or not didn't meet setbacks or something like that and it was just destroyed in a tornado you would have to build it to conform to our new setbacks um but in State Statute and in this proposed code you could replace that structure you couldn't make it bigger or anything like that you could replace what you had big change there um just defines what the establishment of different zoning districts are and their different relationships uh the zoning map a lot of this has remained unchanged and that's ch one so eight pages you can read it tonight if you haven't already before you go to bed and if you're still awake after that you can um move on to uh our base districts so these are the four um zoning districts that are are base zoning districts in Clay County so like the agricultural General zoning District most of the county is zoned this way uh essentially just outlining the the purpose of um each of these districts uh referencing where the allowed uses are where the allowed use standards are um some specific other types of development uh one thing with the agricultural General zoning District um that we have in our current code is uh relates to residential subdivisions and and how those are done there have been some proposed changes to that um to give residents some options for um different types of subdivisions uh residential subdivisions and and and with these kind of the purpose is to uh provide land owners with an opportunity to develop that their land um but also with options to um protect some prime farmland and natural resources as well through the um giving like development incentives uh in terms of additional Lots if you are able to preserve more farmland or preserve more natural features as part of your development residential development design and I don't know if anyone's had a chance to review those that's something we'll probably want to talk more in depth um um in in December at our December meeting and then as far as the the other zoning districts essentially just outlining um again what goals they relate to in the comprehensive plan what objectives they relate to in the comprehensive plan where to find use standards uh where to find different development standards in the code as well as subdivision procedures so this is another short uh chapter any any questions or comments on any of these I think with this spefic specific chapter the biggest change would be with the residential subdivisions um and I can explain if you would like me to I can go into more detail on that or we can hold off until the more of the Planning Commission is present I think it would be good to wait on that a chapter three very similar to to chapter uh two um this describes what the overlay districts are um probably the biggest difference here is that um two of our overlay districts are are flood Hazard zones so our flood plane zoning and then our Shoreland uh I know that this has come up a lot that there's been a desire for the Planning Commission to have the lot sizes and setbacks for Shoreland zoning match with what the state has currently um the county standards are more restrictive than the state so like on a natural environment Lake um the setback in Clay County like a Lee Lake for example is 200 just outside of Holly is 200 feet from the essentially the water's edge or the ordinary high water level in the state rules that's 150 ft so we've changed it to we're proposing changing it to match um the state standards and so in some cases um the setbacks would be reduced and in our public input survey that's one thing that we saw a lot of comments on were um having the Shoreland setbacks and lot sizes match the state Shoreland rules uh the only exception to that that's being proposed to not change is with rivers and keeping that at 200 feet um just because rivers are a lot more dynamic in terms of um flooding and potential erosion and things like that um and you've seen we've seen historical development that's been too close to rivers and now we've seen a lot more with like flood buyouts people having problems in their with potential damages or risks to their property so their proposal is to keep that at at 200 ft uh flood plane I think the other thing I will just mention is that we've um it's essentially I should say that the state has model or ordinances for Shoreland they have model ordinances for flood plane these match up with the state rules and so we want our flood plane rules to match us match the states and be as up to- dat as possible so they've just essentially been modernized uh to match um what the most current rules are so that our flood plane regulations are in compliance with both the state flood plane rules and then um the federal um flood plane Reg ulations as well and in terms of the other overlay districts um one thing too that we've uh tried to do a little bit more is add more um tables and Graphics into the ordinance so it's a little bit more easier to understand some of the more complicated Concepts or regulations especially um with regards to the flood plane regulation and so trying to make them more illustrative um is as a goal so we have more more pictures not quite a picture book though any questions on overlay districts at all no I should know note to that with these with the base zoning districts and the overlay zoning districts none of the there aren't any new districts being proposed at all um they're all kind of remaining the same so chapter 4 um this is probably the chapter that you as the Planning Commission and the public would probably use the most and go to the most because this is the chapter that contains the uses which uses are allowed in specific zoning districts and then if there are any special standards or regulations um for these different use types whether it be agricultural uses residential uses commercial and Industrial uses recreational uses public service and utility uses accessory uses or any temporary uses so when we look at like what would be allowed in each zoning dist District um we have the use table so the use table is going to tell you um if you're looking at a different type of different use that would be in the First Column and then um and then what would be allowed in each zoning district and what type of permit might be required so this has been updated as well this is um there's really not a good way to um display and present this type of information um Beyond a table it's kind of the standard operating practice or procedure um for displaying uses and Zoning districts and what's allowed in what zoning district and what type of permit you might need so this would be I recommend reviewing this um one of the I mean we do have we did add like cannabis has been added to this um uh light industrial uses excluding those listed retail sales and services um has also been added uh to this as well for our Highway commercial and limited Highway commercial and um agricultural service center zoning districts those are kind of some of the bigger additions I to this table and then within each type of use they're broken down by different use categories or use types so for agricultural uses um animal feed Lots would fall under this egg service establishments which the plan you as the Planning Commission have permitted a lot of those um Falls in into this I should say the feed Lots is a lot longer it's just to better match what the state feed lot rules are so EG service establishments one thing we did add in here was agricultural tourism that's something that came up as um a use that's really kind of growing um throughout the country and and and the state so we did add that as a new use uh residential uses commercial and Industrial uses I think one of the issues that that has come up with commercial and Industrial uses is is trying to make things more consistent um providing some more consistency so uh we did develop some um General requirements in terms of an access plan types of environmental mitigation um provision about nuisance and trespass to agricultural Residential Properties and then requiring just a more detailed site plan so you as a Planning Commission have a better um or understanding of exactly what is being proposed um and so a site plan with all all of these different features included one thing another change with with this um section is that I'll scroll down to it here is that we have had a standalone renewable energy ordinance since 2018 um that's been updated uh and that's been modernized and it's been based off of a state model renewable energy ordinance so that's wind and solar and that covers everything from like an accessory solar uh panel um used on a residence up to anything basically 50 megaw under 50 megawatts um which is kind of the local level of Permitting for for solar um anything above goes to the Public Utilities Commission and then same with wind um different requirements there so that's a lot more uh extensive with a focus on um with a focus on different standards setbacks um storm water screening from um dwellings or other land uses um ground cover requirements for what's underneath the the um um whatever whether it be wind or solar um agricultural Pro agricultural protection provision um as well and then the other thing that I want to touch on in this section just because it came up um well we had two hearings on it um this evening was about uh secondary second dwellings on parcels and so one change that's being proposed is to allow for what's called accessory dwelling units so allowing a parcel to have a second dwelling that's not just a manufactured home it could be um different types of the construction could be you know much more there's much more flexibility in what the construction would be and would not be require to a there would not be a requirement um [Music] to um come to the come to the board it would just be a building permit essentially if certain standards can be met would you still need to share the will or could you no you could do your own will yep yep allowed two separate yep you wouldn't need an i anymore yep yep so I know it's just a something that we see a lot of and it's it's becoming more common in other communities um across the country to allow for these accessory dwelling units I think to that a little bit part of that discussion and dialogue is we're talking in a lot of different um around a lot of different tables about housing and how do we address the housing concerns and there are cities that are trying to figure out how to recruit and you know retain folks to live in their communities but also on the rural component I mean I I was able to build a home obviously on a different parcel but on the farm in which I grew up and and um you know I I know that for sure the the Benedict application today I mean that is the the Benedict farm and um it's a great grandson sitting uh wanting to build there and so it's a it's a way to help recruit folks to have the ability to build and live in the rural area too because land is really expensive as well and you're not always um you know you don't have the money to maybe pay $10,000 an acre to get something but um from the county board's perspective it's just it it just plays into what we're all trying to do to address um the housing shortage and crisis and be a little more flexible with it absolutely so and it's a way to do and it's you it's a way to do it in a way that um that well increased density while preserving you know some of that Ro character preserving Prime farmland and and things like that by allowing um more dense um and diverse kind of housing Arrangements I did notice here that I did have some updates for that section and they didn't make it in so I'll have to be sending that updating that resending that out any questions or comments or no sounds good to Spring Prairie Township okay great wonderful no I it makes a lot of sense you know I in certain areas that I've lived you know there was the Mother-in-law homes and they were you know generally not a lot of around we're looking at maybe needing to do something like this ourselves and so soon build something decent because you know so it's right now for my motherin-law but you know in 20 years it might be for me then you're already there and too I think trailers and we've talked at this board trailers are tricky I mean moving trailers are tricky marketing used trailers are tricky and and now that folks are able to move smaller homes and even larger homes um it it might be less of a headache going down the road as well something i' look forward to coming the front Okay if nobody else has any questions or comments i' look for a motion to close the public hearing so moved motions am made at seconded to close the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried any unfinished business Mr Jacobson I do not have any new business um I think the only thing I'd want to just mention is there has been a proposal for a kind of a large scale utility scale Solar Development in um East of Barnesville and North roughly north of Barnesville and a little bit into wilin County now too um and just want to just make you all aware of that um looking right now I think that they've based on my latest Communications with the company I've had some Communications with them they were at about like 2500 um acres in in enrolled or for for leases and uh roughly like 400 megawatts at this point um so it is something that would be beyond the permitting scope and authority of Clay County and it's something that would go to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission I'm still looking at um ways that the county can be involved more involved in the process um as it moves along uh my understanding right now is that they're very very they're still in the early stages um they're hopeful that once they have kind of their project defined which is entirely dependent on people who sign up um to enroll land um for this Solar Development um then they they would be doing more public Outreach I think at a at a later date so um just want to give you an all an update on that's kind of kind of where it's at it's early project is still kind of taking shape but it's going to be um larger than the the permitting scope and authority of of the county and it'll go through that Public Utilities Commission process any questions at all similar note did anything ever come about the meetings that were last summer on the wi project I have not May gonna go whatever Direction I'm facing yeah I have not heard any updates from that I just know that these projects do take some time um to full to develop I would assume that with the wind that they would need to be doing some um Mets Towers at some point where they um basically are putting up temporary Towers to measure do wind studies and those would have to come to uh before the planning condition for uh for use permits further from that anybody else have anything they need to bring up next meeting is 19th 15th December 15th I want to say do we need or SE 17th I'm sorry and then that'll be Ezra Bear's Last yes I should should note that that um um first of all congrats to Joel on on his winning year reelection for the S swcd board um and to our current planning chair who's not here tonight Ezra bear is um selected to to the County Commission so he will be stepping off the Planning Commission at the end of the year and uh moving into that role and Joel I think as the um the vice chair you'd be serving as the chair then until um we would have elections for new officers um in February at our February meeting so if you want to start campaigning now Now's the Time for chair Vice chair treasurer or or sorry secretary okay Sebastian you also uh deserve some congratulations as well for a your election so if you're ready if you're not if you're uh if any of you are not tired of campaigning you can PTSD is what that is little bit hearing nothing from further look for a motion to adjourn Dr Jacobson did you want to remind them of the 2025 I should also note I'm sorry that there your 2025 schedules are in your got it um yeah holders okay thank you I have a motion to adjourn do I have a second second motions are made and seconded all those in favor say I I I opposed motion is carried meeting is adjourned thanks everyone