A motion to call the meeting to order. Motion was made by Brand Brad and seconded by Kurt Shervin. All those in favor say I. I. Post. Motion is carried. Um would uh look for a hopefully everybody
had a chance to look through their packets. Would look for a motion to for approval of the agenda with some flexibility tonight. I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. Motion is made by Ezra, seconded by Dave
to approve the agenda with flexibility. All those in favor say I. Opposed. Motion is carried. Hopefully everyone has had a chance to look at the minutes from last month's meeting. Anybody have any corre corrections or
adjustments? Hearing none. Look for a motion to approve. So moved. Second. Motion by Sebastian, seconded by Ashley. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion is carried.
Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda? Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda? Anybody online? Uh, no, Mr. Chair. Third and final. Anyone in the audience
that wishes to speak on the agenda? Hearing none, we're going to move to the public hearings. And we are going to skip over the request for an IUP and go to the land development
ordinance update. And then there was substantial paperwork in everybody's packets. Hopefully everybody a chance to look at the notes.
Take it away, Matt. No, we need the public hearing open. Okay. Look for a motion to uh open the public hearing. I'll make a I'll make a motion to open public hearing. Motion by Ezra. Second. Second by Ashley to open the public
hearing. All those in favor say I. Opposed public hearing to discuss the Klay County Land Development and Subdivision Ordinance Code. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Klay County is in the process of updating the land
development subdivision ordinance. The this ordinance regulates land use in the unincorporated areas of Klay County in accordance with the 2045 Klay County comprehensive and transportation plan. The planning commission will consider recommending ordinance adoption of the Klay County Board of Commissioners. Draft ordinance is available for review
online. Uh comments and questions can also be submitted by calling the planning office or by email at planning@cllaycountymn.gov. of so um with that I know that in in the time period between when this notice
went out um and now we did get our comments back from um uh attorney who reviewed the subdivision regulations chapter and then the administration and procedures chapter of the ordinance. So, what I want to do tonight essentially
what I'm proposing is that just to kind of give you an overall update on where things are and then um look for any um comments from you all just on the ordinance in general if you've had a chance to kind of review some of the
other chapters. Just an opportunity for that. Uh and then I just some discussion on those two chapters mainly focusing on the um administration and procedures chapters because there are some um pretty substantial comments in there
that uh I would say differ from how um our current code looks and how how it how this this planning commission has has operated in in the past. So, with that, I'll just jump right into
it. Uh, so where we're at with the update, um, we're essentially complete with, and I mean, as I've said last month, we have basically a full and probably been saying this since January, a full draft, uh, ready to go. Just getting some
additional comments from other entities that are requirements. Uh the first being our shoreland section. Uh the DNR has reviewed that uh because what we're doing is essentially
um realigning our current shoreland ordinance to better match the state shoreland rules. Uh they don't really have too many comments. They just have some minor revisions. I think the main main comment that they had was just
we're missing some definitions that they would like to see in there. So, those should be pretty easy changes. How that process works is before our April meeting, the DNR will send us a a conditional letter of approval uh with
any suggested changes. We make those changes and then they would essentially approve the shoreland portion of the ordinance. uh in state statute there is something that requires the pollution control agency and the department of agriculture to review our feed lot
section. There's some other requirements in there as well. Um MPCA I had reached out to them a couple times. Finally, I think got to the right person. And um they said, "Nope, that's not required. Don't have to do that. Uh if you want,
we can review it and just give us some comments." So I said, "Sure." So, that's that's what they're going to do. Uh, subdivision regulations. So, the comments that uh we received from um the attorney on the subdivision regulations,
I think for the most part, I unless any of you want to talk specifically about any comments, um I feel pretty comfortable with the the comments that were made. I don't think that they're very like require any major changes to what we have. um just some some tweaks
here and there. So, unless anyone has anything that they want to point out specifically, um I know Mr. Stiken, you had had mentioned something. Um I don't know if that's something you want to bring up to the group at all or Sure.
Yeah, obviously the the attorney has done a very thorough job of reviewing it all because u there's certain things that she found that you know to the average person probably wouldn't even understand the difference.
I guess on her page on the page two of her comments number one um the uh let's see am I reading it right here page three number one that's what I
meant the de development agreement discussed in section 86-13.b be uh I have it up too. I have it. You have it right there, Matt.
It talks about a reference to something that's mentioned late quite a ways back. And Matt, you could probably explain what I was talking to you about better than I can, but to me it seems kind of important to have that in there because
obviously it's probably duplication, but when you're dealing with that particular part of it, um, it does reference, you know, I just had Oh, it's Mr. Chair, I think you're talking about the pre-application meeting requirement. Yeah.
Yeah. And so we have that essentially duplicated in a couple spots. So we have a whole section right at the beginning of on page three dedicated to that. And then it's just mentioned again. Um so we have an administrative subdivision
process and then a um major subdivision process. And it's just mentioned um as a step I think in in each of those as well. Um, and it refers back to that that section. And she just doesn't change the fact about any of the
verbiage. Just duplicates. I mean, if you're actually looking at that seems like it has a good reference if you Yeah, it's probably duplication and it doesn't really matter too much. I just I like those things when they are duplicated.
Yeah. Just to make sure that I think it meant she she thought we could strike it just because it's duplicative of of this section. Um, I'm kind of the opinion with same as Mr. Syiken to just keep it in there just because it's when you're
going through these the subdivision process, it's almost you almost have to view it as like a checklist of things that you need to do and steps that you need to make and it be it's pretty easy to miss a step. Um, so if we can keep it in there, I think it would it would make
sense depending on what um a developer or an applicant is doing. If they're doing an administrative subdivision where they're just splitting one parcel into two or if they're doing a whole major development. Other than that, I mean, it all
obviously has been reviewed quite well and a lot of work has gone into it by both Mr. Jacobson and and the attorney. So, other than that, I thought it was good.
And Mr. Chair, I think one of the main things that I was maybe thinking she would comment on was the section 8-6-5 township approval required. Um she didn't really have a whole lot to say about that. Um just because there is a
state statute whenever you're platting and laying new roads uh that are in a township and the township has a planning commission uh then township approval is required. Um and in the interest of
basically because sometimes townships have a planning commission some don't just making it a blanket requirement. Um it's something that's required in our current code for uh roads. Um but that is because that's in in statute. Just
making sure that that if a developer is coming with a a proposed subdivision that requires new roads that they ver that they first go to the township um before coming to the county and and get that approval. Um
just because ultimately it would avoid uh the maybe premature investment of a lot of time and resources into doing the plat planning process and the surveying and all that coming to the county and then find out oh no the township's going
to strike it down anyway. So, unless anyone has anything else about um the subdivision chapter, I think we can move on. It's it's personally it's my least favorite
chapter of the whole code, if I had to pick a favorite and a least favorite. All right. Um, just want to give you an update as well just on chapter 4. Uh, just had some some conversations. I think uh Kurt and uh, Commissioner Bear
were involved um, with this just adding a new use to our our use table and to our use regulations for temporary agricultural worker housing. Uh it's something that other counties in the state are seeing more of. Um a lot of a lot of counties in the state do have
allow this and they do have regulations for it. Um so just kind of thinking ahead putting that putting that in there as a as a use and um including those standards as well. Um, I think the main
in the southern part of of Minnesota, um, you see a lot of the H2A visas. Um, and then up here, I know there's been some conversations with, um, sugarbeat producers about finding truck drivers
and things like that and, um, to haul beats. Uh, the other thing that will likely change maybe a little bit is the the cannabis section. I don't expect this to change a lot, but I just want to make
compare it to the model ordinance that the state put out and updates to that model ordinance. Um, and and make sure that we're we're at least in line with that. Uh, this the cannabis regulations are kind of a
moving target. um just because it's legal. They've had a licensing period for it which closed on Friday of last week and there aren't any rules yet. So,
kind of doing things a little backwards, but um I just want to make I'm always kind of keeping this kind of on the front front end just in case something changes, especially with the rules, just so we're as most current as possible and making sure that we're um um in
compliance with those the state rules. Did uh I see Becker County, you have your mic on by? Yeah, it's okay. Sorry. No, no worries. I do see or did see Becker County approved uh cannabis facility. Uh yeah,
Becker County here. I don't know if that's something that we could, you know, talk to them about or see what rules they've adapt adopted anything other than just the, you know, because it seems like a I mean, it's a operation going if
it's coming. Yeah. Going to be it's going to be here before you know it. Yep. Yep. Yeah. And we've I think we've received some inquiries about um cultivation and also um
retail in outside of incorporated cities. So in unincorporated areas of the county, not not many. Um, but it what it sounds like is uh folks are waiting to see if they are getting their their applications in for
a licensing and see if they even have a chance of getting a license before going through that that process, but not not the case I guess in in Becker County. So that for that um business in Becker County, they would still need to get that licensing. They
just kind of took the zoning uh per county permitting did that first I think. So if I remember correctly can that only be done on highway or limited highway? Yes. Yep. So the way our ordinance is right now that we are considering
cultivation, manufacturer, wholesale, uh retail, all commercial or industrial uses. And so they would be limited to our highway commercial or a limited highway commercial zoning districts
at this time. All right. Uh unless anyone has any does anyone have any questions or comments about uh well chapters one through five at all? The only potential other thing that I
did not include in in my PowerPoint here today tonight is that last week the Buffalo Red River Wershed District reached out. They're looking at potentially developing rules uh for setbacks from um
public ditches from from drainage ditches that are under their jurisdiction. Uh I think the the example they gave especially is with um solar development but then other types of developments as well. Um and I don't know what that would be. Other um
watershed districts or judicial authorities ditch authorities uh will measure from like the center of the ditch and it ranges anywhere from 50 feet to 200 feet. They're looking at doing it from the ditch right of way essentially, but
they just don't have a number yet. Um, so that's likely I would advise against coming up with their own setback that differs from whatever rule that they're going to make. But so that whenever they come out with that, that might be
something that we might want to consider coming back and um amending the ordinance so we're in line with with them. If that makes sense. Once once they figure out Yep. Once they figure out I All I know is that they want it there. It's going to be from the rightway. I don't know if
it's going to be 25 ft, 50 ft, 200 feet. I don't know what they're Yep. So, exactly. It's the moment it's approved, it becomes out of date basically. Yep. Exactly. Just like an encyclopedia or a
map or Yep. So, it's a it's a living document. All right. If no one has any uh comments about chapters one through five, I'm going to take that as a good thing and that you all are satisfied with what's
in there. Um that is kind of the bulk of of this and we can just dive right into chapter 7 administration procedures. I'm going to keep things pretty high level and um for the most part there are some areas where we might want to have a
little bit more discussion. Uh but kind of four things that I want to just touch on are procedural consistency, the review criteria for use permits, amendments, uh and variances, uh the appeals process, and then
violations, penalties, and enforcement. and then anything else that you might might want to discuss as well. So, overall, I think one of the the big themes in the comments that we received was just making sure that we're procedurally consistent between the county board, the board of adjustment,
and the planning commission. Uh that the powers and duties of each of the boards are consistent in their description and roles. Uh there's some in in terms of um how they handle applications, what they're describing the makeup of a
board, how how a planning commission is appointed and things like that. Um and then our amendments, use permits and various applica variance applications and procedures. Just making sure that those are all consistent as well. And then our notice requirements that they align with state law. we largely left
them um in our draft as they were in the the current code. Uh a lot of what we have is way more stringent than what is required by state law. Um and so in the interest of aligning more with state
law, um that's kind of the the thought there is to for for noticing requirements. Um, typically for any type of county or governmental decision, um, you have essentially 60 days, it's
called the 60-day rule to make a decision. And in in some of our cases, we have gone down to 30 or 10 or whatever for whatever reason. Um, you can extend that an additional 60 days. uh you can extend it even longer if the
applicant or the person awaiting that government decision agrees to it in writing. Um so just kind of aligning everything more with the 60-day rule just to keep that consistent. Um we did spend some time with the board
of at the board of adjustment meeting this evening just talking about review criteria. So these are the when you're looking at like a conditional use permit or an interim use permit. When we go through a findings of fact um you're going through these review criteria for variances. The board of adjustment does the same thing. Uh because you are not
the board of adjustment. I will not I'll not spend a lot of time on it. Just want you to know that we're looking at um streamlining these a little bit more, kind of cutting down uh the review criteria uh just to match with with
what's in state statute because the review criteria for variances is actually in state statute. Um for use permits that is not in state statute. So really we could have whatever use criteria we want and right now we have 13
criteria. Um I think uh Ezra and Joel have both lost your voices in past chairs lost your voices reading through those and maybe some of you have nodded off a little bit when we get down to like 10 or 11 on there uh of the review
criteria. So, what I'm proposing is that we trim that down to seven. So, these are the first four. Uh, no, but I can I can send this out. Yep. Yeah. So really just
I think the issue with with the re the current review criteria that we're using is like the first one basically covers everything in it. Uh and then there's some repetition that happens and so it's not very clear and
so trying to make each of these criteria distinct um uh I think is really important just because then we can always just focus on that one and not get all jumbled up with the first one is the are current is I think too long in
my opinion. So then these would be the five, six and seven. That's for conditional use permits, right? Conditional and interim use. Yep. Yeah. the the review standards for
interim use permits would be the same. You just substitute the Y. Gotcha. Yep. I like it. Yeah. And I think one thing that this will do is just generate more focused
discussion as well. I think it can be overwhelming to have 13 review criteria and maybe a little bit excessive. And um if we can just hone in our our discussion on on whatever permit is is
before the commission at that time, I think this will just help um hone in a little bit a little bit better. Any thoughts, comments, questions? Keep it in alphabetical order. I think it's a great idea.
You still everything is still covered, but it's more concise. Yeah, yeah, Mr. Chair and Matt, uh, obviously these 13 ones that were on here was some of
them pretty narrowly, you know, describing certain parts of it. If push come the coven this had to be held up in court. Is these seven going to cover it equally well as a 13 in your opinion?
I would think so. Some counties have um four five. I mean yeah. Yeah. In my opinion, I think that would cover it. But, um, that's almost like four or five different review criteria
slammed into one. The only one that I might cons would might consider adding that is no longer on there is um uh the first one just being strictly about the health, safety, and general welfare
of um county residents. And I don't have that on here and I meant to and I think maybe that's that's one that I think we maybe should add and that should be the first
one. Um the reason being is that with use permits and basically any type of decision that you're making. That's kind of the the lens that you should be re looking at it through every decision is
how does this impact the health, safety, and welfare um of of the county. So, that might be a number a one that I would add back in there and just stop it there. And that's in
our current one right now, but then it continues to go on and on and on. Okay. Yeah, that's that's kind of what my thought was too. Um for text amendments, review criteria. Um
just keeping it to three. I think we have four right now. Again, just trying to make things more succinct and um streamlined here because really when we're looking at a text amendment
to the ordinance, I think really three is probably the big one is you're looking to make because the ordinance is the main tool for implementing your comprehensive plan. And so number three is kind of the biggest one is is it consistent with those with the goals and
objectives of the of the comprehensive plan? Is a nuclear power plant next to a residential subdivision consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan? Probably not.
That's probably above above our our level here, a battery plant or a data a data center. That's one that counties are grappling with right now is the d is data centers. um they're not in our ordinance right
now, so they're technically prohibited, but that's a that's a big one. Western North Dakota, Southern Minnesota. So, and AI AI stuff. Yep. So,
and just generally people more storing more things online. Yeah. No one has any really good standards developed yet for
for that. Yeah. Which makes it tough. Um, for zoning map amendments, trying to keep So, a zoning map amendment, um, one thing that's important to know about a zoning map amendment is it's essentially the same thing as a text
amendment because the zoning map is adopted by reference in the ordinance. So, they're essentially the same thing. Um, but they're a little different in that a zoning map amendment often is focused on a specific property
or area. Um, and so looking to keep these the same um but adding a fourth review standard in that the proposed use or zoning district is compatible with the surrounding uses or zoning districts. Um that's kind of like a uh
check against um spot zoning which is uh not legal in Minnesota and most everywhere. I think we might loosen up some language here because I think in our current draft we have it focused on a specific property.
Um but there can be instances and that and this planning commission has made recommendations to the board of commissioners before to zone um whole entire areas of the county, not just specific to one property before.
Same with like if a uh new zoning district were to be adopted in the future or anything like that. Um the next thing I want to talk does anyone have any comments on this? Okay. The next one I want to talk about is just appeals. So kind of laying out for
different applications or different decisions how appeals may be proposing to be work to work. I don't and we're still I'm still discussing this with um with uh attorney Melton on what we want to do here. I don't know if we have a thought, but
their recommendations would be I think for administrative decisions, if someone were to appeal a building permit denial or something like that, the process is that would go to the board of adjustment. Uh and then it could either go to district court or court of appeals. Uh recommendation is it to go
to the court of appeals. Variances um excuse me, variances do go to district court because that's explicit in statute. uh use permits. Right now, how we have use permits set up is say someone is
denied an interim use permit, they can appeal it to the county board and the county board can make a decision. Um if the county board denies their appeal, then it would go to either district
court or court of appeals. That's how it's currently laid out. I think the issue is is that anyone technically anyone can appeal a permit decision. So like a neighbor or
something like that. So say you grant a grant a use permit, grant a conditional use or an interim use permit for a gravel pit and a bunch of neighbors appeal your decision. it goes to the county board. Um,
intermuse permit's a bad example. I'm going to switch to a conditional use permit. Conditional use permit for storage. Um, the neighbors appeal to the county board. The county board
um decides to deny the conditional use permit. So the issue there is that a conditional use permit is a land right and the only way that it can really be taken away is if you the planning commission they
violate the conditions. That's pretty explicit. So the issue becomes is that if that were to be appealed to the county board and the board were to deny it, then the board is taking away that land rate and that could be challenged in court and it would not probably go
very well. So the thought with use permits is to just and a lot of other counties do this too is all appeals of your decision. The planning commission like the board of adjustment for variances is the final
decision maker. They would go anyone wants to appeal it including the applicant. If you were to deny a permit that would go to court of appeals or or district court. So it would take the county board out of that appeal process.
Um, I don't know there would be either one likely. I mean probably I'd be probably a wash. I mean to whatever degree. I mean if you you're probably better off I mean being in the district court to to go through their rules if you're not going to use
an attorney. They probably give you a little more leeway. The court of appeals is a three panel judge. Yeah, three panel judges and pretty strict on their rules and their requirements and and everything else. So, um it' be easier to go through district
court then as a probably that's how I would do it then. Mr. Chair and Mr. Melman, for my benefit, can you give us give me and maybe all of us a little lessons in civics? What's Court of Appeals? What's
district court? What's the difference? Right. So, district court would be here local one judge u a local judge who's rarely appointed by the governor but sixyear uh six-year term. Then they're
voted on by local folks. Um, typically within the criminal realm or civil realm, you know, if you file a case and you have a case here in district court, local court, then you appeal that to the court of appeals, which is three judge
panel. And those judges are experienced judges in law, probably been district court judges previously. And so, so the progression would go from district to court of appeals typically, but in this case, you could. And I think that's some of the stuff
that Matt and I just discussed, the idea of there's sort of that idea, would you would you want it to go to the uh to the county board as a first place just because they are constituents? That's a discussion point. You know, the idea that they want to be heard both by the
planning commission and their own uh commissioners that are elected, but on the other hand, they're already they have appointed you to make decisions. And so that's the reason to say it's not just giving people two bites of the same apple. It's you've you've made your
pitch. It's either granted or denied. If it's denied, it's now into a different more official realm or a different offic not more official, but just a different official realm where it's now a judge or a three panel judge court that uh that's
looking at the matter. So yeah, typ so so the the progression is district court local three court three judge panel court of appeals that's uh typically down in in St. Paul and then the Minnesota Supreme Court which is a nine
judge panel. Thank you. And I think and I I did send you that that case law. I don't know if you had a chance to look at it, but that was the um there's I think there's case law that goes both ways. It seems like
I I I think we could do it either way. It probably just makes sense to allow for it to go to the court of appeals. It's a trained three judge panel. It or I mean I think either one. I mean, district court is local, so that allows folks that are right here the three
judge panel typically either St. cloud or or the Twin Cities where you're usually going because so if if you lose in district court could could you go to the court of appeals and after that they would be they would have that that would be the next one and then after that would be the Supreme Court of
Minnesota. Each one has the ability to to potentially deny or so if you made it and in the statute you would say it's district court they have a chance to appeal to the court of appeals but the court appeals could deny Yeah. I mean, you could be denied all
the way down, but you could still, right? Is there an advantage to use the court of appeals first? You you said there are three judges trained. Is that mean you think about one of your options? I guess I think that's kind of that just that
debate of what's the best and easiest way to kind of make it happen and and give them their opportunity to be heard. Give them a chance to appeal and and it would be done. I mean I I think I think
either way I I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other. I I I'm not sure which is the best way to be honest. Like Matt said, it's kind of a you've seen it both ways. So, I'm not sure there's really a best way. And I I know Kristen, she your garden
just mention just recommended the court of appeals because that's what she sees the majority of the time in her I think reasoning for it was it's just more timely and efficient. That's Yeah. and she said there's case law
that supports that these should go to the court of appeals, but then there is another subset of case law that says district court is acceptable, too. And I I support I agree with Ezra on the district court thing strictly because
it's still local. Yeah. And if you wanted to have the step for um to go to board then I think the recommendation is is that the planning commission becomes just a recommending body to the board for use permits and
the board makes a decision on all of them and there would not have to be a public hearing at board. It would just be making the decision to accept the planning commission recommendation or to to not accept it based on the record. Uh
the record which was basically everything staff report um the application comments from citizens uh public hearing at the planning commission and things and and all of that. that you said for use permits. Is
it that both conditional and yes, so personally I think that unless the the county board feels otherwise, I think that going right to either district court to district court would be
fine. Just keep it district court for variances because it has to be use permits and amendments. Reason I like district court is so you're not saddling the person whoever's trying to challenge it with a big bill going down to St. Paul hiring attorneys.
Yeah. It's more affordable if you're going to challenge it to go through district court and they would in state law at all that you have to to go one way or the other only for variances. Do all So, here's a question for you. Do
all counties have a planning board like this? Not all. Most do. Sometimes the county board is is sometimes the it's the board of adjustment and planning commission are the same. Um yeah and it is a mixed bag
I found out in terms of um some counties have the planning commission make the final decisions on use permits. Uh some counties re do recommendations. Becker Becker County Becker County is one of those that makes Sterns County as an example. They do
that too. So, um I know there's it would uh our county board has very full agendas every week. Um and so this is would that would just be another thing um to add to their plate. And I think that for the most part that they've been
very um they trust they trust your uh judgment and decisions on on these use permits. I would say I don't want to speak for them, but that's just kind of the the the sense that I get that's that's where I sit for being there for two months, but coming from
this, I trust everybody on here make the right decision. I think since I've been on here, I think we've made 95% of the right decisions. Okay. Well, just hearing this discussion then maybe what we'll and we spent a lot of
time on appeals, but this is this is kind of a big thing that we want to make sure we get right. And um my thought would be to just have it go to district court. Is that kind of what I'm hearing? Good. So, uh, next steps, uh, for this would
be to address the shoreland comments, address the attorney comments, uh, do a final review just for formatting definitions, and that could happen. That'll probably just be an ongoing thing. Um, and then to have the planning
commission, the final public hearing, the one that we were supposed to have tonight, to recommend to the board on April 22nd, unless you all feel like you need more time, or if you're like me and just want to be feel pretty good about it and ready to make a recommendation.
Are you going to do all eight chapters or nine? Yeah. And that was the intention for for this meeting because I know we did spend in December time on the first four chapters and then January we did spend time on the um
five through eight and Yep. So everyone feels good about that. One question. Yes. Is is the planning commission meeting in April the fourth one? Fourth Tuesday? I think it's the third. Do I have the date wrong
or see here? It's the 15th. My apologies. That Tuesday slipped by me. That's April Fool's Day, so doesn't really count. Yeah, that's the first.
Yeah. Okay. Yes. No, we'll go to the 15th. All right. Well, that's all I have, Mr. Chair, unless anyone else has any additional
thoughts. Hearing none. Hearing none, would look for a motion to close the public hearing on the development code update. So, move by Ezra, second by Dave. All those in favor say I.
I. Opposed. Motion is carried. Now, regarding the the IUP, um, he is online. Okay. Like to uh look for a motion to
open the public hearing for uh IUP. So, move. Second. Motion by Ashley, second by Sebastian. All those in favor say I. I. Motion is carried. Public hearing is open.
So this is Ryan Buffank. Request for an intermuse home occupation permit. Applicant is seeking after the fact interimuse home occupation permit for a landscaping business at 35637th Street North Lynon, Minnesota 56547
parcel ID 20.0303 in the part of the northeast quarter. the northeast quarter section 30 township 140 north range 47 west mullen township right so this is a request for a home occupation landscaping business so this
property is zoned agricultural general and resource protection wellhead protection the surrounding properties are zoned the same and IEP is allowed uh in this zoning district if it meets the requirements and is granted an interim use permit. So, it's located on the west
side of Cass 11. It's about 3/4 of a mile north of CASA 18 and there are residents and two out buildings on the property. Uh the request is to continue operating a landscaping business on the property. They use the 1,400 foot shop for storage and operating the business.
Uh they operate the landscaping the applicant obligates the landscaping division out of this location. So, and then it employs nine employees other than the owner for a total of 10. Uh, the main kind of use here is parking for employees.
They park here and take company vehicles to job sites. No customers visit the property. Um, hours of operation are Monday through Friday, 700 p.m. to 600 p.m. April 15th to November 15th. And then there is a snow division of this business, but that is operated uh in
Fargo. So home occupation sta standards uh limits employees to five non non-family um the planning commission can allow for additional employees if tra traffic parking utility impact uh and surrounding properties can be addressed.
Um looks like there is ample space for parking um approximately enough space for about 38 parking spaces. Um, so that's more than than what's currently utilized. Uh, they're also the applicant's also using the further south
location for the business, which is creating a buffer between the neighbors to the north. And then there's a pretty significant um tree buffer with the neighbor to the to the south. So in resource protection, wellhead protection, um outdoor storage accessory
to commercial use is not per permitted. So any storage um associated the business would have to occur inside a building or a structure that doesn't include parking. You can do you can do parking. So we have not received any
public comment for this request. uh also haven't received any comment from the township from our comprehensive plan and how this request relates to our goals and objectives. Um we have a goal to maximize potential of Klay County as a thriving center for agriculture,
business, and recreation while maintaining and enhancing its livability. Uh home occupations that follow regulations of Klay County provide unique opportunities for residents to live and work in the county. They have at the potential to enhance both the economy and livability of Klay County. We have a land use goal
to establish a comprehensive growth management strategy that promotes orderly and efficient growth of residential, commercial, industrial development while preserving the county's rural character. Um, home occupations do not necessarily fit into the strategy overall, but they provide flexible living and working
arrangements. They make for more efficient use of large tracks of residential properties and should not detract from the real character of the county provided that structures the structures and use are in harmony with said real character and the use does not create nuisance conditions.
Then we have a goal to plan land uses and implement standards to minimize land use conflicts and home occupations that meet our Klay County Development Code regulations for home occupations should not contribute to land use conflicts.
Any questions for me at all? Yes, Matt. Uh, are there currently is there currently equipment outside that needs to be inside? There could be some equipment outside, but if it I mean, if it's like a trailer or something like that, like something
that you can drive, I don't think you can really store that inside. I think the concern more with outdoor storage um in the wellhead protection um zoning district, especially in an area where you have um looking at this map, this
shows basically the sens pollution sensitivity of groundwater. uh it's very high here. Meaning that if you were to have like a spill of some kind of a hazardous chemical or material, the travel time to get from the surface to
the water table is very short. Um meaning that you have probably a high water table. So the aquifer is probably closer to the surface. Um and really so think of like treated wood storing like
pallets, things like that. um any chemicals or anything like that, storing that outside would be discouraged or not allowed. Now, if you're parking parking some things that you can't, you know, you don't keep inside like uh trailers and things like
that, I think that that would be acceptable. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I I have a comment on that. I've been driving by this property. I don't know for the last 10 or 15 years and almost weekly now it's always wellkept. I mean it's most of the time
it's yeah it's vehicles parked there. That's was what you see. It's not a bunch of stuff out there like fuel barrels and stuff like that outside the area. Pretty well kept piece of property. Well, and in the description of what
they're doing, they don't list, you know, spraying and as one of their things that they do with seating and Okay. Anybody have anything else for Matt?
Okay. Would the applicant care to speak? Hello, Ryan. Good evening. Good evening. We can hear you, Ryan. I can hear you. Yep. Go ahead.
Um, would you like to speak regarding your permit application? Um, yeah, I will throw in a few things. Uh, yeah, we do not do any sort of chemical weed spraying, fertilizing, anything of that nature um in the
business. Um the whole purpose of this is basically vehicle storage or trailer storage. Um there's I don't know eight trailers here and six vehicles I think. Um that's basically it. I do keep anything that nothing gets sold out of
here. No customers visit here. Um everything that I can store inside does get stored either in the shop in the garage or in the storage containers. Thank you. Anybody have any questions for Ryan? I have one question. This is Ezra Bear.
How long have you been running this business outside your home there? Um, this I bought the property a couple years ago from my dad. Um, and I kind of started the business out of the property. So, it's been 2016 is when I
started the business. August of 2016. So um on and off basically from there the last five years have been serious growth if you will. So the last five to eight years basically
thank you. Okay. Uh thank you Ryan. I'm hearing no further comments or questions. Look for a motion to Oh, sorry. Yes. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this?
Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this permit application? Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this hearing? None. Now, I look for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Brad.
Second. Second by Ezra. All those in favor say I. I. opposed. Motion is carried. Thank you everyone. Okay. And Mr. Chair, I do um we have drafted
findings um here that you can modify or change as you see fit. Um if you no need to read them because they're a little lengthy unless you feel feel the need to. Um, they're they're just below they're italicized on the screen and I
can close out my PowerPoint here so I can show you actually what they look like. There you go. Okay. Well, um, thank you. And we will begin going through the 13.
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. Scenic views, 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 injurous 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 interimm use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding 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 odors, 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 the 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 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 the agricultural use of said land. Appearance of structure and site. Structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties.
Relationship to overall needs. The use 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 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 per purposes of the
zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The use is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan if any of the township, city or county. Traffic hazards, congestion and flood
plane areas. The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion and flood plane areas has access during flooding for ordinary and emergency vehicles. Existing businesses nearby will not be
adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought by the intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. I have a is I'm assuming the applicant is the person living is is occupying the
residence on site. That's correct. Okay. I guess the only other concern I had, he mentioned quite a few trailers and I get that, but uh we would have heard from the township if
he was there was road restriction damage or something going on in the springtime because he will be up here soon. He's right on a Cass road. Oh, yep. He's got access to a 10 ton. It's a paved Yep.
That's a 10 ton road. Yep. Oh, okay. Well, that takes care of that. Mr. Chair, would you like me to to read the conditions? I can I can do that. And then um with this being an interim use
permit, we would have to make sure that the applicant is agreeable to those conditions. Yes, please. Okay. So, number one, home occupation shall comply with the Klay County Development Ordinance, home occupation standards. Number two, the permit would
cease upon ownership change. Uh, number three, employees shall be limited to members of the house and 10 additional non-family employees unless a plan for additional employee parking and mitigation of potential impacts are provided to the planning office. Number four, outdoor storage accessory to the
commercial use is prohibited. All commercial storage must occur indoors. Go ahead, Mr. Stiken. Have a question. Matt, Mr. Chair, am I remembering this incorrectly, but
does an inter use have a specific amount of time that's allowed to be run? Uh, Mr. Chair, Mr. Second, it can be either a period of time or an event that would trigger that. I'm confused. event being like an
ownership like if the if the the applicant or the permit holder were to uh sell his property or convey his property to someone else. I guess in the past it's always come up on mining that it's a specific time. So that's yep
what I had in my mind. Thank you. I've got just a quick question here or two. Um is it nine additional non-employed family members or they want a buffer in case they need to add? That would be a good question for the applicant
if you would like to go beyond the 10. Yeah. Could we I mean we have um an additional shop in Fargo that we run five employees out of two. Um so you know I guess if we could shoot high and say 15 I know I would probably never
exceed that. I think that's reasonable, I guess, to add it to 15. Um, and then I just wanted to ask, do we want to have hours of operation? Um, it doesn't sound like he has much of a nuisance, you know, loud noises coming from the shop or anything,
but I know that we've added hours of operation, I think, on things, too. And Mr. Chair and commissioners, I don't know what your thoughts are on that. his stated hours of operation are um
they were in the permit application it should be 7 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. I believe my my two comments on Ashley's comments would be he could go up to third I mean for people that work that aren't family
members is goes to parking spaces correct correct and the math shows 38 so I mean 15 is very doable to have on that number especially if they're just coming and going and then when it comes to hours of operation I mean they are just coming
and going from there. They're not working from there. They're not I mean, they're coming there picking up a piece of equipment and leaving. I don't know if we'd need to have an hours of operation because what if a rainstorm's coming, they got a job they're doing in Fargo. If work till 8:00 cuz the storm's
coming at 10:00 at night, you know, just to get it done so they're done tomorrow. But they got to shut off by 7:00 to be back at the shop by. So I don't with it being on a cass road, a heavy road, I don't I don't know if ours operation would be necessary, especially if it's
just vehicles coming and going. I see your point, Ezra, because they're not doing business. Yeah, it's not they're not actually operating doing business there. That's just a parking. Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense to me. Just wanted to throw it out there.
Yeah, Mr. Chair, the only hours time when an hours of operation might come into effect is if they're doing any maintenance on any equipment or anything like that. Something to consider which should be inside. Yeah,
because you wouldn't be changing bearing bearings on your trailer at 10 o'clock at night in April outside. No. All right. I'll make a motion to approve conditions one through four with the correction from 10 employees to 15.
I'll second that. Okay. We have a motion by Brad, a second by Ashley to approve the permit with the four conditions with changing the allowed employees to 15.
And Mr. Chair, I just confirmed to with the applicant that these conditions are acceptable. That was my question. Make sure Ryan Yeah, we might want to ask Ryan that the minutes. Okay, Ryan. Yep. So, we have a you in the in the minutes.
Um, are these four conditions acceptable to you? Absolutely. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Permit is granted. Thank you everyone. On to unfinished business. No, we need to close the hearing. No, we did that. Yeah, we did that. We're okay.
Yeah. Unfinished business, Matt. Um, just a permit violation update. Um, well, maybe what I'll do is I'll just pull up kind of where we're at with permit
violations overall. This is a presentation that I gave to the county board. Um, let's see if I can find it here. Bear with me. I just thought, oh, maybe I should show
this, right? I did not prepare. Thought I should just Oh, I'll show it right now. Um, see here. It is. Yeah, we need that. I will bring it to the next meeting.
How's that sound? No update. On to new business. Yes. So, um so uh sad to say that um um we're going to be losing uh Brent
Berg here. uh be be stepping down on the planning commission. I just want to thank Brent for um all the expertise and and thoughtfulness that you brought to our meetings. I know Brent's one of the planning commissioners who would always
um send me an email or give me a call about things that he was seeing out and about in the county and just did so the other day and um just really appreciated that um that uh level of of
participation and and and dedication and and so I don't know Brett if you have anything that you want to say at all or Yeah, I just wanted to say I've enjoyed being on the board and honestly The only reason I'm backing down is that got teenage two teenage kids and I just was
adding it up. My daughter throughout the year is in nine different sports, uh, different teams plus 4 and showing cattle and, uh, just too too busy, too many interruptions. So, I figured I better back down and hopefully find somebody
else that could be a little bit more committed to making the meetings. So, that's it. Well, thank you, Brett. So hopefully um once things slow down for you, we'll have a spot for you back on on the planning commission. So open invitation
and and so with that, um we have uh Josh Schroeder here from from Barnesville and um Josh, you serve on the planning commission, correct? He's been on the on the Barnesville city planning commission. I don't know if you want to say a few things and introduce yourself at all. Sure.
And might want to just use the mic there. Yep. Do that. Thank you. Uh good evening, commissioners. I'm Joshua Shrader. I've uh served on the Barnesville Planning and Zoning Committee for three years with Brent. Uh a couple of months ago, he mentioned he
was on this commission and was potentially interested in stepping down from that. Uh at the time, I was running for school board in Barnesville. I'm now on the board in Barnesville, so I've got the running part of my uh days out of the way. And uh when he brought it up again, I said, "Well, go check it out
and and see how it works." So, uh just a little about a bit about me. Um I graduated from NDSU in 2000. I'm a structural engineer. Uh my wife and I moved down to Kansas for a couple years. Uh we moved to Barnesville in 2007 with our daughters and we've been there ever since. So, coming up on 18 years now. Uh
like I said, I've been a structural engineer. I focus mainly on bridges. I've been doing that for 25 years. Um I work for KJ currently. As far as I know, we don't have any a lot of business anyway with Klay County or anything like that where there'd be conflicts. Um, I
do bridge design. I do bridge construction inspection and I do inservice bridge inspection. So, don't bring Brent's uh insurance uh side of things to that, but uh I am familiar with a lot of the issues that the board would be uh into um you know, platting
and and the uh the other issues you've talked about tonight. So, I think I could be a good commissioner. I'm I'm interested in doing it. Uh again, unlike Brent, I've got two daughters. My youngest is going to graduate this year and move to Duth. So, I am going to be
an empty neester and should have time to to participate in the board and I'll do lots of listening until I get things figured out. But, uh um I I appreciate the work that the boards do. I know how important it is to people and um yeah, hopefully you'll have me. So, any
questions you have of me? Chair, I have one question for him. You've been on Barnesville planning and zoning for three years, correct? How many meetings have you missed in three years? Not too many. My my bridge inspection uh takes me down to South Dakota in the summer and stuff, but I'm able to
prioritize that. Uh, school board meetings are Monday nights. Commission meetings are Tuesday nights. Planning and zoning are also Monday nights. They are the first Monday of the month. Last year we had four of them. Um I don't expect there to be any interference with
my current work obligations. I have a pretty I I can uh address my own schedule and and work around if I know I've got a meeting coming up. So should be able to make it. That's all that's all I have to ask. I'll just quickly say that I I wanted to
endorse Josh. I've been after him for pushing a year probably to take my spot here. So, I'm glad he finally is agreeing to that. So, he'll be he'll be really good. Thanks, Brent. Thanks, Josh. Josh, good to have an engineer from the
planning commission. Yeah. Chair, do you want to go ahead and give the presentation? Okay, certainly. Um, in light of this being Brad's last meeting, Brent's last meeting as
he's stepping down, you'd like to have a plaque for you. Thank you, Brett. Okay. Anybody else have any questions for Joshua or for Matt about him?
Hearing none, would look for a motion to approve his nomination to the the county commissioners. So moved. Second. Motion made by Ashley, seconded by Sebastian. All those in favor say I. I.
Opposed. Motion is carried. So, so Brent, when you come back on the planning commission, you do have to give that plaque back and then serve nine years and then we'll give it back to you. Yeah.
Okay. Next on the agenda is land use training opportunity. Yes. So, there is a land use training opportunity. This happens every spring. There's one in the spring. Uh this is put on by the Association of Minnesota Counties. Uh, and then the Minnesota Association of County Planning and
Zoning Administrators, um, MC Pizza is the acronym for that. Uh, there is also one in the fall that's put on by the, um, Minnesota Counties Intergovernmental Trust, the insurer of most of the counties. Um,
this one would be in Staples on April 28th and it's basically the whole day. Um there is lodging available if anyone would want to go down the night before. Um just so that that is an option too. I
plan on leaving probably bright and early and get getting over there. Um I think uh Dave, you've expressed interest in going. Our assistant county administrator is planning on attending as well. If any of you want to check your schedules and if
you can make it work, it's very um I think it's it's very much would be very much worth your while. Uh one of the focuses of this particular session is going to be on writing um good findings of fact.
So that's something a little different. But they talk about um there's a lot of things with um noticing 60-day rule and things like that, but also talk about conditional use permits and and and things like that. So, if you can make it
work, great. Um if not, I'm going to bother you in the fall about the MCIT training. I've I've gone on those with Matt. I'd highly recommend them if you haven't gone on one with them. It's veryformational. And you get a ride down with Matt. He drives.
I do drive. And how's my driving? Not bad. Okay. And maybe you can get him to go to Mley to get some fish, too. Yes. We finished on the uh Okay. This doesn't really pertain to the planning commission, but it's one of our
planning commission members. Um, I had the opportunity to go down to St. Paul with uh Morhead Fargo Chamber of Commerce. They had a huge cross-section of business, municipalities, higher education, and
and is about 38 of us. Um, it was pretty neat that we got to meet with influential lawmakers and Commissioner Mojo and Commissioner Krabanov from the uh, County Commissioner were there
and I can see that Commissioner Mojo has done a lot of work behind the scenes prior to us going down there because they were very familiar with what she's been working on. you know, specifically the bofuels by more the aviation fuel,
the psychiatric facility that they're working on and the flood protection for more. I do just a few of the things and it's not the best year to ask for money from the state because when we're down there we had two days on the hill and then one day with the League of
Minnesota cities the economic forecast came in 180 160 million less than it was proposed and they knew it was going to be down. So, it's a tough year to be at for asking, but Commissioner Mojo has spent a lot of time, I can tell, working
on these um these issues and we had a chance to meet with the governorh Wallace and he is so behind so backing the bofuels and the
psychiatric psychiatric facility. It's kind of neat to see that it's high on our radar and Senator Anne Rest was she spoke to us and she said that this is the most important legislation in her
40 years the psychiatric facility uh that she's ever had to deal with. So when you get her attention that's a great starting point. And um I talked to some tribal leaders and they're all for
you know you know the we're part of the county and the county is very proactive on what they've been proposing to do here with with the definite costs but the tribal leaders are so behind this as well and I
think all the tribal communities have signed on as far as the other different municipalities. So, if it happens this year, who knows? Uh, but there I know I'm going to talk to Commissioner Mojo when I have a chance. Uh, but I just
wanted on record that they've done a fantastic job. They and thanks for sending them down there for the uh county commissioner sending them down and she's a great spokesman for the county in so many ways. So, um it's just
great to see uh her excitement and her dedication to making the county better. One one comment on that, David. She was down there today. That's why I'm here today. Okay. Well, back down on Thursday. Another example of her putting in the
time down there. I make the motion.