Roll call has been taken. So, and we have a quorum. Um, so hopefully everybody received the packet ahead of the meeting this month. And if you've had a chance to review it,
I look for a motion to approve the agenda as printed. >> So moved. Second >> motion by Sebastian, second by Brad. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried.
>> Second item, approval of minutes from last month. >> Mr. Chair, I have a couple of corrections that I cut or that were caught with the minutes. Um, I did correct them in your packet, but just want to point them out. Um the first one
on page two, uh this was for the wholesome hearing recommended minimum conditions and I have it up on the screen here, but um where it says IUP, that was in the minutes was CUP
and then that also got translated to uh condition number six. Yep. So it said cup there. So that would be my recommended to change that to to IUP. >> Look for a motion to amend the minutes
from last month changing the CUP to an IUP regarding the Olsson hearing. >> Make that motion. >> Motion by Josh. >> Second. >> Second by Kurt. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda? Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak on something
that is not on the agenda? One more time. Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak to something that is not on the agenda? Hearing none, we will move to the first public hearing.
Um, Jacob Edwards, request for interim use, home occupation permit. Um, this is an after the-act ask. Take it away, Matt. Oh, look for a motion to approve the public hearing. >> So move.
>> Second. Motion by Brad, second by Sebastian. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Thank you, Matt. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, this is a request for an interim use permit home occupation for a tree service business.
Um uh the property is just south of Holly on um County State Highway 31. Um it's zoned agricultural general. uh a IUP home occupation is permitted in uh the egg general zone zoning district if
it meets the standards and is uh granted an interim use permit. So there's a residence and a number of outbuildings um on the property. Most of the business activity would take place in the the northwest corner of the property.
Um so that the request is to continue operating tree service business on the property. If you I don't know if you've driven down Highway 10 before, but might be the airport. That's where this business used to be located. Um they used about four 4,300 square ft um two out buildings for the business. Um
mainly used for vehicle and equipment uh parking and just for maintenance. There are three additional employees at the business other than the owner. Uh there is employee parking on site. No customers visit the property and they typically operate from 7 a.m. to 5:00 pm 11 months of the year.
Um the applicant does appear to meet all the standards for an intermuse home occupation. Uh the nearest residential property is about 1,000 ft to the to the northeast and it's uh buffered to by trees and buildings as well.
Uh it looks like this uh would meet all of the goals and objectives relevant to this request for the comprehensive plan. Uh any questions for me at all? can go back to the no. Uh,
does anybody on the board have any questions for Matt? >> Just uh, if you don't mind, uh, just a general question. Uh, did something change that there uh, this wasn't done before? What
created this situation? >> Oh, the pro the business used to be located on off of Highway 10. It was zoned highway commercial. Um, which you don't need a interim use or a conditional use permit for this type of business. But when you move it to a
homebased business, then that Yep. triggers the need for that >> and not really knowing. >> Yep. >> Yep. >> Pretty. We probably see a handful of these every year. So, pretty common. >> No. Uh, would the applicant care to
speak to his permit? >> If so, come up to the mic and make sure that the light is green and state your name for the record. >> There you go. >> Thank you. Uh, my name is Jake Edwards.
Um, I guess I Matt pretty much covered everything um, fact-wise about how we run the business. Um, we're sure to keep the property clean. It doesn't look any different than, uh, how it did when we first moved in. And, uh, we don't plan
on storing any big equipment or anything outside to make it kind of an eyesore or anything like that. Well, I appreciate you uh coming forward in your business. You you're local resident and you're providing a needed service.
Um it's a good thing and there's a lot of ash trees out there. >> Yes, there is. But uh yeah, I think that's pretty much all I have. >> Does anybody else have any questions for the applicant
comments? Thank you. >> Cool. Thank you. >> I need to announce to the audience. Okay. Okay. Um if nobody else, nobody has any other questions or comments for Matt or the applicant, I would look for
a motion to close the public hearing. >> So move. >> Second. >> Motion by Brad, seconded by Sebastian. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried.
Okay. We have the findings of fact in granting an interimm 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 land 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 interimm 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 immediate vicinity. Development of surrounding property. Establishment of the interimm 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- streetet parking and loading spaces. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide utilities, access
roads, drainage and off- streetet 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, soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other signs 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, 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 depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to agricultural use of
said land. Appearance of structure and site. The structure and site shall have an appearance which will not have an adverse effect on 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 existing plans or with comprehensive plans. The use is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan if any of the township, city or county. Traffic hazards and congestion in
floodplane areas. The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion in flood plane and in floodplane areas as 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. Matt, you have some Yeah, Mr. chair just proposed three
conditions that are pretty standard for this type of uh running of a home occupation as service type business. Um complying with our home occupation standards, permit ceasing upon property ownership change in employees limited to members of the house and 10 additional
non-family employees unless a plan for additional employee parking mitigation and potential impacts are provided to the planning office. So very almost exact same as the conditions that were uh put in place on the permit that was approved in March. Same type similar
type of home occupation. >> How about signage? Is there is he allowed or and then if he is allowed restricted to the the 4x8? >> Yep. That would Yep. >> Go ahead, Paul. I I have a question. Um
Matt, um tell me why the limit limit the limitation of 10 um non-family employees. Why that number? >> I think that's one that was has just been um used on in the past for very for similar um types of businesses. And so
there really isn't like a standard in place, but it's more of like a um just a past past permit condition that's been put on similar types of businesses. >> Uh that could be amended if his business grows and he has ends up with three crews and there's four people on each
crew. >> Yep. You would just need to submit like a plan for additional employee parking essentially to our office and then that could be increased. and ask the question to the applicant
>> on that number. >> Is that okay? Is uh just curious is is tenure going to be a limitation you see in the future? >> I'm sorry. Say again, sir. >> Part of a condition coming up here is a
penula of limiting 10 non-family members >> in this occupation. I I guess I'm asking might that number be a limiting number as you're looking the growth of your business? >> As of our current plan, that would not
be a limiting factor. I think we want to keep it around, you know, max would be eight to maybe 10 employees total. >> Okay. I just don't want that to become problematic for you. >> Absolutely. >> Within a year or some shorter term.
>> Yes. Yeah. I think if we did grow to the point where we needed to get an amendment on that, it would be many years down the road yet. >> Thank you for that. >> Okay. Anybody go ahead, Mr. Stiken? >> Mr. Chair and uh Matt,
>> is the applicant agreeable to the U conditions set forth? >> That's what you'd have to ask the applicant, Mr. chair if they're >> it's important if it's a IUP or CUP. I know last meeting we said you don't need for the cup but that's not >> exactly how it is.
>> You're supposed to ask for both IUP and CUPs that the applicant is agreeable even though you probably have it for a cup in the past. But the whole thing is if if they're agreeable, it's more
difficult for them in the future to come with a claim that says that's not what they wanted. That's not what they agreed to. But they're on record of agreeing to whatever it is we're setting forth in conditions from here on out. I'd learned
that at the Wadina Staples. So nice. If I only learned one thing, that's it could save the county a huge court action. Not that it probably would. This is pretty simple here, but it's important to make sure the So, is the applicant agreeable to the conditions
set forth? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay, that's what I wanted to hear. Okay. Anybody else have any further comments or questions? Thank you for affirming.
Hearing none. Look for a motion to approve or disapprove. >> So I can approve. >> Motion by Dave to approve. >> Second. >> Second by Kurt. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. IUP is granted. >> No further conditions. Okay. Now we are on to the major part of the
packet. Um environmental impact statement. Um hopefully everybody has had a chance to at least skim
the uh information. There's a lot of it in there. It's a lot of nice not being able to sleep reading that maybe puts you to sleep. Um there was except for the DNR.
Um and it was more of a generic response than any specific response. There was no public outcry or I mean there was just kind of a non a non-issue.
Um we uh you care to explain what we need need and really don't need to do. >> Yeah, absolutely, Mr. Chair. So, I can kind of go through and walk through. In the past, we've um you know, the past
couple year years, we've had a couple of these environmental assessment worksheets and the two that we've had have received a lot of comments on them. enough comments to warrant having a public hearing for this one. We didn't we only received one comment letter for.
You don't have to do a public hearing for this type of of environmental review. Um there is a process that's that's laid out. And so um with that just without you know not a whole lot of public comment just thought we we would go this route. Uh but I can just because
it is a big document walk through walk through it. Um so essentially the the purpose of this is to evaluate if this project which is the Aspen ECR pit expansion uh if there
isn't a need for an environmental impact statement. And so that's what the environmental assessment worksheet does. It's kind of a short kind of scoping document almost to decide um if if it is needed uh for um non- metallic mineral
mining which gravel mining falls under uh in Minnesota rules 4410. Uh the county is the what called the responsible government unit. So, the county is responsible for determining if an environmental impact statement is
needed or if the environmental assessment worksheet is adequate. And so, for this um they're looking to expand an existing gravel pit about almost they're just under doubling the
size of um the pit to 104 acres. Uh the goal is to continue just the mining, storage and distribution of sand, rock and gravel products to market. Um this is this expansion would extend the 20 year life of the pit. An additional 10
to 20 construction seasons. Uh located um right across the street from the landfill on um County Road 23, Tasaw 23. Uh you can see there's a lot of other
there's two other gravel pits uh in the area as well. And this whole area has kind of had a history of gravel mining all the way up to to the river basically. Um it's zoned agricultural general. This use is allowed with an interim use
permit. Um there is a lot of uses currently on the property. It's used for agriculture. It's residential and then also the the gravel mining uh on the property as well. And I just wanted to, this is kind of hard to see, but we do have um goals and
objectives related to um aggregate resources in our comprehensive plan. uh one being to recognize the importance of these resources to Klay County in the region and to protect from encroachment of incompatible residential, commercial and industrial development and to ensure
the sound stewardship of aggregate resources and our biotic resources because a lot of times those two resources um occur um they coexist essentially uh to foster a balanced approach to aggregate resource extraction that is compatible with the
natural resources of rural character of Klay county uh and then a number of objectives under that goal as well. So, just some permit property history. So, in 1991, Coast Brothers, Inc. got a conditional use permit uh for a 20 acre
mine. Uh in 2003, the mine was taken over by Aspen. Uh and then just a couple of years ago, they did get a variance to the 500t residential setback. That residence was the um is the property owner's residence essentially.
Uh and so I'm just going to touch briefly. I know the EAW is a is a large document. Um it was it was developed by SRF consulting. They are the the comp the consulting firm that that um developed the document. And how that
works is they develop the document and then as the RGU um I review it, uh the county engineer reviews it uh county attorney reviews it. we make sure we're good with it and before presenting it to you you all essentially
because ultimately it is the county's environmental assessment worksheet. Um so the the plan is to just continue a kind of a phased expansion process. So starting in the northwest corner and moving clockwise. Um basically mining
the exact same way that this property has been mined since 1991. just removing top soil aggregate above the water table. Um they'll deposit unusable material within the project area. They're not proposing any new buildings or structures at all. Um would be
reclaimed per landowner specifications. Uh they have reclamation ongoing in the southwest corner and they're going to follow the mining operations in the same kind of clockwise pattern. So they have a large um phase open right now. Um,
and then they have some that's reclaimed, some that's currently under reclamation, and then this kind of mustard color is what they're planning on on opening up um into the future. That's the expansion essentially. And then the reclamation would follow kind
of that same approach um where they've got phase one, 100% reclaimed, phase two, they say got about 60% reclaimed, and then phase three and four. Phase three is what they're in right now essentially. Uh for permits, um they do have a um
permit from the pollution control agency. Um they did get NA uh natural heritage inventory concurrence uh from the DNR. They may need a um groundwater
or they might need may need a water appropriations permit. Um, that's something that I'm working with the DNR and and uh the project proposer Aspen on determining. Um, they don't withdraw any groundwater, but they do um use use it
in like a closed loop system from their storm water basins, but that still could require water appropriation permit. And then they would need to get an interim use permit from Klay County um and then an interim use permit from Holly Township as well.
So, I kind of jumped ahead of myself a little bit with water resources. Um, really not too much within the project area or um within a mile of the project area. There's there is some significant water resources, but they're kind of they're they're buffered quite a ways.
Um, as with all of our mines, um, that are permitted or about to be permitted, uh, it'd be important for our County Wetlands Conservation Act coordinator, uh, who's with the SWCD, uh, to do a, uh, consultation and review
of this project. Um, that would be probably part of any, um, permit. It could be, it would be, it's a typical permit condition essentially. Um, groundwater is scattered anywhere from two to 52
feet below grade. I think the the the groundwater that's I mean there is some that's that's exposed. So, it really depends on how much they've already excavated. Um, but there is a lot of variation there. Uh, they're not planning on discharging um to any
surface waters or public treatment facilities. Um they would have their industrial waste water which is essentially their wash what they're washing the material with. Um that's under a permit. Um they are conducting all of their mining
operations above the water table. So when they hit water they basically stop mining essentially in that location. And so this um really colorful uh map kind of shows you generally the
topography of the area uh as well as the direction of um uh the general direction of the storm water flow. Um and so that would be any rain runoff and things like that. And um the the important takeaway
here is all the blue arrows are pointed inwards at the property. So, the lowest that's generally flowing to the to the middle or the center of the property. There are um some protected areas that are nearby. We have um Buffalo River
State Park is 2 miles east. Blueest stem uh prairie uh just to the south of Buffalo River State Park is also nearby. Um there is one site of moderate biodiversity significance within the project area. And then there's just several native uh plant communities present as well. You can kind of see
them on this map. So, oops. So, essentially this kind of ridge right here that goes from uh the west and then moves southeast is essentially uh an area of high or moderate biodiversity
significance. essentially just a lot of native plant communities um along the beach ridge there. Uh with this uh proposed project though, it's all within cropped land. So it's all farmland. So in that in that sense,
it avoids natural features. Um so no direct environmental impacts would be expected. Some potential indirect impacts could be surface runoff, increased dust. the surface runoff would be mitigated through that storm water going towards the center of the
property. Uh and then increased dust um maybe fugitive dust within the pit itself. Uh but they access uh paved county road. So um no dust really uh from transportation of the materials at
all. Uh the biggest thing probably um for this pit would be just the potential spread of invasive species which is common could be you know gravel pits especially ones that are unrelaimed are um harbingers of for they harbor a lot
of invasive species or have the potential to um so they do have some um plans in terms of monitoring and then for rec reclamation as well. Sure. >> They would have to be 100 feet from all
the property lines. Um and they're a bit of a distance away from um some of those native plant communities already. >> Yep. >> Yep. >> Yep. But the wind does blow very hard out
here. So yeah, >> seeds can seeds can travel. >> Um in in terms of air noise and odor and visual impacts, um it's already located an area that's used for mining. Um visual impacts just include the general
m impacts would be associated with mining activities. A lot of that though is occurring below grade. Um and they do have it burned. Um and then just based off of the the current landscape, they're not really anticipating any
degradation of anyone's views. Uh there's not going to be a batch plant at all. um there really wouldn't be any um increase in air quality or emissions essentially because they're even though they're expanding the operation, uh it's
not growing. They're using the same equipment that's the same number of equipment that's been used, you know, for the past 20 plus years. Um dust control, I think fugitive dust within the mine would probably be the
biggest thing. Um, and also just keeping track of like large stock piles and things like that, especially during high wind days, which we've had quite a lot of. Uh, and then one thing that's would be important um for this pit in particular because we've noticed noted
in the past and asked for it to be um addressed is just removing track dust and mud um from County Road 23 where they enter. Um, odors. It's I think all I'll say is it's across the street from the
landfill. Just leave it at that. They're not really expecting any noise um just because again there's not going to be a badge plant. Um they haven't had any complaints from their existing mining activities. There's not a whole lot of residential um residences out there. Um
um so really no anticipated impacts there. Uh for transportation, I think this is all is important to um really highlight is they're they're operating 26 trucks trucks that are t taking four to five trips a day. So we got 260 truck trips
per day. Um from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Um not really consistent at all. Um so this isn't like an everyday thing that that's happening. Um but that's the potential to to happen. Um and then also their employee uh vehicle trips as well.
So looking at about 380 daily trips and with that they're not looking they did ask you know the our county engineer we asked about if there need to be like a traffic impact assessment or anything like that especially just on a county road and a lot of these trucks are going
up to Highway 10. They're making a left-hand turn um at that that uncontrolled intersection. um didn't seem to be an an issue just because the frequency of truck traffic is not going
anticipated to increase at all. Uh the last thing is cumulative impacts. Um and that's looking at the environmental impact of a project just from its incremental effects. So as well as the effects of other projects in the area. Um there's a you know three other
pits in the air or two other pits in the area and then um the landfill um pretty similar types of land use. Um and so as if other projects come up, I think it would be important to evaluate those pro
that project. Uh just because too it's a it's a goal and an objective in our comprehensive plan when we're looking at new mines um new gravel mines um to also consider um what the impacts would be relative to the surrounding land use and
if there are other mining mines in the area and what a new mine would do would add add to that. Um so we did get a comment letter from the DNR. We didn't receive any comments from Holly Township and we did not receive any individual public comment.
Uh the main takeaways from the DNR was um loggerhead shrike nesting season. Um it's an it's a state endangered species. Um they're more common in like Arizona but or in the southwest, but they make
their way up here too. And so just making sure that no trees are cut down essentially. They like shrubs. Um, it's a bird that essentially what it does is it'll catch like mice and it will impale
them on like thorny shrubs and that's how it takes them out. So, they need shrubs. Um, there really aren't any shrubs in the project area because it's all crop land. um water appropriations, which I had
touched on. Um just making sure that if they're over um basically moving through or discharging 10,000 gallons a day or more or a million gallons a year, they would likely need that water appropriations permit. And that's
something that can be addressed as part of um the the interim use permit as well. And then just other impacts, uh, dust, which we've talked about, um, any vertical walls, um, which I think there's they're just concerned about
like animals getting trapped in the in the floor of the mine. And the way that the mine's set up right now, there are escape routes um, for animals. Um and then reclamation just ensuring that um this once the mining is complete uh and
the pit is exhausted of material that it doesn't become like a um breeding grounds for um invasive species Canada thistle and all that good stuff. Um so based on the EAW,
um the staff recommendation would be to issue a negative declaration of need. Um I just kind of summarized uh our we did put together findings of fact, but it's 35 pages long. Um so probably not going to read through all of that and I trust that you all had a
chance to to look over that. Um just really what we're doing is acknowledging that we have jurisdiction over the review process. uh it met all regulatory requirements. Uh no significant environmental impacts were identified. Uh there are mitigation measures in
place to in address environmental concerns and because of that a environmental impact statement would not be required for this project. Um before I um yield for any questions, one thing I do want to state too is what
we've done in the past with these EAWS is just had the planning commission um pass a resolution essentially stating either there is a declaring a no need for an EIS or there is a need and um the planning commission in the past couple
years is one for one on that. you've you've you've declared it no need for one and and you've declared a positive need for another project. Um the resolution that I've drafted is
essentially assuming that you would issue a negative declaration of need just based off of the findings um effect and conclusion. So with that, is there any questions for me at all? Guess
I've got a just a couple small questions. Um, you said uh right now the site is birmed with top soil uh partially for visual impact and and maybe for some outflow of sediment. Are those stabilized? Are they seated? Those
top soil BMS or are they just open top soil that uh would be a breeding ground for invasive species? It'd be a source of uh sediment discharge from the site, I guess. What uh or is it the assumption that everything will drain onto the site?
>> Sure. Um I think they are stabilized. Last time we were out there, they did have vegetation on them. So, Yep. >> Is there an elevation of water? We've got, you know, two days of rain coming in here. Is there an elevation of water where there's concern where there would be migration of sediment off of the site
>> in this particular pit? just based off of um the topography I would I would say no. >> Um then my last question I guess would be with all that uh uh stipulated the actual conformance to their permit is
that that's the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is that their jurisdiction to actually enforce that we are strictly just saying whether or not we need the additional EIS. >> Yeah. So, um, how it would go for this process is, um, you determine if an EIS
is needed or not, and then likely next month the, um, applicant would apply for a interim use permit for this expansion. That's all I have. >> Thank you, Josh. Paul.
Commissioner, can you please use your microphone? >> All right. Thank you. Not used to that. Um uh anyway, is there um is there a time frame that they need to move on with this expansion? I mean, there's
their intent is there, but are there limitations of years that or does it just go on for a 20-year period no matter when they start it? You understand what I mean? >> Yeah. Um, that would that would be a a condition that would be placed on the
interim use permit. I mean, typically for mines, it's been either 10 or 15 years is kind of how Yep. >> Yep. Um >> and the reason I asked your question is the es and flows of or demand on the product, right? >> Yep. >> Yeah.
>> Yep. Absolutely. So um yeah, it's really market dependent. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And then and la last one. Um, I'm I always in I I really I really appreciate the the minds that I see that
have been reclaimed and the ones I'm mostly aware of, you know, a top-notch job, really good job. Um, do you know, um, it was interesting hearing the clockwise motion and all that type
thing. Um, is there a period of time that they leave that open for the chance I'm just saying there's a type of Azure that's in there they might might want to come back for it. You you understand what I'm getting at?
>> Uh, yeah. So, a lot of times what mines will do is they'll try to mine it out uh and then they'll have an area where they can stage their product so it's all sorted. um depending on by what type of material it is and what specs that it would meet.
>> And so, you know, in an ideal world, um that's how it would be organized. >> Um so, it would it would be mined >> um and then it would be stockpiled for Yep. >> That makes sense. >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you for that. >> Hey, go ahead Dave,
>> Mr. Chair and Matt. So tonight we're just focusing on if we want to if we're going to require an impact statement or just be satisfied with that's that's our action tonight.
>> Yep. >> And then whatever conditions they previously had would follow the expansion. Correct. >> Yeah. My recommendation would be um when
they come forth with an application for an interim use permit, we would use this environmental assessment worksheet as kind of a guide for the um uh development of conditions. Um, so the water appropriations permit
from the DNR could be a condition controlling fugitive dust um within the mine and then also maybe maintaining county road 23 where they access it, keeping that clean whether they're sweeping or not. Those those are things
that have been identified in this environmental assessment worksheet that we that can be leveraged as as conditions of the in the permit. So, we will be visiting this to some degree in the future, obviously. And to go along with Josh's question, I think it read in
here, >> once they reclaim, they got roughly 30 days to get it all seated in, >> if I remember. >> That's the suggestion from the from the DNR. Yeah, >> that's their Okay. >> Yeah. And then it talked about uh you
know the not supposed to move remove trees or shrubs from April to July and if they are they're supposed to verify that the loggerhead strike is so there is some conditions they do have to continue following but
if we see fit we might implement something else too but as of now we're just deciding to EI astronaut. >> Yep. Correct. >> That's the way I understood it. >> Thank you.
Anyone else have any questions or comments or concerns? Um I after reading through this at length and visiting with Matt and um I personally feel that this EAW
more than satisfies the concerns that an EIS is not agree with staff that it is not I wouldn't require it and I would and now looking for a motion
to as you said negatively affirm. >> Yeah, it would be a motion. It would be a motion to pass planning commission resolution 2025-1 that supports the approval of the findings of facts and conclusions and
negative declaration on the need for an environmental impact statement for the aspen pit expansion project in Holly Township. >> I so move a motion by Josh to approve Second taken.
>> Motion seconded by Dave. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. The EAS is EIS is sufficient. Thanks everyone.
Thank you Mr. Chair. And so next what will happen is we'll inform the project proposer and let them know that the the need to get their interim use permit application in um and then also we would need to publish the basically the decision um in the in with the Minnesota
State Environmental Quality Board which we will do. I think the deadline for publication is today. So since we can't make that we'll have to wait a week. Okay. Update of planning and zoning violations.
I think the biggest update being is we resolved two of the home occupation ones that were on there um this month and then in March. And then there were three new um gravel pit violations. So, we're up to 14. Um,
again, mainly relating to not having the appropriate state permits. Um, some setback. I think one being over acreage potentially. Um, and so working to to resolve those. And Erica, not to put you on the spot,
but of those 14, how many operators would you say or pits do you have an idea? >> Like six. >> Six. Yeah. So, it's not 14 separate pits. It's some have multiple >> and the one that has four acres over,
he's actively trying to reclaim those extra four acres. >> Well, that nice to see that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. Anybody else have any comments or questions regarding violations
>> on those violations? uh they all understand they're in violation and they all understand they're going to get it taken care of and they hopefully they do. I mean you're good about following up on those things. So >> correct. >> Yep.
I think it's Mr. Chair and Mr. Stiken. It's one of those things too where if it if it keeps going on and we have to keep pushing on the on the same violation or if it's the same violation and it's just repeated. Um that's when we get to the
conversation um where we're going to likely have to maybe bring your permit to the planning commission for a revocation hearing. >> Thank you. Any unfinished business?
>> No unfinished business, Mr. Chair. >> New business. Um, the only new business that I have is, um, I know you all recommended, uh, the adoption of the, um, 2025, uh, Klay County development,
uh, and subdivision ordinance and looking to bring that to we had we brought it to um, back to the consultant just to do some formatting tweaks to it. um had to change the chapter structure a
bit in order for it to fit into oop sorry fit into our um overall county code which is online um and it was recently our county code was recently recodified uh online and so that covers a wide
variety it's all of the the ordinances in the county and so the land development ordinance is just one section of that and so we did have to do some reformat adding of the chapters so it would it would fit into that system neatly. Um, so we've done that and
that's really the the only major change that's that's taken place since you've seen it uh or recommended it. And so I'm looking to bring that to the board on um Tuesday, June 3rd at 9:15 a.m.
Oh, we'll have we'll have a little more than 15 unless you want me to talk fast. Unless it's so great that don't need to talk about it. So, and that's all I have. Anyone else have
any points or anything that needs to be brought up? Uh, hearing none. I'd like to point out that the the June meeting will be the 24th. It'll be the fourth Tuesday, not the third. So, if you want to put
that on your literal calendars or like I have to. >> Yeah. Yeah. Mr. Chair, the the third Tuesday of the month um in June every year is when um the county board of um
equalization meets. So, they meet in the in the evening 6 pm. Okay. Hearing no nothing uh else. Uh look for a motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Motion by Brad. >> Second.
>> Second by Kurt. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you everyone.