Motion by Laura. >> Second. >> Seconded by Brad. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Is there anyone in the audience tonight
that wishes to speak 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 to something that is not on the agenda? Third time. Is there anyone in the
audience or online that wishes to speak to something that is not on the agenda? Thank you. Okay. Um, our public hearing number one is Lauren Richards request for an
interimm use an IUP mining permit. The in the applicant is seeking for an IUP for a gravel mine on parcel ID 17.005.200 the northwest quarter of section 5 township
141 North Range 45 West Keen Township. Look for a motion to open the public hearing. >> Motion. >> Second. Motion by Josh, seconded by Brad. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. >> Motion is carried. Public hearing is open. Taken away. Matt. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes. This is a request for an intermuse permit for a new gravel mine. Uh this is located in the northeast part of Klay County in Keen Township. It's actually just uh to
the northeast of the county gravel pit. Um it's 168 acre parcel. Uh primarily the use right now is egg and there is an inactive gravel mine in the lower left hand or southwest extent of the
property. Uh the zoning is egg general. Uh the overlay zoning is resource protection biological kind of a little finger coming down here. And then the rest of the parcel is resource protection aggregate. Uh the cup for this was
granted in 1988. Uh with the existing property and surrounding area uh there isn't any prime farmland on site. There is high aggregate potential. Uh there's native prairie in the northwest extent of the parcel. There are natural and excavated
wetlands present. Um the surrounding properties do contain high quality native prairie and prairie chicken habitat as well. And then you can kind of see here. So, a lot of the parcel has very high aggregate potential and then all this green is essentially that
native prairie. As for wetlands, um there are just some on the west side of the parcel and some on uh the north here of the parcel. Uh, and just because this is so close to um one of my favorite um
landmarks in Klay County, the Buffalo Rock is just to the south here. So, you can actually see it on the aerial right here. And this is the parcel down here. But yes, this is worth a trip if you ever have time if you haven't seen it yet.
Uh for the mining, uh they're going to do open pit extraction. They're going to use front-end loaders and bulldozers. Uh material would be processed on site with portal screening and crushing plants. They're not doing any washing at all. They're looking to operate between April
and December uh 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. So that's consistent with our um with our time. And then Keen Township as well with their um required operating hours. um looking at maybe 30 days out of the
calendar year for doing um uh crushing um just for bigger jobs and having two to three equipment operators and 8 to 12 truck drivers on site. Uh dust control would be a mix of water and calcium chloride as needed. Uh they
would do contouring vegetative cover and they'd have to comply with their storm water permit. Uh and then they plan on uh top soil um stockpiling that to be seated and then reused um for reclamation.
So some hall route and environmental considerations. So this would uh pass through um sensitive native prairie habit habitat, greater prairie chicken booming grounds. Um, so dust control, minimizing truck speeds, limiting early morning noise is essential and then
potentially coordination with the DNR and then also the Klay County Highway Department as well just on um road maintenance. Uh so their sites here, Hall Road follows Township Chip Road 170th out to county 108 which is a paved
road. Did not receive any comments from the township or the general public on this request. um though approval may be required by Keen Township. So they'd need to check with with the township on that.
Looking at how this request um aligns with our comprehensive and transportation plan goals and objectives. Uh we have a goal to foster a balanced approach to aggregate resource extraction that is compatible with the natural resources and rural character of Klay County and to avoid or
mitigate impacts to groundwater surface water, native prairie woodlands and wetlands for new or expanding mining operations. Uh really the big thing here is just with all the native prairie uh habitat in the area um really controlling that dust control on um on
the roads, hall roads and in the mine itself. Uh part of the proposed mining area does appear to include a wetland or a portion of a wetland. So a wetland consultation with um our um water wetland conservation act coordinator
would be must occur prior to any mining commencement so they can avoid that. We do require phase end reclamation plans and bonds and they've indicated that reclamation will occur as mining progresses. Um and then the there is a
reclamation bond requirement with every um gravel pit. Um and then just considering cumulative impacts of mining. So there would be that with the nearby Klay County Felton Pit. Um, there's also a northern
improvement pit that's been and both of those mines have been in operation since the at least the 50s or 60s. So, very old, maybe even the northern improvement pit probably a lot longer than that. Um,
just um paying particular attention to this the sensitive environment. Uh, and then also just with 170th Street being gravel road, just making sure there's regular maintenance and dust control on that. Any questions for me at all?
Hearing none. Would the applicant like to step up to the mic and introduce yourself and speak your piece? >> I'm Ian Severson. I work for Lauren Richards. He wasn't able to get here yet. Um, I don't have anything to add unless you got specific questions on anything.
>> Um, I guess I'll go first. Um, so this isn't the first mine you guys have operated in. >> It's not >> in in Klay County. See, you're aware that if um you know this is approved and magically you mistakenly are mining 15
more acres, then you're supposed to that you that there could be some punitive >> Absolutely. We've we've been through that before and we've learned our lesson and went through all the steps necessary to fix our past problems. Okay. And I
encourage you to reach out to um our Wacka County WACA specialist because it may be because this is an old mine that >> those wetlands may not be actual actionable wetlands because they're artificial.
>> Sure. >> So that was all I had. >> Mr. Chair. Oh, I just have a question for Mr. Severson. If >> if there's a third party that's going to be doing the um stripping or site prep, like a Subaniac, or will you be doing
it? >> We do all our own stripping and reclamation. >> Okay. >> They they may do a little bit, but just as they're there, but we do the majority of it. >> And I work with Stefan. I mean, everybody does. That's
>> that's who does our crushing at our other pit when we crush in there. Here's a question for Matt first and then awareness. Uh Matt, what's the uh setback for the native prairie? >> So we have a setback for anything that's zoned resource protection biological 100
100 ft. >> 100 feet. You're aware of that? >> Yes. >> Yeah. I will Mr. Chair just add that um Mr. Severson, Mr. Richards and I have met a handful of times um going into earlier this year um on this on this
proposed site, even into last year, I think. And um they just wanted to make sure that they're doing their due diligence ahead of time. And there, you know, you're you don't I'm assuming they won't be required, they'll be required
to put it back to natural state because in your notes you'd stated that the prior mining didn't do any reclamation. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, that's correct. The the prior pit um the conditional use permit did not have any conditions attached to
it. No requirements for reclamation. So that would be a kind of a separate the the mining here would take place would be separate from go back to a map here. Yeah. So it would be separate from this. >> Okay. >> So they wouldn't be required to do
anything with unless they go in there and mine. >> Yeah. Unless they use this for whatever reason. No, they would not be required to reclaim that. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else on the board? >> Mr. Chair, just a quick question. Um, I
don't see anything about uh expected runoff direction. Is the flow onsite or is they have to implement any best management practices to keep runoff off site? >> Yeah, Mr. Chair and Mr. Schroeder, the they would be directing all storm water
runoff in into the interior of the pit. nothing would be discharged. Thank you. Is uh there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against?
Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this IUP? Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against? Hearing none. Look for a motion to
adjourn the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Motion by Brad, second by Laura. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Post. Motion is carried. Public hearing is closed. go through the findings of fact. The
interimm use will not be injurous to the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of residents of Klay County. The interimm use will not be injurous to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purpose already permitted. 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. Adequate measures have been or will be
taken to provide utilities, access roads, drainage and off- streetet parking and loading spaces as required by this ordinance. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration,
water pollution and soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. The interimm use will not create an
excessive burden on current or anticipated public infrastructure or services that serve or are proposed to serve the area including but not limited to parks, schools, public safety services, roads, water supply, sanitary sewers, storm
sewers. Unless the county and the applicant establish a development agreement that determines how such impacts will will be resolved. The interimm use is allowed by this ordinance and conforms with any specific
use standards established in chapter 8 as may be applicable. The use the interim use is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Klay County comprehensive and transportation plan and any comprehensive plan of a township or city
as may be applicable. And uh staff has 13 14 15 >> 15 >> Paul. >> Yeah, I didn't find that one. So, thank you. Okay, staff has
listed 15 um potential requirements and uh they are appear to be keeping in line with what we have done in the past and keep in
line with gravel pits in that area um or in in in in the entire county actually. Does anybody have any they would need to add or
If there's a case of emergency, the uh you know blood or behind because of weather, all they they would just need to contact and you've done this before, contact Matt and staff and they could or you know may
give you a permit to work longer and have I'm assuming you have access to or have looked at these 15 recommendations and understand and are able to follow
them. >> Yeah, >> thank you. Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve uh conditions 1 through 15. >> We have a motion by Brad to approve the IUP with conditions 1 through 15.
>> Second by Kurt. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. IUP is granted. Okay. Our
next hearing is uh Spring Prairie um Spring Prairie CSG LLC request for a cup. Um, the applicant is seeking a conditional use permit for a 1 megawatt community solar garden on parcel ID
27.004 3000 in part of the northwest corner quarter of section 4, township 140N, range 46W, Spring Prairie Township. Look for a motion to open the public
hearing. Motion by Laura, >> second by Paul. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Public hearing is open. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, this is a CUP
request for 1 megawatt community solar garden. Uh, this is at the intersection of Trunk Highway 9 and County State Aid Highway 26. uh there it's currently agricultural and there is an existing 1 megawatt community solar garden permitted by CUP
in 2019 on site. Uh the zoning of this property is agricultural general and so the request is to establish this uh community solar garden on approximately 16 6.63 63 acres of land farmland. Uh part of this community
solar garden program which allows for residents, businesses, and other entities to to subscribe to solar power and receive bill credits if they can't do it on their own property and that's accessible to XL Energy customers in Minnesota. Um again looking at site
selection criteria, level train, amount of sunlight, proximity to electrical infrastructure and landowner participation, the ability to inter connect to the um grid through XL Energy. It's kind of why we're seeing a lot of these requests and projects in
the Highway 9 corridor just because of that proximity to um the infrastructure and it being in XL Energy territory. So the goal is to begin construction in 2026 and and conclude in 2027. The
project has about a 35-year lifespan, be about 2400 solar panels, max height of 8 ft. Um and in Klay County, our maximum height requirement is 15. Um they would also have to establish
bene beneficial habitat and pol pollinator vegetation as part of this as well. Uh there's a decommissioning plan to full removal of all equipment and restoration of the site to egg production. Um appreciate the applicant providing probably the most detailed
cost breakdown of um solar decommissioning that we have seen thus far. So that's much appreciated. Uh the estimated cost about 300 thou $36,46 and there's a salvage value of $102818,000
uh with a net cost of $226,000. Uh considerations for this request um would take about 6.63 acres of prime farmland out of production. We did not receive any public comment on this request. Uh this was approved by Spring Prairie Township at their last meeting.
So they did get a permit from from the township. Uh the township did not have any issues. Uh they will likely require an access permit uh from the highway department to connect to CASA 26. So while this uh request relates to our
comprehensive plan goals and objectives, we do have a goal to support the long-term protection of the county strong and diverse egg economy. Um being that community solar gardens um they do add diversity to our egg economy and
allow producers to diversify their operations in revenue streams. Uh the development is compatible with all is compatible with the character and quality of the county's agricultural areas. Um a lot of these are going up right along major transportation
corridors and hubs. We do have a goal to protect prime agricultural soils from commercial, industrial, and residential development. This is something that would take 6.63 acres of prime farmland or prime farmland if drained out of egg
production for a minimum of 35 years. Uh there there is the um possibility that the site could be returned to restored to for farmland as soil loss would not occur. Um, and it's
a pretty small scale project. We also have a goal to encourage commercial and industrial development that is in harmony with the egg and rural character of Klay County. Um, get comments from folks that um, community solar gardens can be detracting from the
rural character of Klay County, but can also be seen as an emerging component of the agricultural landscape. And then to avoid um or mitigate against commercial and industrial development in or near environmentally sensitive areas. This project is not in or near any
environmentally sensitive areas. Uh and then to avoid or mitigate against commercial and industrial development that increases the potential for land use conflicts with rural residential or egg uses. So this use is relatively pa passive. if it doesn't generate any
excess traffic um noise, vibr vibrations or dust and generates power for Minnesota businesses, residents and institutions. We do have a goal to grow and restore prairie and woodland areas in Klay County for the benefit enjoyment of Klay County businesses, residents, and
visitors. And this would result in about 6 acres of pollinator and wildlife habitat. And that is also a requirement uh per our ordinance as well. Any questions for me? Feel like we've seen a number of these
this year. So, >> is the applicant present or a representative and would like to speak for the project? Please come to the mic and identify yourself for the record. >> Yeah, my name is Jacob Van Damlin. Uh, my address is 33 West State Street,
Geneva, Illinois 6134. Um, I have nothing else to add. Uh, if you have any questions for me, I'm happy to answer them. >> And I have nothing. It's, you know, pretty boilerplate at this point. Um, I
appreciate that you put in there that you're really looking at two years before it's done. Mr. Do you have anything to add? >> Just a question. Um, are you involved with any of the other projects along
that stretch in that area? >> No, it would be me if anyone. I'm not aware of any. So, this is our only project in this area in this county. >> Okay. And I'm assuming there's no issue getting an entrance off of CASA 26 that close to the intersection. I did uh
speak to the county engineer about that and said that just go to go through the access permitting process. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak or online that wishes to speak for or against?
Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak for or against? Is there anyone in the audience or online that wishes to speak for or against? Hearing none. Look for a motion to close the public hearing.
Motion by Sebastian. Second by Kurt. All those in favor say I. I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Public hearing is closed. We will go through the findings of fact.
The conditional use will not be injurous to the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of residents of Klay County. The conditional use will not be injurous to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for
the purpose already permitted. Establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses predominant in the area. Adica measures have been or will be
taken to provide utilities, access roads, drainage, off- streetet parking and loading spaces as required by this ordinance. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive
odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, water pollution, and soil erosion so that none of these will constitute a nuisance and to control lighted signs or other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to dis neighboring
properties will result. The conditional use will not create an excessive burden on current or anticipated public infrastructure or services that serve or are proposed to serve the area including to but not limited to parks, schools, public safety
services, roads, water supply, sanitary sewer, storm sewers. Unless the county and the applicant establish a development agreement that determines how such impacts will be resolved. The conditional use is allowed by this
ordinance in conformance with any specific use standards established in chapter 8 as may be applicable. The conditional use is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Klay County comprehensive and transportation
plan and any comprehensive plan of a township or city as may be applicable. and staff has established six. Yep. And Mr. Chair, these are pretty standard across the board for all of our
community solar garden permits. I did make one suggested change on the um decommissioning um bond or to just make it an even $300,000 >> and I the township has already voted on
and approved >> correct >> this. So Mr. Stiken, >> Mr. Chair and Matt, I know in the past we've had some discussion on keeping weeds down, the fence up. Is
that all covered under the number seven or the findings of facts long as they establish or the standards established in chapter 8? Does that cover those issues? >> Yeah, and correct. And as part of the um
Minnesota statutes 216B 1642 um one thing that the board the board of water and solar resources does is they actually go out and do checks on all of these to make sure that they're meeting that habit beneficial habitat standard. Um and so that's that is part of that
Okay. Anybody else have any questions or comments, subtractions or additions? Hearing none, look for a motion to approve or disapprove.
>> St. Approve the permit requested. >> Motion by Commissioner Styen to approve. >> Second. >> Second by Brad. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I.
>> Opposed. Hearing none. Motion is carried. Permit is approved. Thank you everyone. Our next public hearing is Steven and Teresa Opatrol request for
a subdivision. The applicant is seeking to plat a two lot, oneb block subdivision on parcel ID 19.017.4200 in part of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter and the
southwest quarter of the southeast quarter. Section 17, Township 138N, range 48W, Curts Township. Look for a motion to open the public
hearing. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Motion by Sebastian, seconded by Brad. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Public hearing is open.
Matt, take it away. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, this is a request for a platted subdivision. Uh the location of this would be um just south of the um recently approved um platted subdivision. Um on the east side of
Highway 75, uh north of 90th Avenue and south of 80th Avenue. Uh the base zoning or the zoning for this property base district is egg general. Uh the overlay district would be there is some flood plane fringe on um in the southwest part of the
property. So this would be a preliminary plat um one block two lot. The name would be the a patrol subdivision. Uh the parcel is 66 acres. Um land use is agricultural. There aren't any structures on the property. Uh the crop equivalency rating
on uh the property is ranges from 67 to 73 um which is considered good very good and there aren't any known wetlands on the property as well. Uh improvement plans so the the lot sizes would range from 10 to 53.73
acres. There would not be any internal road public roads. Uh it' be a direct access connection to US Highway 75. They don't have any restrictive covenants. Uh there was township action on um this
request. Um September 8th, they considered request from a different applicant to reszone and plat the property and that was that was denied. Uh in September 23rd they heard a request from the landowner for this plat. Um the request was approved but the township did voice operation to the
sighting of a concrete plant or other industrial use at this location citing loss of farmland. neighborhood concerns, concerns about traffic safety and potential groundwater use. Um, one thing that was discussed at the township
meeting on September 23rd was um a concrete plant would be permitted as an interim use in this zoning district um the agricultural general zoning district. So whether there's a plat or not, that would still be permitted. it
would have to go it would still have to go through the interim use permit process. And then we did receive um public comments um and you all should have received the letter that I that I received provided to you um concerns
about um noise, dust, vibration, uh highway safety, just this is being a um 60 mph two-lane road. um comments about long-term planning and zoning just having industrial uses that could disrupt progression and under undermine
long-term planning at this location. Uh then impact just with the recent commercial industrial development. Um they've neighbors have observed impacts already on on US Highway 75. I also received a phone call from a neighboring
property owner um Mr. Victor Hegarude who um strongly emphasized that the county should protect rural character uh and that his opinion was that development along this corridor should match US Highway 81 corridor which is in
North Dakota and Fargo and it's across the river. It's primarily residential and then industrial development limiting limiting the growth of Morhead to the south. Um just again all these comments relative to this plat um would be more
appropriate once we know for sure if there is an interim use permit for in the future. Did also receive additional comments from MDOT. They would require an access permit and as part of that a site plan as well.
Uh just looking at the average annual daily traffic count for Highway 75 at this location, uh there's about uh 1646 uh trips or vehicles a day and that's 2024 data. So that's the
um most recent um count. All this request um would relate to our comprehensive transportation plan goals and objectives. Um, we have a a goal to recognize and
protect the egg character of Klay County, protect prime egg soils from commercial industrial residential developments. Um, and the proposed resoning has the potential to take approximately 10 acres of prime farmland uh out of production uh ranging from uh
a CER of 67 to 73. Uh, this would be considered to be good farmland. And then that we just have about 297,600 acres of prime farmland if drained and 154,240 acres of prime farmland.
Uh to we have a goal to encourage commercial and industrial development that is in harmony with the egg and rural character of Klay County and to promote value added egg commercial and industrial development in agricultural service center areas and along transportation corridors and hubs. So
the proposed plat would allow for egg residential and some commercial such as storage units or industrial uses um like a concrete plant would be situated along Highway 75 uh which would be a major transportation corridor in Klay County.
Again just noting that there's no reasonzoning request with this plat. So these be limited in in in uses that would be allowed to the egg general zoning district. We have a goal to commercial to encourage commercial industrial development that is in harmony with the
egg and rural character of Klay County and to avoid or mitigate against commercial industrial development that increases the potential for land use conflicts with rural residential egg or egg uses. Um just noting that the closest residence is about a/4 mile north of the proposed plat and there's
also a residence uh point4 miles west of this proposed plat as well. Any questions for me at all? >> Want to be clear, Matt. There's nothing on this property at all right now. >> Correct. >> Nothing. It's the middle of the >> farmland.
>> Yeah. And so this piece was picked in this location, you know, for any reason specific. >> Run over to it here quick.
So the original request from to the to the town board and that would have gone to the county was for that re platin resoning for specifically for a concrete plant. >> Okay. Yeah. >> And and one of the reasons I'm asking
this question, and I don't know if the the bigger piece that's on is owned by one same owner or not, but if 75 some issue, you know, why wouldn't it be on some location that would exit on the
90th or something in a safer place? >> Just asking just to the >> But that's not what's being asked. Yeah. Anyone else have anything for Matt? >> Okay. Would the applicant care to come up and speak
your project? Introduce you know the drill. John Lowry with Lowry Engineering and I'm here on behalf of Steve Alpro and the land owner and uh I think Matt laid out everything really well. One one item
that I would stress is you know um Steve is interested in and his wife are interested in creating a 10acre parcel that they can market for sale as an agricultural use as permitted uh through the county ordinance. that that's the only request that we're here to discuss
and and uh asking approval on tonight. Um you know, there may or may not be additional requests coming in the future, but uh at this point, he's looking for a 10acre marketable piece of property, which I believe he's allowed to do uh by right through the code. So,
um that that's uh what the request is. So, if there's any questions of us, uh feel free here to help and answer in any way I can. I guess I'll ask my question. Yeah. >> Why why this particular spot uh in that
piece of land when we're talking about potential >> y >> uh danger on on 75 when maybe I'm not saying you can or can't you know be exited off on 90th. Well, I think the
same danger the perceived danger I I don't know that there is, but I think the same perceived danger would be the same if it was to the south onto a township road and then onto 75. You know, you're going to have the same traffic, the same it'll be stop controlled from the east. And this
location is where in, you know, in the future at some point, this is where an access will go uh for MDOT. This is where they prefer. >> That's where they want >> when this land if when this land develops, this is where an access will be located. Okay.
>> We we've been in contact with Mandot and that driveway location is uh preferred by them. >> That makes sense to me. >> And if a turn lane or something is required at any point in time, you know, that that'll be identified and built out for safety concerns. They haven't
expressed that with the level of traffic that could be anticipated here. So, for one site. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> So what you're what you're saying is that right now even though you know we we see that there's talk
about you know potential concrete plant that right at tonight >> Yep. >> all you're talking about is splitting off 10 acres for a potential >> sale >> agricultural Yep. Yeah. And with the egg zoning and
any uses that are permitted underneath egg zoning, there's no reszone request or anything else. It's just creating a 10acre parcel that they can they can hold for sale with agricultural uses. Yep. That's correct. >> And then that would allow, you know, a
fertilizer plant or something based an egg based business to go in there if we would allow this. >> Yeah, Mr. Mr. Chair, I think there's a a little bit of difference between um egg uses and uses allowed in the agricultural general zoning district
because there are some uses that are not egg such as a batch plant, concrete plant, asphalt batch plant, um gravel pit, um those types of things. We do permit those as um the typically either
interim uses or conditional uses in the egg general zoning district. So it would still whatever use would be proposed would still have to go through the permitting public hearing process, the permitting process. Um you would have to
as a planning commission um or the applicant would have to actually demonstrate um that they can satisfy the review standards that we had just gone through in our the past two public hearings. um
and that you would make findings for that. Essentially, regardless of the plat, the an applicant could come forward and propose a concrete plant on the entire 66 acre
parcel if they so choose because it's allowed in our code in this zoning district. provided that it meets all the setbacks and that it um satisfies our general review standards and criteria
for interim use permits. >> You just taken >> I just want to make sure I understand this clearly. We're just here to decide on the plat tonight. >> Correct. And it's a it's the applicant's risk or their idea what they can do with it
afterwards. That'll come back in some fashion if it's approved or not approved. But we're just focusing on the plan tonight. >> Correct. >> Right. Kind of getting off in the weeds on a lot of things there. >> Just want to make it really clear in my
mind. So, we're saying even though I may believe that the very best use of this land is it farmland and we're going to burn up some good farmland for another use and
that's okay. That that we can't stop that. >> I'm no I'm not saying that because we do have a comprehensive plan in place. We have goals and objectives in the comprehensive plan to protect prime farmland. If you as a planning
commission in the future make a finding that this is not an appropriate use here because of uh it conflicts with our comprehensive plan goals and objectives. That is a perfectly reasonable >> but that wouldn't be a decision made tonight. >> No, that would be another time.
>> Yes. >> Yep. That would be at another if whatever development or proposal comes forward in the in the future. >> Okay. >> We everything's cool tonight exactly what they're doing and the the fact that
it is prime farmland uh is just part of the deal. It goes with this other uses available to that land. >> Correct. Yep. >> Thank you. All right. And I would also add that a lot of the um well just with
the batch plants in general, they're not conditional use permits. So they're not land rights, they're interim use permits. Every essentially every single batch plant that's been permitted as an interim use in Klay County has an expiration date on it as a condition.
Typically, it's been we've seen some that are one year, we've seen some that are five years, we've seen some that are 10 years. Okay. um that's part of the interim use process and that's similar for now if you wanted to do like a egg service establishment so more
commercially oriented to agriculture which would be allowed um that would be a conditional use permit so that would be a land right so no no expiration on on those >> Yep. >> Thank you for that.
>> Yep. >> Okay. Thank >> hearing nobody else. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against >> Ron Null? >> Pardon? >> Ron Null.
>> Okay. Please come to the mic and state your name and um please come to the you wish to speak. That's what you have to do. Uh, I have no questions or comments at this time other than to express my
concern for the batch plant that we know is coming u down the road. So, thank you. >> Okay. Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak for or against
>> Dale Schfelt? If so, please come to the mic, introduce yourself. >> Chauffel, 921614 Street South Morehead. I'm like a half mile away from where this is going to happen. And there's going to be a lot more traffic coming down these roads. I live on 90th Avenue
which is a gravel narrow road and it's actually comes from the downer road and we're just afraid we're going to get a lot more traffic on that narrow gravel road people coming here and then the dust and the noise all the construction equipment beeping all the time and then
the all the water use that they're going to be doing. This just kind of concerns us. We're against it. Schaveltzar. >> You. >> Anyone else in the audience wish to speak for or against?
>> Paul Bannerman. >> My name is Paul Bannerman. Uh we reside at 8462 Highway 75 South. We the closest property owner. Uh our families lived there for 80 years. Currently still live there. We're a lot of safe concerns the chfields have the water usage. Um we're
concerned with water wells running dry. There's no definite source around how long it's going to last. Increased traffic noise dust and noise pollution lights from everything, you know, yard lights and such going on around us. The
um increased the noise from beeping the trucks in constant use from that. And as previous stated, the eventual we see they're eventually going to try and put a batch plant. They've been trying to do one for a couple years for either asphalt plant and or a concrete plant.
They've been trying for years to do it and we're extremely opposed to this. >> You >> Jeff Jelene. >> Um it would be terrible to live next to that. Am I supposed to say my address? >> Just just your name, please. >> Oh, uh Jeff Julen. It would be horrible
to live next to a batch plant, but I actually have a small concrete company and like 5 years ago, I couldn't even get concrete because I'm a small company and the other batch plants were really busy. I think they were doing like the diversion project. So, it wouldn't hurt
the community to have another batch plant available for smaller concrete companies such as myself to Thank you, >> chair. There are three people online. >> Is there anyone online that wishes to
speak for or against? If so, please state your name and speak your peace. Anyone online that wishes to speak for or against? Is there anyone in line or anybody else in the audience that wish to speak for
or against? I can't hear nobody responding. I see nobody else in the audience. Um look for a motion to hearing nothing else. And if anybody
else has questions for Matt, I look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So move by Brad. >> Second. >> Seconded by Sebastian. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Public
hearing is closed. Thank you. So, Mr. Chair, just with all all of our platted subdivisions, kind of three options for you. Um, one would be to authorize or recommend approval and the
authorization of the final plat. Once that's completed, you would have the opportunity to review that again before it comes to the county board. Um, you could just authorize the uh preparation of the final plant and wave that right to review and recommend to the county
board or recommend denial of the plat to the board. And I appreciate everybody speaking. their peace over this. But tonight, our main and really only task for this board
is to advise the county commission whether we approve taking this 10acre parcel out of this parcel. That is our one and only
ask and Mr. was careful get too much in the weeds. Um, I do wonder I do appreciate people coming to board ahead of time to express their concern over something that
may or may not be in the works. Far better to get in early than late. That being said, um we only have three options and
I guess I don't look for a motion to recommend to the county commissioners for approval or a denial of this flat. Mr. >> Second approves the uh
uh request for the plat and is it to wave the right? Is that the most streamlined way to move forward on this? >> Yeah. Um Mr. Chair and Mr. Stiken, I think if you're looking for a motion to
recommend um I guess recommend it be a motion to um recommend authorization of the preparation of the final plat and then wave the right planning commission right to review to the county board.
>> That's the direction I would like to go. >> Second. >> Seconded by Mr. Schroer. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. I.
>> Opposed. Motion is carried. Platt request is moved on to the county commission. >> And Mr. Chair, just for your awareness then for the folks who um did attend this meeting tonight, um the earliest
that the county board could hear uh that plat request um would have to confir confirm with the the developer as well would be uh November 18th just with um um public meeting public
hearing notice uh Minnesota open meeting law. Uh and then also with um the Tuesday, November 11th being Veterans Day, there is not a board meeting um on that date. So in order to comply with the notice public notice requirements uh
and then also the the holiday um the 18th would be the the earliest, but that I'd need to to discuss with further with the developer on getting that final plat. >> And there is also an end date or must must be by date, correct? or is that
just on the next hearing >> for the for the plat? >> Yes. >> Yeah. It's typically 120 days. So, thanks everyone. Moving on to our
final planned hearing of the evening is Scott Manthy request for a platted subdivision. The applicant is seeking to plat a 12 lot, oneb block subdivision on parcel ID13.0093000 0093000
in part of the southwest quarter of section 9 township 139 north range 45W Ali Township. Look for a motion to open the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Motion by Kurt. >> Second.
>> Seconded by Brad. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Take it away, Matt. >> Yep. This is a request for a platted subdivision. Um the location uh this is west and south of Holly uh
south of Highway 10 on the east side or west side, sorry, of Mariah Lake and um east side of 200 Street. I got my east and west mixed up there, so I apologize for that. Uh the base uh the zoning, the base district is egg general. uh the
overlay district there are is general flood plane uh and then some shoreland uh special protection as well. So the request would be for a u preliminary plat for a oneb block 12 lot residential subdivision. Uh the plat
name would be the oaks on Marai Lake subdivision. This is a 67 uh acre parcel. Current land use is is agricultural. There aren't any structures on the property. Uh very wide range of quap crop uh equivalency
ratings here from ranging from 24 to 67. Um not a whole lot of prime farmland um on this property. And then three kind of major wetland complexes as well. You can see those here. Um, we'll just say that the developer
did work um with the clay uh SWCD and the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources on a wetland delineation to avoid impacts to the wetland. So, they had their um it's a pretty intensive process with site visits and then having
a um technical evaluation panel meeting. Um and they did provide a notice that they were um in concurrence with um the where these wetlands are located on the property.
So improvement plans for this would be uh 11 residential lots ranging from a little over two and a half acres to 8 and a half acres. The average size being 4.16 acres. There would be one large 15 and a half acre outlot here.
Um and then one um a 70ft rightway with a 24 foot wide internal road. um storm water management involving kind of the wetlands and then a storm water pond as well and then restrictive covenants um private sewer. Um the lots appear to
have ample space for two uh drain fields and then private wells as well. Um the nearby well depths um they range from about 55 to 88 feet and pump tests about 15 to 40 gallons per minute. So our um
minimum standard is typically five. So they seem to exceed that. Here's just a closer look at that plat for you and where the road goes. Um road design really is to um avoid wetlands and then also the um general
flood plane zoning as well. Um which kind of encompasses the the shoreline here and then this larger wetland as well. Township action on this. Um they did approve this preliminary plan at their September 25th planning commission in
October 7th uh meeting. They also did a grant variances. Um we recently updated our our land development ordinance to reduce the um ordinary high water level structure setback uh from 200 feet to
150 to match state standards. Um Holly Township is in the process of doing that. Um they haven't quite done that yet. So they did grant um uh variances to match that count on the riparian lots on the lake lots to match that 150 foot
minimum setback. Um they are also in the in um the process of of getting the road agreement finalized as well. Uh a couple additional comments. Um no public comments have been received. Did not receive any comments from the DNR.
Uh this is something that we will have to send to as a shoreland um to to the final plat to the DNR as well. Just some minor updates to um the signature page and then we require a title opinion as well. Um should just also note that um
just the name of the road would have to be changed to match Klay County um road naming standards. Uh, I talked to our um addressing um specialist, our GIS and communications director. He said it
likely would be like a seventh avenue to fit into the kind of the naming the street conventions, naming conventions and addressing uh the comprehensive plan. uh how this relates to comprehensive plan. Uh we have a land land use residential goal to
provide opportunities for qual quality rural residential development in Klay County. Um this would typically fit fit with this just providing highquality lowdensity rural residential opportunities um just with larger sized lots as well.
Um, we do have also to encourage the development of egg and conservation subdivisions that cluster residential development on small lots and provide for shared open spaces. Um, this isn't formally a conservation subdivision, but they do have a large outlot. Um, that
would contain probably the most prominent natural feature on the site, which would be that wetland. Um, and then preserve open space. And the the design is really to um of the
subdivision, I think, is to minimize any or avoid impacts to wetlands and then to stay out of that uh general flood plane zoning as well. We have a goal to permit large non-farm residential development if a portion of the property is preserved or converted
to a use that retains rural character of the land. So these again are large lots um with a with a large outlot as well. Um there's no change to the agricultural zoning, agricultural general zoning. We have a goal to or an objective to
avoid or mitigate residential development on or near environmentally sensitive lands or lands with high quality natural resources. And just want to point out here that the applicant did coordinate um to delineate with Clay SWCCD and um Bowser, the board of water and soil resources to delineate and
avoid wetlands. Um, no structures are proposed would be proposed could be proposed within floodplane areas. Uh, development setbacks meet or exceed the county standards. Um, there's a lot of goals and objectives for this one, so bear with me here. Uh,
we have a a goal to protect and enhance remnant tracks of native prairie and forest for the benefit of enjoyment of Klay County residents and visitors. There are some remnant woodlands. Um, they'd have to be retained. Um there's covenants requiring mature tree trees um
be preserved. Uh and then just large lot configuration provides flexibility for homeowners to site dwellings with minimal disturbance to existing vegetation. Uh then we have a goal or an objective under this goal to protect native and high quality prairie and woodland tracks from residential
commercial industrial development. We'll note that this property does have a history of egg production. Um, no natural heritage data for the property indicates the presence of native prairie or sensitive species. So, it was farmed. Uh, good portions of it were farmed back
in the 30s. And actually, I should have um brought the the aerial photo, but the 1939 aerial photo shows that they were actually farming in the Mariah Lake in the bed bed of the lake at the time.
So, which was common in the late 1930s. Um, a lot of lakes in Klay County, they're shallow. Um, a lot of them were farmed. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Potatoes, I think. A lot. Yeah.
We have a shoreland and storm water goal uh category to protect and enhance the health and vitality of Klay County surface waters, including lakes, rivers, and streams for the benefit, enjoyment of Klay County residents and visitors. a subdivision does meet all the shoreland
uh standards. Um they do have a storm water plan in place. Um we have a goal to reduce development pressure on natural environment lakes in Klay County of which Mariah Lake is. Um this would be considered low density development. A
lot of the minimum lot sizes and lot widths are um exceeded um in in this proposed plat. Then we have a goal to maintain and
enhance riparian areas of public waters um especially within shore impact zones. So in our 150 ft setback um from the ordinary high water level or from the shore uh the shore impact zone would be half of that. So 75 ft essentially from
the water. Um and so we have regulations in place uh to manage those areas and to protect um uh the the public water. And then an objective to continue to enforce shoreland regulations on Klay County Lakes, rivers, and streams.
Again, this um proposal complies with all of our um lot dimensional standards. Um so it's consistent with our our shoreland regulations. Any
questions for me at all? >> Yeah, I I appreciate the them Scott coming through ahead of time going to Bowser and visiting with Tony and going over the whack of things. That's that's positive
step. I guess a general question for me is so what it's an environmental lake. what uses are allowed on the lake specifically >> a natural environment or state um
shoreland rules basically of classify lakes um there's natural environment um there's general development there's recreational development a lot of it is dependent on um the amount of shoreline
the size of the lake the depth um the development velment at the time. Um, existing development at the time and all goes into the determination. Um, and from there really
that informs what the minimum lot sizes would be, what the um, minimum setbacks would be in the state shoreland rules is based on that that lake classification. So, for example, uh, Turtle Lake is a recreational development lake. Um the
setbacks for Turtle Lake are um smaller than or shorter. Yep. And the lot sizes too. >> So I guess can and does this prohibit somebody at 6:00 on the morning of July 4th go out
there with their jet ski and tear around 80 miles an hour? >> I would not recommend taking a jet ski on this lake because you're going to ruin it. Um >> well I mean are there legal >> no >> restrictions no >> that kind of
>> no but really this lake I mean the depth max depth is probably 10 ft. Um you'd maybe get a small pontoon on it. Um it's pretty it's a it'd be a nice lake for duck
hunting. >> Yep. >> Until the house is gone. Unless the houses are duck hunt or the homeowners are duck hunters, then it's Yeah. So, um but it's also an impaired lake
too for I want to say um aquatic recreation just to because of um phosphorus. Um so, it's probably not a lake that you want to swim in either as well or limit your swimming. >> Yeah. Um
Matt does I'm just word has here about provide a fully executed township road resolution is that is there what does specifically that mean? >> Uh in this case >> it varies from township to township but
in this case they would be the township uh we don't allow public or private roads in Klay County. So they have to be public. So, they'd have to be taken on by the township and um some townships just have a resolution that they pass
that say, "Yep, we'll take over the road. We will maintain it." Meaning, but that ultimately means that they hire the county to maintain it. >> Um, >> go ahead. >> Yep. I know in Holly Township with a lot of their subdivisions, they um have pretty detailed requirements for their road agreements.
>> Okay. >> Um that kind of go more into the actual specs and design of the road itself. Yep. >> And then with that to township then the requirement of the name change is would be by the county.
>> That'd be by the county. Yep. Mhm. >> Thank you. >> But the the board would not be able to consider this request until that agreement is um the county board until that agreement is is executed. >> Mr. >> Mr. Chair and Matt, um on the one slide
you mentioned there's enough room for two drain fields. Does that mean it's a shared uh septic? >> Well, that would be just a requirement um just in our in the state um state
rules just that there's an ample space in case you have a drain field that fails um that there would be a spot for a backup drain field. >> Mean for each lot. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yep. And then uh if the applicant speaks, I had a comment
for him, but I guess that was my question of you. Anyone else? Thank you, Matt. Would the applicant care to come up, state your name, and speak to your proposal?
My name is Scott Manthy. uh looking at doing this development for my kids. Uh my family's here and uh they're looking to move back to the Holly area. Uh some of them are two of the oldest two are married and my daughter's not married yet, but they have a desire to be back
in the Holly school district if they have kids and things like that. And so I don't know if you guys are familiar with the Holly area, but it's very tough to find property that's existing to to build on or to to buy. houses are expensive more more expensive than in
Morehead for instance and uh so it's a very tight market. So when this property came up uh again I looked at it a second time. I'd looked at buying this piece of property as a uh when it was foreclosed on by the previous owner Paul Johnson
and uh I was recommended not to buy it at that time because of some outstanding leans and things. Those have been cleaned up when it was um inherited by his brothers Gary and Daryl. And uh they decided to put the property up on a
piper auction. And at that time I I considered it and visited with both u ever from the township and Matt from the county prior to purchasing the property. Laid out a potential uh development plan that had 14 residential lots. after
working with Jacob uh Ducher who's on online from more engineering uh in order to fit both the old the existing township uh rules and the current county rules. With the township rules not being
updated yet, we ended up having to reduce the number of lots that would be uh buildable lots to 11 lots. And uh and then also uh I mean that this is u there's a lot of
work that went into designing these lots so they be uh good good places to build and the township was able to grant us the 150 foot setback like Matt mentioned on two of the lots two of the five lakefront lots. So going from the bottom
along the lake it's 1 2 3 four and five. So on two and three those variances were granted and uh so we were able to uh redraw the plan as it is today and um I just got done working with uh the
folks at more engineering to design the road plan. Uh, and that was we didn't have a plan at the township yet because we weren't sure how they were going to approve it and what where all where it was all going to go and also where the wetlands got settled on. Uh, that
happened fairly recently. So once we got all that information down pat, then we finished the road design on Friday and I'll be going back to the township to make an agreement on that current road design. I wanted to firm up the firm up what I what my expectations of building
the road were and make sure that met their expectations before signing the road agreement with them. And uh so my kids are all looking forward to potentially having a spot to build out there someday. And really the intent would be if you look on the bottom of
the the map, lot one goes with lot 11 across. So my oldest boy would be on the lakefront and have a back back lot adjoining, not adjoining, but kind of in the same line. My middle son Blake would have that one and the third middle one
across. My daughter would have that lot and the one across from there. And so the the outlot in the middle would be owned by us. Um either my wife and I until the kids get the lots and then it would be jointly owned by the kids after that. So it' be connected to all their
lots. And then the six six lots, excuse me, five lots, excuse me, up on the north side would be sold to uh help pay for the de development costs. So that's kind of my intent.
You have any questions for me at all? I uh just had a comment. Um, looks like you've taken care of things that need to be taken care of uh from different agencies. I can't imagine trying to design
something and comply with everything that needs to be complied with. Looks like your team has done a great job. So, uh, looks like it's quite looks like it's doable. I mean, I I don't know why
uh it wouldn't be. I guess as long Matt everything is taken care of as I as we understand right as it's designed right now >> for the design. Yeah. >> Right. For the design. So I >> think you did a good job to make it all happen. >> I think the one thing Mr. Chair and Mr. Sych that we'll just want to work
closely with the township and um um the the surveyor is just making sure that the road stays out of that um the wetlands and then that general flood plane as well. if they had >> going into the general flood plane
triggers a whole um series of um analyses that would need to happen um in terms of uh demonstrating um essentially no impacts or no rise um to neighboring properties.
>> If they had a concern, would that would they be coming back to us with a different plat design? No, I think this is probably the the best one that on paper looks like it avoids that. Just making sure that that happens in in reality. >> Mr. Chairman and Matt,
uh, so I did have the wetlands delineated. So there's pink flags along that wetlands there and there'll be as part of the storm water plan, there'll be silt fence installed in there prior to moving any dirt along that corridor there. and we'll be staying out of that.
>> And I and then you know you said that you have have a you know kind of an agreement set and that you're you will be you're kind of under the gun. You've got 120 days to get things if we approve to send this to the county
commission. You have you're kind of limited on your your road plan. >> Yeah. So >> to get it to the county commissioners. So, so I submitted the the potential plan to Matt and Ever at the township on Friday, and so I've got the the road
plan drawn up, but we just haven't uh agreed on it and and got the road agreement signed yet. >> You're potentially just a township meeting away. >> Yep. Y >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks, Mr. Grabinoff. Did you have >> Well, mine was sort of a cute comment,
but I'll make a compliment first. Um, you know, I appreciate much like Dave was doing, uh, the amount of work you put into this. We've had other developments over time that, um, have met challenges before, too, similar with
wetlands and all that. And I know it's uh, not easy to do and you're being as efficient as possible and sensitive to the areas that we need to be. The my comment is that um I sell real estate and and when I sell a house, the kids
get their own bedroom in it. Figure it out. >> Yeah. Uhhuh. No comment on that. You already know the drill. >> Okay, >> Mr. Chair and Matt, this is being this is brought up. Does the to makes make it
clear the 120 days, is that for them to receive an answer? or is that for them to respond with some request? >> No, that's just um essentially for the final plat. So, no,
they would >> But are we under the 120 or they under 120? >> They are. They are in the county. >> I just want to make sure. >> Yeah. Nope. It's never been I'll just say in my time that's never been an issue. >> Okay.
Thank you, Scott. Anybody else in the Anyone else have questions for Mr. Manthy? Anybody else in the audience wish to speak for or against or online? Anyone in the audience? Okay, please come to the board and well,
you know the drill. State your name again. >> My name is Jeff Julen. I'm the neighbor to the south. Um, not 100% sure getting the road through the Ismiths or whatever I'm saying is a great thing. Uh, I guess if you guys are okay with it, that's how
that goes. And my opinion would be it's his land. He's trying to do the right stuff. I guess I'm okay with that. >> That's it. >> Thank you. I guess my only concern is,
you know, some of these rural areas with roads not being is snow and hopefully that's not an issue. So, thank you for your comment. Okay, start all over again. Anybody else in the audience or online that wishes to speak for or
against? Anyone in the audience or online wish to speak for or against? Anyone in the audience or online wish to speak for or against? Hearing nothing. Look for a motion to close the public hearing.
>> So move. Second. >> Motion by Kurt, seconded by Brad. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. >> Public hearing is closed. Um,
thank you for all the leg work you did before you came here. I appreciate that. So, this is going to be duplicate of the last hearing. So, we have we have three options. Mr. I have a
question. I didn't catch what the last speaker was referencing. Matt, could you explain? >> Concerned about the road. >> Can you draw on the map? >> Yeah. >> Just the placement of the road here. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. So it's, you know, like I said, it's the identical to the last one. We have three choices. We can recommend um,
you know, approval to the to the planning commission. We can recommend the planning commission approve this and we wave our right to review it again or we can recommend denial of the plat to the county board. Mr.
Stiken >> Stiken will recommend the authorization of the final plat wave the right to review and recommend to the county board >> for approval >> of approval. Yeah, >> thank you.
>> I'll second a second a motion by Dave to approve with option two. Second by Josh. Any further discussion or questions hearing? None. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed.
Motion is carried. That moves on to the county commission. Thank you everyone. >> Mr. Matt, unfinished business. >> Uh, no unfinished business, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. How about new business?
>> Uh, new business. Just want to say that on um October 7th, um your recommendation for that text amendment um denial did go to the county board. Uh and the county board did um uh
ultimately approve that that text amendment. So just for your your own awareness on that, um we'll see if anything comes to that um uh in the future. And then something else to to put on, uh, does anyone have any
questions on that at all? >> I'll just add, Matt, um, how many parcels by the decision we made on the on the egg center or, you know, on the cannabis, how many um, just so they're aware, how many other opportunities that
creates inlay county? >> Yeah. And it's um would create I mean it's roughly 20 parcels so 8% of the total parcels and I think that was one of your basis for for denial just a lot of those being green field development.
Um um but yeah so about yeah 8% of the the lots would meet that they would need a building and things like that. So um without a variance, yeah, and someone can always request a variance and that may or may not be
granted, but um any other questions for me at all. >> I'll uh please come up to I can't hear you. So >> just one question. Uh when would be the
next board meeting then? It'd be the same that November 18th. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Stiken. >> Mr. Chair, >> Mr. Chair and Matt, uh, not that we need to know everything about one time we got an update on the
diversion. Are we entitled to have someone come to us and just people ask me about it and I do listen to the commissioner's meetings and try to follow what's going on in city hall chambers for that. But it's hard to
piece it all together sometimes. But we did have a presentation a year or two ago and I thought it was pretty neat and we could ask questions and they were willing to answer. And is that a possibility? >> Yeah, absolutely. I can look I can check with I think in January we had that
presentation from Eric Dods with the A2S um can check with him and then I could also check with um uh Chris Bakagard uh to see if someone from the diversion authority would be willing and able to u provide just an update on that especially now as the construction phase
of that is moving into to Klay County with the construction of the southern embankment. Um also be maybe a good time um at a less busy planning commission meeting to um look at that potential um
dam safety and the zoning um just restricting the that development around on the um the dry side of the dam just in case of a dam failure. That's that was a recommendation from the DNR too. So um that can be something that we could we could visit here um before the
end of the year for sure. So, I will look into into that. That's a great great suggestion. Do >> do you have guidelines on that already on the that dam on the >> Yeah, we do essentially have some guidelines on um basically the setback
distance from the dam. Yep. >> Yeah, >> we've had a few hearings where buildings are >> different projects that we dealt with that, but yeah, we need to do some >> need some more input on that. >> Sure. Yep. Um and then any other
projects too that you would like to hear about? I know there's the um there's been a lot of public or a lot of open houses on um the Maple River um Cailluna transmission line project um
that might be potentially coming through Klay County. And so I don't know if anyone's had a chance. I' I've attended one of the open houses and it was very informative. Um, and I know I think that once the um
the the routing is is more firmed up, um, potentially might be looking at at they might be coming to the county board could potentially see if they could give a a presentation that project to our planning commission as well.
>> Thank you. Any other? >> Yes. One more thing. Um, looks like Laura, you are you are up for uh reappointment. Um, just realized that today. So, if that's something that
you're interested in continuing, this would be your third term, I believe. Yes. So, if that that's something you're interested in, you don't have to answer now, but if you're if you're willing to give it a another three years, um would
look for a for a motion to recommend re reappoint. Okay, we say yes. Well, we appreciate it. >> You need a motion. >> Okay. You making a motion, Paul?
>> No, I'll let someone else. >> I'll motion that Laura is appointed for another term. >> Okay. Motion by Josh. >> Second. seconded by Sebastian that we ask the county commissioners to reappoint Laura to her third and sadly
then final um term as a planning and zoning commissioner. Any discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I posted motion is carried. Thank you. Carry the ball water Paul.
Okay, hearing nothing else. Look for a motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Motion by Laura, seconded by Brad. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion is carried. Hearing is
closed. Thanks everyone.