One. Is it one o'clock? >> One o'clock. We'll bring the meeting to order and we'll say the pledge of allegiance. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. First thing is uh the approval of the agenda. Does anyone want to make a motion for that? >> I'll move. >> Second. >> Motion made by Lynn, seconded by Ed.
Agenda is approved. Next is the approval of the minutes from the last meeting. >> Move to approve. >> Second. Moved by Ed. Seconded by Amy. Amy. Thank you.
All in favor? >> I I >> I. >> All right. We have our first petition, docket number BOA 12182501 to consider the petition of Todd and Sheila Wayiller and Mike and Marilyn
Kenhammer. The petitioners who seek a variance regarding the following to allow a new dwelling established on a class two soil type instead of the required class 4 through class 8 soil types pursuant to chapter 10.4.7-6 4.7-6
of the Winona County Zoning Ordinance and additionally seeking relief from the requirements of the Winona County zoning ordinance chapter 11.37 number six pertaining to the square structure setback standard from the
ordinary high water level as depicted in table 11.8 8 in order to allow a 65 ft setback from the OWWL instead of the required 100 ft for a pre-existing structure and there is a new amended binding
effect on there. Eric, >> good afternoon board of adjustment. Know that was a a lengthy introduction there by your chair. Um, but I think as a matter of procedure, it's important to note that there is two variance
requests. If for some reason the the dialogue or the discussion went one way or another, there could potentially be two separate motions and actions because of the nature that there is two um separate variance requests
that are associated with this. Maybe a point of order. You have front of you a very recent communication that we received from the Minnesota DNR as a result of a site visit that had just uh transpired in the last couple days. So,
we appreciate uh the comments from the DNR to um respond and you know, I guess if you needed time to digest that, please feel free, you know, to to take additional time to uh review that.
Um, as mentioned in the intro, this is a variance to request because of maybe to back up a little bit and give some history or background. Uh, this involves a structure that was built in 2021 as an agricultural structure. It had come to
the planning staff's attention that the owners wanted to enhance that use that they had for that structure and create an apartment for a family member who would be providing uh caretaking duties on that on that um property that they
have. in evaluating that. Um there the ordinance uh takes a different approach when there's a dwelling involved and that's how the prime soils category um was evaluated with this and it also came to our attention that the structure
was closer than the required 100 ft setback as indicated on the original permit. So that was a shortcoming that had to be addressed with their plans to move this forward. Um so that's the two variances is to allow a dwelling so-called unit on prime
soils and to recognize the existing setback that the structure is from the ordinary high water. Okay. Uh it's in section 36 of New Hartford Township, pretty close to the county
line in the very southeast part of the county. Um this particular parcel number is referencing 52 acres. However, there's multiple I believe at least two parcels and the total acreage is 180 um
acres that's associated with this um Lanes Valley Creek delineated. It's part of the um public waters inventory that the DNR has. Um I believe it's not a designated trout stream. It's a pretty low flow stream. Um, and it essentially
shows a 300, this map is depicting that it's a 300 ft buffer on each side of that stream would constitute shoreland overlay um, regulations that apply. Um you can see the existing structure
that was built and within that the applicants wish to um uh enhance that by adding a 24 by 32 um dwelling unit with that structure. Next exhibit is showing the soil
classification types and and in this case the class 2 soil encompasses uh where the where that structure was uh constructed. Uh the applicants had done a survey uh
as this this proposed plan came forward. They hired I believe a try Christ. I have to I guess that's Well, there is an exhibit in your in your packet there too. I believe it's tri-state surveying out of Calonia
and elevation survey and showing what the distances were. Just want to comment that they're showing um setbacks from the corners 85 ft, 70 ft, and 85. But I believe the surveyor was indicating that those were distances essentially to the
center of the stream. So when we look at the Minnesota shoreland, it's from the ordinary uh water level. Um and measuring it on GIS, it it appeared the closest point. There's an elbow of that stream and that we have to go by the
closest point and that's where we arrived at the 65 ft. uh that would be the minimum um distance from the existing structure. Uh this is showing again the shoreland with lidar elevation. The purple lines
are representing essentially a twoft change in elevation. And you can see where the structure is. There's a a rather steep embankment that you will see that um sits above
Lane Valley Creek. In fact, um you know, flood plane was um one of the usually the paramount concerns and you'll get we'll see some exhibits there how that does. I just want to comment that the site is 18 to 20 feet above the the
floor of the stream. So it's s it's relatively high and class two soils and the set back 65 instead of 100. These are the flood plane exhibits and we're trying to depict what the new
flood plane data is and I believe at that point um where the structure is the base flood is about 722 I think that's >> where is the base flood on that on that diagram
I I failed to find >> they use the liar again that map of the purple lines but when they model the flood plane We try to shade or these are the crosssections and what those individual base floods would be a particular part
of that landscape and um they shaded out to represent this what the 100 year or the base flood would look like. So that extrapolated onto an aerial. This is what you would
we would see the structures outside of the flood plane. >> So they're >> based on elevation. >> So they're okay. They're saying it's okay, right? Okay. Because on the other one it looks like oh >> their entire house is covered. >> Yeah. You know that's >> Yeah.
>> Well, we do still look at the effective map. That's the 1984. And there is a lot of problems with the 1984 map because that was before GIS and LAR and elevation data. It was extrapolated onto um I believe quad maps
and so there's a lot of errors a lot of old data on the old flood plane maps. >> What do those n they're all 700s but 700 based on is that feet? Is it above sea level? >> Yeah, that' be based on sea level.
um basically a datim set that would set the whatever the base is and you know like the Mississippi River it's usually so many feet above you know sea level um but this would you'd have to go back to the flood study to you actually uh dig
into that a little bit >> and so is this showing what whatever high water in history >> correct it's accounting for um dynamics like feeder tribute Utaries elevation. So obviously a flood plane measurement
or a flood plane elevation is going to change on the landscape as it's extrapolated through a valley, something to that nature. Uh some photos from our site visit just recently this week. Uh the first one on
the left showing the uh entrance would like to say that you know they have an existing driveway. They worked with New Hartford Township to put in that new access. Uh the applicants will site some of the things that they've been involved with. Uh there was a new address
assignment. Um if this goes forward, they will need to I believe their intent is to put a septic system and put a new well in to serve that serve that property. Um the picture on the right is the building as you approach it coming
in off of the driveway. This would be the um side of the building facing the south. And this would indicate where um this would be the um portion or that corner where the
um that that entryway is where the uh intended living quarters would be >> in that little spot that >> Well, you enter through there, but it would be interior. Yeah, it' be interior. Sounds like the the floor and
it's it's um rough finish. It hasn't been finished. There's no I mean it's a gravel base now at this point for cold storage. Uh this is looking along the stream side of the building
and the picture on the right is showing the nature of Lanes Valley or Lane Valley Creek. Um the applicants will point out that this was all kept natural. There was no fill. That was I think one of the main
concerns of the DNR when we visited. And so this was not been altered other than the trees have been cleaned up. Uh this is the portion of which rip wrap had been left to armor it as you get closer to the township road.
Uh, a couple more shots just showing the nature of the township road. Um, that's looking south along Lanes Valley Road on the left and the picture on the right is showing the north profile of the township.
If you're not aware, um, going north will take you up to County Road One eventually. Um and you know either go back towards Nine or go towards Lac Crescent. Uh the township um was contacted and they had a meeting
on November 13th um reviewed the plans with the applicant and they indicated that they had no comments to the proposal. Additional considerations. Uh this is part one of the applicants
um meetings. Um tonight, if this is granted, uh this will go forward to the planning commission for tonight uh essentially to allow a new dwelling um conversion of an existing dwelling in the shoreland district. As I mentioned,
since their plans now involve enhanced use as a dwelling unit, there were several chapters or sections of the ordinance now that come into apply that they have to um satisfactory address and that would be
>> so with the shoreline overlay district, did they not need that when they put up >> the farm structure? they would they did not need that part of it. >> So what what makes it apply to that is that >> a dwelling so it's it's the definition
of a dwelling use that puts it into a conditional use permit category. It puts it in a very >> in terms of the shoreland overlay district. What is it about the uh the rules and regulations in terms of like using it for agricultural versus
somebody living there in terms of the structure of being >> well that ordinance goes back to 19 at least since the late 1980s and it may even go back even before that in the 70s but as far as I I can um um
safely say that to build a new house in shoreland whether it was a farm dwelling or a non-farmed dwelling of any kind that action uh would require a conditional use permit to do that. >> So the so if it was agricultural it wouldn't necessarily need a variance but
it would need a cup. >> Yes. >> Because it's in that district. Okay. Okay. >> That's be one way to phrase it too. That'd be accurate. Um again um in the staff report
and the findings of fact that staff has um we generally support the request with conditions. Um the comments that I see that you've received from the Minnesota DNR are re uh iterating the findings of
fact and that would be up to the board's discussion to concur or to have you know a difference of that but um that is it seems to be the primary comment that the DNR has forwarded since there was a
shoreland component involved with this one. So in terms of the the existing structure, if they say since they already have to get a variance for the soils, if they say they
just decided to build the structure starting inside the building and then move it the end of it outside the building to get that 100 ft set back, would that work or do they still need it because you found out that this already
existing structure does not meet the code. >> I think the existing structure due to the deficient setback that that's an action that we would have had to have cross that yeah we would have had cross that action but if they didn't want to convert it to a dwelling >> um you know that the other parts of this
would be off the table it would be be part of the discussion. Eric, I saw something in the materials that at the time of the original construction um it might have been
US Department of Agriculture encouraged the applicant to move the building close further to the east toward the creek and then in an effort to minimize the
intrusion on the high quality soil s they removed some trees but didn't disrupt the bank and in the classic no good deed goes unpunished category they now find
themselves closer to the creek. >> Yes. And I think the applicants would be in the best position to speak to that because my understanding there was wind storms, there was tree damage and there was um construction the constructor the
builder contractor involvement. So there there's a number of I think factors in play to this. >> Then I just quickly read the uh email that came in from >> DNR >> soil the DNR representative.
>> Yep. Here's that bottom line conclusion is that in his opinion the nature of the terrain and the vegetation is such that the water course protection that's been
done by the applicant would then be an adequate setback even though it's 65 ft. Is that your understand? >> Yeah. Yeah, that is um you know unfortunately you know if you were to measure all the drop in the contours yes
I could see where you'd come up with 100 ft if you were to take a tape measure and but no we measure as a crow flies straight lineal or straight horizontal so when we got our tools on our computer top that snap a line you know it's from
you know it's a very linear measurement so yes I mean that I mean because of amount of vertical because of the slope as I mentioned there's about a 20 foot change in elevation um there there would be a little bit of art and science into actually measuring
you know a project on that so >> on one of the pictures it looked like and maybe I just can't tell from this angle that there was like some of the agricultural land that was
even closer to the creek Is that accurate to assume? I like below the below the structure uh on that picture like how is the are
they allowed to is there any sort of buffer regulation for that creek with the agricultural land or anything or is that something that's just >> that this shadowy is probably a buffer. Okay, >> I would interpret that this is the line
that represents road cropping and yes, it would be subject to the Bowser or the board of water and soil resources and the um um in that there would have to be a 50 foot buffer during that repairarian
area. You can have perennial grasses, hay fields, what but they do not want to see roll cropping within 50 feet. >> Okay, so >> ordinary watermark. Okay. So, the the crap distance is 50 ft and the building is 100. Okay.
>> Y that I guess I'll turn it over to your >> Thank you. Does any of the uh petitioners wish to speak on behalf of the variance? And if so, please come up to the microphone and
state your name and address for the record, please. My name is Mike Kithammer and I built the building and own the property there and Sheila is my daughter who's going to be taking over the property. But uh just to
in some of the comments that were made I guess for the the land as far as the contours and stuff. Last summer we had the ASCS office out of New Elm come down a lady and we laid out the whole valley again for contours for runoff or any
problems that we're going to have. And due to the 50 ft that you're talking about, I think she took that into consideration. And then if if the measurements are made, uh I think we'll find out that we're in compliance with that because we stayed stayed back along
the bank there. Um this lady told us she was down this morning and looking at it and I was hoping that all of us could go down and look at what we did as far as restoration of the land for rip wrap
that we put in. I put in 38,000 lbs of 6 to8 inch aggregate on the bank with a base underneath it to prevent any erosion or whatever on the creek side. And the measurements I'll take the hit
on that. I measured off the corner of the building when we staked it with just a tape measure down to the stream. And the one map that we had on there, I just had that made because I thought I was in compliance. I didn't know. But during the operation,
um, the only inspectors I had down there was a state electrical inspector came in twice and checked things. The lady from the ASS office came in and she was behind the building on the west side. There's a bank that goes up about six feet. And the more we moved it to the
west, the more we were going to cut in and cause all kinds of erosion problems. So that's probably where the building got got moved. But the structure of the building, I'm a builder, okay? The structure of that building is built far
in excess of what a normal pole building would be made. It's a ladder construction where normally we we build them. We put in a 6 inch uprights. This has got 8 inch. The ladder constructions every two feet with 2 by8s all the way on the
sheet metal. The sheet metal on the building is normally all the builders will use probably like a a 28 or 29 gauge material. We got 24 gauge material on the on the roof and 26
gauge on all the walls. Um the um doors in there are all insulated because I like insulated doors because they're heavier in structure and they hold up a lot better.
And for the land itself, we did a lot of work along the stream there with erosion problems. One of the culverts up on the north end was smashed all the way in and full of concrete mud. Actually, it joins
Ed's land and we went in and pulled all that concrete out of that tube, put dug it all the silt out of it, actually took jacks in there and jacked the tube back up because it was smashed in and then did rip wrap work there also. But, um,
there's a lot of things that were done in compliance to try and prevent that stream. But um >> and then another thing too just to point out um you know we want the stream to stay in its natural habitat too but when
we um were doing the clean up there the bank pretty much down from the shed was all full of old cans and glass and just garbage and we cleaned all of that up. >> Yeah. It was used as a
>> dump for I don't know if it was a whole neighborhood or one individual, but we took washer and dryers and oil stoves and car parts and old machinery. I think we took probably six, seven loads of junk out of there and cleaned that whole
bank up. And the one gentleman from the DNR yesterday, I didn't notice it, but there's still a radio hanging in the tree there. And he asked, "Want to know what kind of reception I get on the radio?" Yes. Okay. >> But we held all all that to the to the
township dump and and disposed of it all and then we receeded it. We put over I think we're between 5 and 800 lb of seed on the banks and all the way around the buildings. We seed it and saw it, but I
think most of it was done that there was more concern about the tillable soils and cutting up into that hill more than there was of the of the 100 foot. And I honestly I I'll I hate to play dumb, but
I don't remember anybody really saying anything to me about 100 foot setback, you know, and like I said, we only had one inspection, and that was from the state electrical inspector. We had to trench the wiring and everything in and then they had to come in and measure all
that because there was a problem back then. Copper prices went through the roof and you couldn't find out copper for the main thing. So, we had to go to a two out aluminum bigger size to meet the specs. And she came in, it was a
lady uh I don't know where her office was out of. I think she was out of Winona and she came in and inspected everything twice. And then when everything was done, she inspected all the other wiring, too. So that's basically the only inspections we had.
But that building, you know, I had the Amish helped me build it. Okay. That building is less than a quarter inch out of square. You don't hear about that with agricultural buildings and the workmanship in it was just excellent.
So, but uh if you've got any questions with regards to anything with the building, the land, whatever, um I'd be more than welcome to any questions. >> Is there another farmstead anywhere on the land?
>> What's that? >> Do you have another farmstead? >> Like home? >> Do I Yes, I do. >> Homestead, I should say. Yeah. Sorry. >> On that land? Not on the >> either the 51 or the 180.
>> No, I I I got land out by the shrine on South Lacrosse. >> Nothing to do with nothing to do with over in Minnesota. >> Okay. So, what was the purpose of building that agricultural shed in the first place? >> We've got tractors and lawnmowers and
ATVs and and stuff stored in there. >> So, does somebody in your family actively farm it then? Uh my my renter passed away about a month ago and so we may I don't know if I can find another
renter. We rent out the tillable but my grandson is kind of thinking that down the road he might want to start farming it himself. And I've got the equipment. I just have to move it from my farm. And >> and we put in some um how many acres of
food plots do you put in? We we do some planting of um corn and beans for deer, >> right? >> And then we did plant trees down along the creek there too because we had right after we were billing, we had a terrible
windstorm come through and it wiped out half the trees along the creek there. The creek was actually blocked right off and I cut that tree up and was able to move it out of there. in the township was it's still laying along the road up there and they were supposed to come in
and cut that up, but they never did. But uh but we did go back and plant some. And then the farm now is put into a forestry program. I put 143 or 144 acres in. In the farm that I live on now, we
planted over 9,000 trees and we're planning on going in there and planting uh some more trees and stuff cuz it had been heavily logged off before I purchased it. So, >> and now I thought I saw somewhere Well, I guess you can kind of see a corner. Is
there a homestead across the road? >> A corner. There's buildings or something. There's there's houses right across the road to the east, but the uh this property does go on to the other
side of the road, too. There's like a couple of acres over there, but there's two there's two or three houses over on the east side of the road. >> And are they anywhere near as high above the creek as what your building is?
>> Uh I they're they're above the creek. I don't think they're as high as I am. No, my building off the center floor. We shot it with the transit. I'm 21 ft over the creek. Um, and across the road,
Belling's property and that I would say he's maybe more like 10. Um, there is another house. You can just see it down in the corner there a little bit. That's way down lower. And I don't know
cuz the beaver started building a dam in there. Mhm. >> We thought it was going to back up into her house. She was pretty excited about that. So, we had to go on and take the dam out. Otherwise, I they kept building and building and I think it would have flooded her house. But
>> So, have you ever seen flooding? As long as you've known the property that would have affected even the house across the road, much less your property. know actually uh John Zardy who lives up the road's been there like 40 years I think
he said in the 40 years he's seen that creek dry up three times so >> in the summer when there's a lot of vegetation you can't even see it in some areas >> it's pretty narrow >> I at one time I seen some little minnows
in there and that was about it it's not I don't think it's at the deepest part I don't think it's 680 inches deep. I up by you, Ed. I don't know how deep it is up there. >> A a little deeper. >> Yeah.
>> And as long as that has come up, I own 40 acres immediately adjacent to this property that are in crop land. And our main property is further to the
north on the east side of Lane Valley Road. And you live in >> my wife and I live on the east side on the >> 3
20 acres on that side and then there's 40 on the west. >> So in terms of the description of the request on here, it does say that you wanted somebody to live there to help with operations of the farm.
um and maintain the property. Um so is that you mentioned your son is is that like a thing that >> Yeah, cuz we mow >> do >> we mow several acres. So um he would
take care of that for us. >> Um snow plowing, shoveling in the in the winter, keeping the snow off of the roof. Um and then like I said, he does put in some food plots. He's a avid hunter. >> Um, and then just maintaining the the
equipment, the the tractor, the lawn mowers, and then for security too. Right now, we have nobody out there. So, there isn't much for security and it's not very useful for us right now because there's no running water or bathroom facilities.
If I could ask a couple clarifi clarifications. Uh this would be not an exterior addition to building but you won't even >> the structure won't at all right the exterior of the structure the footprint
>> and the interior structure is going to be on the back side of the building away from the creek. So if that's any >> that it'll be in the uh southwest corner. Oh, got it. Okay. Thank you. >> It probably be 150 feet away from the creek.
>> And you do or do not have the 50 foot buffer strips the the length of the uh stream side that is on your property. I didn't understand that. Well, the ASS office came in and we re Eric who rented
the land for me had him come in and we recontoured the whole whole 200 and some acres back up into the woods to conform better as far as runoff and stuff like that. They did that last summer and he came in then and reclowed everything and
we changed everything there. But when the ASCs office was in there, I I I should have brought the paperwork with me. She's from New Elm. Anyway, when they came in, they shot the whole fields and laid them all out with Eric the my rener. And the I'm sure they, you know,
if you're talking from the top of the hill, but if you're talking from the side of the stream up to the thing, it's well over 50 feet. >> Okay. Um, and some things, um, there was no inspection except by an
electrical contractor when the building was, uh, planned and set up and worked on. >> Right. Right. Now, I don't know, you know, in the state of Wisconsin up until a few years ago, egg buildings in which I have built on
my own place, I didn't need a building permit or anything. Okay. Now, I don't know what the Minnesota law reads or whatever, but no, I had electrical inspectors out there. Graph electric wired it and um
basically that was that was about it. But >> um and your building um you indicated it has the heavier, more stable construction. >> Oh, definitely >> sounded like everything. Yeah. >> Um, and you've been cleaning up the trash dump that existed on every old
agricultural place. Lucky it wasn't in a sinkhole like ours was. Um, you've been seating the banks and planting uh above the banks uh for uh erosion control. >> Right. Right. Todd, my son-in-law, he
clean we had trees down all over the place. We cleaned all that up and we reed it even down along the creek and up. I I think we're at about 5 to 800 lb of seed just in what we put along the the creek there and cleaned it up.
>> And if I remember when I was there, you're you must have an equip contract for the forestry. >> Yes, I do. >> Equip. >> Yeah. And that must be above your uh tillable on the It looked like >> up on the hillsides. Yeah.
I put all that in a forestry program about three years ago, I believe. >> And we're going to be going into a tree planting and cuz like I said, it was logged and they they did a terrible job. They really destroyed a lot of stuff in there and so it needs to be re
replanted. So, >> and they usually don't. >> We're talking to them about that. The gentleman from over by Rochester came in and wrote up the forestry plan and I have that. I've got all the certified engineering drawings for the truss system and everything that's in there.
So, all of that's been all certified. >> Great. >> And I far exceeded the per square foot snow load on that building is made a lot stronger. Um, and I noticed when I was there, um,
where the drip line comes down, uh, you have put in place on the stream side of the building, the south, um, rock. >> Mhm. >> Big rock and then timbers to hold that in place the whole length of that part of the building. What we did on all the
way around the building, we went out about probably the overhangs like 2 ft and we went out 6 ft and we put like probably 7 8 in of washed rock in there. And then so that when the water runs off the roof, it runs into that. But we went
one step further on both ends of the building and in the middle of the building, we dug a trench that's I'm going to say four to 5t deep and maybe six feet wide or whatever. We fill that full of wash rock. So all the water that does come off the building runs
into those buffer zones basically if you want to call it. And then we fed them all the way down so that it's there's no erosion going down to the stream at all. >> And you're talking about um what I'm talking about is the well I'm not going to say the contracting term for it, but
the rock >> river rock >> about three two three inches held in place by timbers right that I saw. around the whole building doing that, but it it's more like six or eight inches thick. The >> You're talking about like the
landscaping rock along both long edges of the shed. >> Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Yeah. >> Where the drip line comes down. I saw that the drip line ran into that. >> Correct. >> You're the landscaping area. Sounds like you're talking about something outside
the landscape area put in place. The drip line you're talking about is one one address that I talked about, but outside of that where the roadway goes back along there on the creek side, we dug down in there so that the water wasn't going to run over the road. It
would sink into that that those buffers that we put in there and it absorbs the moisture so it ain't cause any erosion on that steep bank going down to this creek. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you for that. I learned something. Where is the proposed well and septic?
Do you >> That's going to probably be on That'll be away from the creek. That'll be probably up on the upper side of the building where we've got grass growing in there now. Probably 20 ft or so. We can I'm sure I'm probably going to end
up with a mountain system. I don't know how the soils are going to test yet at this point, but we will. and the well has to be so many feet away from the septic. So, they'll both go up on the upper end there someplace. Or we could put the well in the back here where the
transformer is because most of the uh plumbing is going to be on the on the south end of the building and then the septic will probably go above there. >> Any other questions? >> No. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Okay. >> Somebody, anyone want to make a motion to open the public hearings? >> I make the motion to open it to the public. >> I'll second it. Maybe the motion to open. Seconded by Lynn. Anybody online or in person that would
like to speak for the second time? If there's anybody that wants to speak on behalf of the petition, they can come on up. All right. Well, do I have a motion to uh close the public hearing? >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll second.
>> Amy makes the motion to close the public hearing. Seconded by Lynn. All in favor? >> I >> I can uh go ahead and discuss. Sounds sounds like a O to me. I think they take pretty good care of their
creek bank and building's already there. I mean, really, is anything going to change? if if the Creek Bank is an issue or a concern, uh, you know, I drive by there all the time and I've seen what it used
to look like and I see what it looks like now. Um, the applicant has expressed all the improvements they made to the bank and their credit. It's probably the most impressive stretch of
Lane Valley Creek in the valley. uh just put a lot of pressure on people like me to try and do the same thing. >> Well, I agree. It does sound well. I can tell that they care deeply about how
their property is. Um and that's really wonderful. That's as soon as um I was there today and um I was going to go yesterday, but there was a lot of snow today. It was a lot of slush and ice, so maybe that was a bad decision. That's a
heck of a road, by the way. Lanes Road. Whoa. Okay. Um, but walking along the bank of uh above the creek and you said it's 21 ft from uh
your measurement approximately of the floor of the building. Okay, I understood that correctly. Um that is already under a process of erosion. Um, I know you've been planting seed
obviously. Um, and I see some plantings. Um, but there is, uh, it's so steep. There is a lot of bare soil. Um, and so I think if you get any rain, it's going to be really hard to vegetate
that. I mean, we live on a farm with some of the same issues, so I kind of understand that. Um and so that is what I noticed is that there is currently
uh erosion starting along that bank. It's very steep. It looks very difficult to hold uh vegetation. Um, and while the stream is small, uh, it is a designated stream
and it does widen as it goes, uh, is that north. >> Oh, >> south. Okay, thank you. Um, as it goes south, it does widen um, a little bit. and under the conditions of the last
30 years um having a stream running the length of our property. Um and the number of properties that now use uh wells and aquifer water and water
that comes through the subs soil. uh the streams fluctuate much more than they used to. So, I'm not surprised that that little spring dries up and that pretty soon you're like you can't even see it when there's a dry summer. Um and
we do have more extreme weather. So, yeah. Um you're going to see that. But, um it was somewhat concerning to me. It was concerning to me that that bank is showing erosion. And I walked about a
football field past uh away from the driveway um along the edge of the it looked like probably the tractor had driven along there between the bank, still a high bank, and where the crop ground is. Um,
and that continued to look I I was a little nervous to get too close to the edge of the bank. It doesn't look real stable. It is problematical, I believe. Um, so I would just like to make that observation. That was my observation today.
maybe in the middle of the summer there's no stream and the bank is fully vegetated, but you made the point that you would like to see folks go out there and look at it. And that was my thought as well um to make a really uh
perceptive decision about the situation. And so I would just like to make those points. Did you see any vegetation or was it did it look like bare ground? >> There is bare ground. Um
the length I'll call it the length actually it's the height of the the bank that goes down to where then there is the small stream and sort of almost looks like a wetland as you keep going um away
from the building. Is this to the north or the south of the building? >> Help me out. I think it's must be. I'm >> not sure. >> It's towards No. >> toward the driveway or away from their >> away from the driveway. >> It's south. >> South of the building. >> South of the along the building and then
south. >> So, but there is all that rip wrap as I approached it along the driveway. There is large rip wrap, very large rip wrap and a lot of uh material that's staying on the bank. Um, >> it's heavily vegetated in the summer.
I'm sure everything >> and the erosion isn't along where the building is. It's >> Yes. >> Beyond that. >> Yes. >> Can we look at that on the map once where you're talking about some of that? Can I Can I Zar if I speak? >> Yeah, sure. You want say your say your
name and address for the record, please? My name is Todd Wimler, a uh 1626 Oak or 1464 Claudia Avenue, Lac Crescent, Minnesota. Thanks. >> Some of that what maybe you're talking about was pre before we did a lot of the
work. I know I haven't really some of that erosion really close to the creek. I haven't touched because I don't know. I mean, I don't want to mess with the creek whatsoever, but everything above it between the the the the shed and before you drop down over that bank,
it's it's it's all like what what Sheila and Mike had talked about. It's we went, you know, really above and beyond to what we've, you know, to try to have it go any get any worse. I know there's one tree that maybe you're talking about that's been that way for for years, you know, and I'm not going to do anything
to harm the the the quality of that tree or or and I I'm not going to fill anything that would cause it to go down towards the creek either. You know what I mean? I don't want to I don't want to mess with anything there either. But everything away from the creek, we went above and beyond I felt to uh you know
maintain the quality, you know, and like and and it is fall and if you get out there in the summer, it's there's a lot of green grass down in there and green a lot of weeds, you know, and uh there's even some buckthornne trees brook growing down there that I haven't even touched. You know about buckthornne and
because I don't want the the bank to erode, you know, that's why I leave them there. So, >> so they may have said, but I I don't remember when was it seated like recently or >> Yeah, we've been working on it ever for the last three years, four years. >> The seed's going to take a while to
come. >> Oh, yes, definitely. Yeah. To really let that get full and and everything. And it's kind of a a road mix, a DOT road mix is what they call it. I mean, it's got some flowers and it's got some color to it and and you know that and some of that's underneath the canopy of the
existing trees, too. So, so it it's going to take a while before you really notice it and you get a good good, you know, grass growing or or uh weeds growing. >> So, >> all right. Thank you. >> You bet. Thanks.
>> Anybody else have anything? >> I think >> nothing further from >> they should be able to do. Anybody want to make a motion? >> I'll move that we allow them to do what they want to do as
laid out with the conditions. >> Lyn made a motion to approve with the conditions. Anybody second? >> Second. >> It's seconded by Ed. All those in favor say I. I. >> All those opposed nay.
Motion passes and I will read the board appeal. All decisions by the board of adjustment in granting variances or in hearing appeals from any administrative order requirement, decision or determination shall be final
except that any agrieved person or persons or any department, border, commission of the jurisdiction or of the state shall have the right to appeal within 30 days after receipt of notice of the decision to the district court in the county in which the land is located
on. questions of law and fact. Any party that would like to submit an appeal to the decision rendered at the public hearing must do so to the district court. Planning and environmental services is not responsible for filing the appeal or obtaining representation
by council for the petitioner. And with that, I believe we have done all our petitions. Anyone have a motion to adjurnn? >> I move we adjourn. I'll second >> motion to adjourn by Amy, seconded by
Lynn. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. And meeting is adjourned. Thank you everyone. >> And merry Christmas. >> And merry >> merry Christmas. You handle that together.