and I called a meeting to order at 7 and now I ask everybody to rise and say the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge of alance to of the United States of America and to theic for it stands one nation under
God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you and our next item is to approval of the agenda I so Mo yes like to add add an item to the
agenda that we we discuss this uh enhancement to the the reinvestment re invigorating the records of the P plan so an update on the potential comprehensive plan yes like okay discuss
that after all the uh after the last docket yes so before we adjourn I I'll put that as 6 and a half okay so an update on the comprehensive plan is that sound all right I think you got to
go 5.9 or something oh yeah 5.9 or 5.5 thank you is that okay do I have a motion then with his addition second all right all
in favor say I I so there you and John I'll I'll move that we approved the agenda with the amendment yes and that's the way I took that because I I had them then you second it as before he did it before I hit a second yeah
right now uh approval of the minutes from February 2 20th 2025 is there a second second Eugene got the second any discussion otherwise all in favor say I I post name hearing none all
in favor and then we'll move on to our petitions I want you all to know there's amendments that have been added uh to every petition and they should be in your manual okay some of you got updates on your email I just didn't know if you had it
chance uh to get there okay now are the amendments in red or I haven't really looked there I don't think they are they are on the agenda but but not in the information packet all right and will and here they are
they're included and they're in red to let you know there's more materials oh okay so it's page just for example the first one is page 16 and 35 and I think our staff probably cover that quite well when we get there all
right all right so our first petition is uh I'm looking for the number for it I got it back in my agenda it's PC
0320 d251 and this is to consider a petition from Greg and Brandy gol who seeking a additional interim use permit regarding the following and that is to allow a new short-term animal
boarding facility in pursuant of wona County's ording ordinance chapter 10. 4. 6-14 and 10.4 6-27 and who do we have in charge of
that all right good evening so we're gonna have Olivia do that go ahead so the first thing I want to point out to you is the sections of the ordinance that were cited for this project um at the last County board meeting the County Board did vote to amend the zoning ordinance related to dog henel
specifically to commercial breeders however this petition came forward before that so it's noticed under dog pels and other similar uses you'll notice that it is not having to De with commercial breeding it's more of a daycare overnight facility just to put that on the table
to ahead of time so a little bit about the site location it is in Hillsdale Township section 19 um it's along County Road 25 there you can see in the areial image on the west side it's about 3 acres um and there is an existing residence and a couple of access
structures just here see on the printed one here it's 10.4 six 26 and there it's 14 I have a new modification of that based on what Olivia is telling you yes
to adjust okay just so it's and that's because of the ban and how we had to change your ordinance okay okay I just notic there was a difference so the one I quoted second is the cor you qued it is presenting it here at so the agenda the to allow section on
the agenda talks about an accessory dwelling unit that's incorrect what chairman Flynn stated um and what was at the beginning of this slide is correct for what it is noticed in the in the project that it is thank you for pointing that out though so this is a very basic site plan
showing what their proposal is they'd be using the existing driveway that Services the house to um lead down to a parking area and then there would be about a 5,000 square foot indoor facility with outdoor runs on the east side of
it these are some of the ples that the petitioner provided so you can see there on the right the new building is in the southwest corner of the property with parking to the north um and then three outdoor runs that you'll see in some P pictures later on the left there's the schematic from their Builder that
they're proposing some of the project overview um when looking at kind of the full operational capacity they'd be looking at about 40 dogs and 15 cats as um their average um animals although they do talk about having the ability to care for
other animals as needed um depending on the customers the indoor facility like I mentioned is proposed to connect directly to those outdoor runs so instead of having to you know walk animals on leashes they could just open up the doors and let them in and out um and then their business plan is highlighted in the packet they provided
information on um some of the customer um like business plans and hours and things like that some of the site considerations itself so it is in the egg resource conservation zoning District um the
existing accesses off of County Road 25 Dave Kramer a highway engineer did review it um and didn't see any conc concerns with using that existing access or the increase in use of County Road 25 um there are five residents that I mentioned in the staff report as being
within about 1500 ft of the property um and then this next slide here can show you so the residen are marked um with red axes and then the gamls property is outlined in red there there's also a feed lot to the South um that sees a decent amount of
traffic as well utilizing that road one thing to note um outside of the zoning ordinance we do have a barking dog ordinance that the sheriff's department is in charge of enforcing so I wanted to just highlight that here um the way that they measure um whether or not The
Barking is substantive is with 100 feet so if you're within 100 ft of the property line where the dog is barking then these standards would come into play um and you can read them there a lot of other counties go off of deciel or like how loud it is this is more of a a time if you're within that range of
100 ft so some of the site photos when you're looking at the the picture um on the right there you can see that the mode path in the grasser it's maybe a little bit hard to see with the lights but um those are where the outdoor runs are so you can kind of see the rectangles there and then the tree area
with some of the vehicles in it is where that um facility and parking area would be on their property so this is I was standing on County Road 25 looking towards their property um looking West this is looking Southeast on the
property looking out towards where the Run area is being proposed this is looking at the new building area like I said there are some things there now um but it's an area that's already flattened on the property and historically has had um some old farm buildings way way back
um this is looking the other direction looking Northeast towards the facility and parking area um and then the land slopes down as you go towards County R 25 which is where they're proposing those outdoor runs so utilizing this existing driveway
excuse me um both of these are from the road looking opposite directions you can see one of the residences that's closest to the site um in the photo to the left there it's that black building um a newer build Hillsdale Township heard the petitioner on February 10th they did indicate
support for the request in provided written comment that's um included below so our recommendation would be that you consider all materials and testimony before making findings that support your decision the packet was amended to include a neighbor letter um so take that into consideration and it
should be towards the end of the materials that were um originally submitted we did do the analysis and draft findings to support granting the permit um as an interm use instead of a conditional use with the identifiable end date for that interm use being if
the property were to transfer to someone other than the current owners and should you decide to approve the petition we have drafted four conditions for your consideration which are included in your packets any questions yeah
um this kenel or whatever we want to call it building yep that's going to be a permanent building right correct how can we all it interim use if it's a
permanent building sure so the way we went about it is with the last kennel facility that was approved it was approved as an interim use just due to the nature of the business and if the business were to change hands in the future having those new people come back
to the Planning Commission to the County Board um to ensure that those conditions and the business plans have not changed so they would come back to um reapply essentially okay okay yeah uh do you know what the
setback is from County Road 25 there there's not a setback for the fences I believe for a structure I think I have it in the staff report um I want to say 130
[Music] ft any other questions for me otherwise the petitioners here as well do you know uh the maximum numbers for any of the other boarding facilities in the county none that I saw had maximum
numbers so we all of our our kennel permits that we shed for breeding facilities most of them outside of three of the older ones had maximums um I don't believe any of the the short-term facilities have
maximums I did speak with the board of animal health as well um just to check in to make sure that there weren't any other state requirements that came with boarding facilities and they confirmed that there weren't um anything from the state's perspective that they would be required to do although the petitioner
has stated that they intend to follow the kennel guidance through their program so even though it's not requirement they still want their kennel to meet those standards that um the animal program has to meet anything else for me thank you
thank you can I have the petitioners come up and speak on behalf of your project that would be great and thanks Greg uh state your name and address uh Greg DS 19793 County Road
25 and tell us what you um know what I know well maybe be all night tell us about your facility proposal um we're just looking to utilize our property and uh since it's kind of a
small hobby Farm is type property um we looking at putting up uh Dog Daycare and boarding facility um to
manage uh as a business um for being at home most of the time and uh working there any questions
y what's your experience with the dogs and cats that on this type of situation have you did something like a similar before yeah I currently have seven dogs and two cats have experience
yes any other questions I have a question Y in terms of like what your Optimum business plan is are you focused more on the daycare aspect of it meaning that you'll have uh vehicle traffic on the daily coming in and out or you
focused more on that boarding overnight boarding overnight okay um with uh that uh knowing that you're going to have like some you know perhaps you know you get people charged by the hour or something someone's dropping off a dog before work and picking them up after um
do you and again it's probably on here it's just maybe not as a parent you have like a reception area where the dogs that you have aren't interacting with dogs coming in and out like there's yes okay so it's sounds like it's a pretty professional setup um that's really the
only question I had we offer also offering a pickup and drop off to eliminate some of the traffic sure that makes sense that was my only question thank you yep being that's us a business proposal will you have any employees or will you
you and your wife handle it all uh if we were it would be future um and in growth if if it became larger than what we could handle okay any other questions um I guess then
following on that do you have uh from what we're seeing here on the site plan can you like maybe indicate where your parking might be it's in front of it right this whole section here oh I'm sorry and that is it's pretty obvious on this wrong thank
you for that y thank you gr that's it y thank you open public is there a second I think Jordan got ahead all in favor opening public meeting say I all as impos of uh opening public
meeting say n so all in favor so the public meeting is open and if you have anything to say for or against this petition please please come to the microphone state your name and address sure so Amber braa 19740 County Road 25 wiona
Minnesota um and before I guess we talk about any of our concerns or recommendations um I do want to make it clear that we aren't looking to oppose the permit um I think something that's
very important to us in um part of what we love about Winona County is being able to have land that you can pursue different business opportunities or um enjoyment opportunities or those kind of things but the different things um that
are included in your meeting packet and some informational bits that I have here are just to help um make sure that everything's nicely managed so as was mentioned in some other counties the uh in a situation like this there would be some sort
of um regulation or ordinance relating to decb so just kind of giving a little bit of a like more black and white uh of what is a manageable noise level versus not so much um in Monona County we don't
have that and really the only um like enforcement backing if there were to ever be a problem is The Barking ordinance um which goes from yeah so the 100 feet from the property line that the
dogs are at and it just in my experience of being out in our land area there's not a lot of structure to block noise so we hear like if I'm going on a walk I can hear the trains in lewison it's you
know noise travel is pretty um pretty long distances out there so I just wouldn't want to see it have to get to a point where we're having to potentially you know call and say Hey you know it's getting getting out of hand um living
out in the country it's there's there's Farm dogs everywhere and there's Farm cats and um I'd like to think that we're pretty pretty tolerable for that um I one of my jobs growing up was helping to train hunting dogs I love dogs I'll you
know roll around on the ground with them all those things um but just making sure that um and I think on the map you can't see our house but in the pictures you can um so all of that hard work of you know
building a house which the gbls they put in their hard work to have their house over there too and whatever so just making sure that the Health and Welfare of everybody is being considered in this so again not looking to oppose the
permit but when we got the letter in the mail just letting us know that the permit was being pursued all it really said is the type of facility um that was was maybe you know going to be going up uh and not much else information other
than that and just kind of told us how to get in contact with uh the different staff and respective people that we would have to con you know convey any concerns um and so a couple days after that I we were really not we didn't know
what the appropriate amount of concern was um again our initial thoughts was great small business we love country living um the gels have their other dogs that are they're not much of a like noise problem or anything so um and from
what we've observed they're happy treated well um so no concern in that regard and the GS have been great neighbors all those good things um so just really looking to you know minimize any potential like conflict um and so I
started Gathering some different information just so we could be like strategic in that approach and have all the information that we could have and part of that was making some phone calls to other similar facilities in Winona County um so I guess I'm not sure
what page it's on in your amended packet because it was sent in on Tuesday 35 pack forward yeah onward rather so there's a little bit of information about like different decel levels and um
just kind of to compare it I think when we get to the recommendation portion of potentially asking that the uh maximum amount of dogs be set at a certain point um we would definitely hope that there
could then be capacity for other animals not minimizing the profit of the business um but just with the size of the um like the three-ish acres is just pretty small in in comparison to some of
the other available land that these other um boarding facilities do have to help accommodate you know arrange where their facility is there's lots of trees and structures on the on um those other
bits of land which is not present out in our area um so just looking at those talking to um some of those owners and then some of those staff of those businesses uh as I made those phone calls I made
sure to let those people know right away hey um here is the purpose for my information gathering just so they weren't like caught off guard or nothing was being sneaky or anything like that um and just gave them the situation of
us being about 600 feet away and the common reaction was you're how close and there's how many dogs so that's when our concern started to rise which we didn't really like I said didn't have right away um and that's when I started
getting some of the information together on on the Deb and then they also gave some recommendations for managing noise so um yeah uh the operational Dog Daycare that heading
there's some information about uh like most of them don't have a residence that's within half a mile and then one of them does have a residence that's within a quarter mile that has structures and trees in between and that particular neighbor they' just kind of
work different things out where they tell them hey we're having a get together outside can you keep the dogs inside or you know that kind of thing so I think that there's definitely a lot of a lot of room to just get things worked out in Winona County specifically
there's just not a lot of Regulation these type of facilities as was said aren't regulated by the state or federal government or anything so if there's any opportunity to get some um good guidelines so that everybody's on the same page moving forward this is that
opportunity so yeah um I guess I don't need to go and read everything in there I tried to keep it short yeah yep included in yeah are there any questions related to that
information um otherwise I can go to the recommendations that we had to be considered so 600 feet from where I think the the permanent structure is going to go up or from the I guess I don't know
600 feet from okay which is I think it's like 0.1 miles something um so if there's no questions on the other information that was provided as far as the more factual
based information which is two of those pages um and then which is like just labeled under section one and then section two is consideration and concerns so that's more of just um not necessarily factual but just concerns
that we had things that we were thinking about um and then section three is the modification recom uh recommendations so that would be uh the recommendation of having a capacity of 25 to 30 dogs and
part of the reason of bringing this up so early is that if that um capacity was set for dogs uh as in like some of the research that is cited it's usually recommended that there's one person to every 10ish dogs um just to keep them
nice and content and um when you have a lot of different dogs that are different personalities in a different um area area and with being so close to County Road 25 we're in between a couple Family Farms so they're constantly you know ATV
tractor different things so um just being able to to manage the dogs well and then moving the outdoor run potentially so the way that it's set up right now the um indoor building um is I
believe steel siding or some sort of metal something um and those outdoor runs are some of those are right against that so if there was an opportunity for some of that sound to go in a different direction it's then redirected or
ricocheted directly towards the other residences um so there's already not like distance isn't in our favor structures in the way aren't in our favor and then there's a structure that could potentially be amplifying some of that sound in our
Direction um and there are uh some different areas with some mature trees on the property um they are not as close to the indoor facility but I wondered if we could be a little bit like creative and having some space back
there for the dogs to be able to go to and still be able to run straight out of that facility um back into that area and then um yeah measures to dampen noise for both people hearing the dogs and then what
the dogs can hear or see to limit episodes of reactions as a result of the the stimulus so in some of that um different information related to sound and noise and decb and what's too high and those kind of things really
something that came up was um how the change in decb is really what can be impactful on health so if you're in a loud room and something loud happen happens that's not as alarming but if
you're it's pretty pretty quiet out there which is great but then when you have something like a big Roar of dogs coming you know out it's that's moving from whatever that 30 orish deciel range
and then with the distance considered um that could be more to like the I think it was like the 70 dbel range so that's just a really large jump and that's alarming and what the body does is says stress and so that is
that thank you yeah question coyotes around there are lots of coyotes around yeah okay okay we'll ask questions later okay that sounds good thank you is there anyone else wishing to
speak for or against this petition please come to the microphone state your name and address is there anybody else wishing to speak for or against this petition please come to the microphone state your name and
address okay for a third time anyone else wishing to speak for or against this petition please come to the microne and state your name and address I move to close the public hearing do we have a second and Lou
second said all in favor of closing the public hearing say I I I oppose n here none all in favor okay we've heard uh our staff uh the petitioner and another uh person
speaking against or at least having concerns about the petition uh commission what's your thoughts what do you wish to do we have the petitioner back ask and see if they've got anything for mitigating so I think that's a fair
question so if Mr G come up here I have a couple questions for you too but Lou you go first uh have you thought of anything to mitigate sound effects towards that property um yes we do plan on planting
trees and um shrubs and stuff like that in the lower area that you would like to have the runs and we can also take in
consideration of having to run up in uh the mature tree area also uh it is an option uh just wasn't one of our first options
um uh but I I could make one suggestion okay my son and I bought some cattle panels that are solid like for wind brakes yep and we been by my place you could probably see them maybe you could find something similar like that would be a temporary way to deflect your sound if
you had to yeah it's an idea yeah I'm definitely going to look into options for noise reduction because that was one of our concerns also um but I know
the uh pasture that we want to have them run in is all open right now it does fall in a valley so in the lowest part it the road is above so it's kind of a
firm or whatever there there's another thing in there too if you've got coyotes running around they also create noise too yeah you're building you're proposing though it's a steel looks like a steel structure yep is it insulated yes so
that insulation should help if you have a problematic dog yep to secure them in the facility rather than outside outside I mean I'm just stating what I read in here as possible options and we're also looking
at other siding options than steel so um okay and the wood siding would be even more insulating yeah and it would absorb the sound a little better too no if I I
read things right in my booklet for the rest of the commission I'm on page 30 and full occupation at 40 dogs 20 15 cats during your day hours 10 to 30 dogs correct uh between the hours of uh six
and four is that correct yeah roughly yes and then overnight you would have a potential of maybe 10 to 20 yes overnight now overnight you would probably have those inside side yes okay
yeah all uh border dogs or um daily daycare dogs would have their own separate kennel and I saw that in your plan there yes keep them
separate any other questions for Greg e j um I guess it was at least partially answered by your question in M but um yeah I I can't see that noise is
going to be a major problem because you're going to have less animals in the evening and they're going to be all inside yeah so I I can't foresee that
unless you get some real hounds or something in there that you're going to have a lot of problems with noise okay any other questions or statements thank you gr we already did it's up it's up to you Commissioners
decide what you want to do if you need more information from the staff yeah or the petitioner and then we have uh the uh of fact recommendations to oh I got those I find on page uh
17 to 19 yes J um under the recommendations IT staff recommends the Planning Commission review all material and testimony and uh it number four is the one I got the
question about this is uh recommendation yeah it's the petitioner receives An approved development certificate and septum septic system of permit now is that in the plan Alivia or both of those come if this were to be
approved so that's the next step both of those are issued administratively so the development certificate is the zoning permit that we issue If This Were to be approved and then they would have a separate septic system for this facility which we would they would apply for after this okay
y any other comments uh how do we handle this uh noise situation sitting in here I mean the way it sounds like it's settled but if it becomes a problem could there be a condition sitting in there that they should address it if you certainly could
add that Louie as a condition I think we should add a so you want to add a number five I'd like to add a number five if the Barking or whatever becomes excessive that uh that they manage it or do what they
need to uh so a noise uh thing something like and our a public meeting we there are some parameters on decb and stuff do you want to refer to that it would be a way to prefer but 600 feet because if you just say a noise thing you're not
really def another option would be to allow staff County staff to decide whether or not it's m ex I mean I mean I want to take concern of the people that are next to I mean they do have a valid concern about having dogs barking all the time
too but the the gentleman's trying to do the kennel right and he would fix it within a proper length of time I assume he would do that and uh I I hate to put anything in regulation to force him to do anything that you shouldn't have to do common sense would say but sometimes
you're better off to be a little bit you know on the ball or proactive so do you want the stuff to manage the noise potential that would probably be the proper may you come back and tell us your thoughts on that just one comment so the existing ordinance framework that we have doesn't
necessarily deal with decb it deals with length of time of barking so I had a a map up there that showed 100 ft from that property line and if there were violations of that amount of time so I think it's 15 minutes overnight of constant barking or 30 minutes during
the daytime if that is found it would be considered a public nuisance so if you want to use something related to that potentially saying if there's repeat offenses of that ordinance 36 that could be a potential solution for you I hear you right that's already in our ordinance correct okay so we wouldn't
necessarily have to add that we wouldn't have to add a condition if they were in violation of that ordinance then there would be um I think fines yeah actions right
okay and we can pull that up again if you'd like to read that language is can't be perceptible beyond that foot buffer how how was that 100 we talking pull out yeah so we'll pull it up again um about
600 okay so the language reads essentially if you are 100 feet away get over there so A3 reads repeated incidences of barking or Crying by a dog regardless of length
which can be heard by a person other than the owner within 100t of the property line on which the dog is being kept so that dashed line there shows you that 100t distance from all sides of that property so what that's saying is if you're 100t away from that property line and you can hear these instances
then this ordinance would apply and C talks about the violations um and the punishments Associated I would say if you could hear it at all it would be more restrictive than a decibel measurement well I think that's more
detailed and trying to do the J all yeah and my point is is that I'm trying to flush out here we already have an ordinance yeah and if they're in violation then all the rest of this goes under anyway so Louis is your intent
to the staff involved before the sheriff's department well so my intent is to not turn around and give them fine give them some chance to mitigate the situation before violation the first time you just get a warning sometimes you get the warning the next
damn day sitting around there too you know what I'm getting I mean sometimes it takes a time to get the mitigation well yeah yeah but it but having two of the same thing doesn't mean you're going to get a response any faster right okay it's already stated clearly in our
ordinance and uh if we State everything that's in our ordinance we'll have five pages of stuff all right and then we won't cover half of it but this may makes me aware of the noise thing which I was unaware of earlier that this is already in our zoning and it's already
corrective action can be taken so it's not in our zoning ordinance though so this is a separate ordinance of the county that's enforced by the Sheriff's Office okay but it's there we have the tool to correct yep so there if there is a a problematic
dog um it gives the owners of the the warning gives the owners an opportunity to deal with the owner of the dog and say this dog is causing us problem be boarded at my place yeah right right I mean it's not the dog living there or as
he stated it probably would not be allowed to be out in the run so it have to be right right right yeah you would keep it different options did I hear you right on that also indoor runs sure so if there's a problem animal that but in
this case the problem dog uh the the owners can say I'm sorry your dog is not doing what we needed to do and you're no longer allowed to bring them to our boarding place I mean that to me is how this would be solved I through all my division all
covered one place or the other I think it's covered through the shariff's thank you liia well then I'd move the per with finding facts and the conditions right is there
there a second to that I'll second Chef seconds it any other discussion before we vote all in favor say I I oppose nay okay hearing none uh 7 to zero and
you still will have a County Board um you'll meet with the County Board on Tuesday April 8th at 9 a.m. so what you got here is just a recommendation from us that is in favorable to your project but
it'll be up to County board for the final say okay and again that's April 8th at 9:00 a.m. and it's in this room that's Tuesday okay thank you and our next
petition is docket PC 03-20-2018 two that's to consider a petition from Beth Turner and Aaron Json uh who is Seeking a conditional inter interim use permit regarding the following to allow a land disturbance
activity on steep slopes for the purpose of building an accessory road to a proposed building site in pursuant of County Monona County's or ordinance chapter [Music] 11.6.1 is this yours this will be mine
um good evening I'll run through some slides and um feel free to ask if you have any questions um the location of this petition is um south of Pickwick on um Cedar Ridge
Drive uh in Homer Township section 23 um this uh petition was be before the board of adjustment uh in 20 23 uh for Building Development on a
bluff between the toe and the top of a bluff and that variance was granted um they're back today because they're looking at moving forward with the project uh and there is a disturbance of slopes between 18 and 25% so there is a trigger for a
conditional use permit and then there were also over a threshold um for a standard for the bluff that required a variance so I just wanted to um um it's for the same feature though so it's still the driveway that we're that
we're we're talking about today um I think I'll start back on this map actually and just kind of point out the location of the the driveway is on the left of the um of the aerial photo uh where there's a big curve at the top
of the bluff so it's going from um just uh at just below the top of the bluff back up to the top um and you'll see that here on that curve as you come down the the Cedar Ridge Road um the proposed
driveway would be off to the left and then um rise about 60 ft to the uh farm field or pasture um Hayfield on top of the bluff and you can see here the proposed residential structure that uh would be um would be
built um in relation to that uh here's a few of the uh proposed U amenities or um um erosion control structures uh that would be incorporated into the driveway uh a couple of
culverts are proposed and a culvert Pond to to slow down the water as it comes through and um um um keep it from eroding the the the slope Bel below felt fence would be below below the the
driveway and the Disturbed area and um erosion control blanket would be on the upper slopes above the driveway that are Disturbed there are a couple sections that wanted to point out that are the steepest along the driveway grade um and they're towards the upper
portion of the um of the driveway before it tops out on the on the farm field um here's a cross-section of of the of the proposed driveway showing silt fence to the right um um the filled slope below the
driveway gravel of the finished drive and then break a rock underneath um and then um showing a sale above on the up up slope side of the driveway um and then the the cross-section of the uh the Culvert um
to the left there so here here's a topographic map showing the um the thicker lines are 10-ft Contours the thinner ones are twoot Contours um so you can get an idea of the The Rise um that the driveway will take over the course of uh its its
length um and then the elevation profile again it's uh it equals about 60 ft from the beginning of the driveway to the top of the um of the the bluff um this is a cross-section um hopefully you can see it there's a red dash line that's a straight line through
the middle that would be the um proposed driveway and then the black line you can see that un undulates a little bit along the um um the course of the driveway that's the actual um that's the actual uh uh
Contour um so that will give you an idea of the type of um grading and filling that would need to happen in order to create the um the driveway that they're proposing the driveway um and the county standard is that it's less than 12% grade of the surface of the driveway so
that's what they're shooting for is below that 12% grade finished grade of the driveway and so that's where they'll have a nice steady um about 11 and a half% 11.9% grade just below that
12% um that would be created out of that undulating um Contour some site con uh considerations uh parcel consists of 136.6 Acres most of that is wooded um the upper part portion where the the
house is is um is pasture or um or Hayfield we'll have some pictures of that so you can get an idea what that looks like um they did I think there there was a lot of conversation when when it was before the board of adjustment uh regarding alternate locations for the driveway and Alternate
access um that would come from the neighbor's house um and um it was discussed to share the driveway and then split this driveway off near the neighbor's neighbor's home and head across the top and that would reduce the
the need for the this driveway and all the um an the land alteration um that ultimately wasn't going to work um it couldn't work anything out between the two neighbors um so this is really the the best case scenario for um
locating a driveway given the the U um given the conditions on site [Music] um um the building site is located on this the least steep area of the property that is true that is surrounded
by steep slopes um um um on other on the I guess it would be the the East and the north side of the property and as you go down the slope um on on Cedar Ridge Road um petitioners have stated uh propos driveway will maintain a
consistent grade of 11.9% less than 12% required um the disturbance is estimated to be uh around 963 cubic yards um and um I just wanted to point
out that the staff analysis staff analysis and findings are for a conditional use permit um your staff report might indicate in in one place inim use permit but um the this is really a permanent driveway permanent feature that's that would be on the land so we would consider it um a conditional
use permit and not a temporary um use um we do have a few photos to give you an idea of what it looks like and these are some older ones the ones with the leaf on obviously are from the board of adjustment packet from a few years ago they were taken in the summer um and we then we'll have some that have Leaf
off conditions as well uh but um this is from the base where the the the beginning of the driveway would start and you can see the top through the trees there um here's uh just from last week
um or a couple weeks ago during Leaf off conditions um and uh uh no snow so you can see well through the through the woods but it's from the roughly the same um location as the previous photo
um again the the driveway access where it would come off of Cedar Ridge Drive um and then further up um um away from the the access point uh up in the woods a little further and give you an idea of what the lay of the land looks like
there um here is a photo of the uh kind of from the neighbors um property line on top of the bluff looking out towards the proposed building site um so on the map to the left where it says property line you be stand the
picture would be taken from that direction heading towards the um the the proposed building site there again um kind of from the proposed building site looking back towards the neighbor's property um Township has considered the
uh uh the request and indicated support um at their February 20th meeting and as always um you consider all materials and testimony um staff analysis is and draft findings are to
support granting the conditional use permit and there are five conditions for consideration um that's all that I have I'll back it up to one of the maps just for reference are there any
questions for me no questions um it's stated that the estimated Excavating excavated amount of dirt is 963 cubic
yards what happens if 37 yards isn't too far from thousand right what if it goes over to the cuz there's a trigger for the Thousand cubic yards for a conditional use permit right just argued about that right and so
there is an exemption in the um in chapter six um that would um not require a conditional use permit if um if another permit like this one was was uh being considered for the same thing so um in this case um since there's already
a variance and a conditional use permit being considered for the driveway you wouldn't need to have another um per like a like a grading filling permit or another conditional use permit if it goes over um but the bottom line is that
still would would require an erosion control plan um which we have um and um I think this body is capable of uh of looking at that as part of this process wouldn't necessarily need to worry about that since we're we're here
considering it today mik for Cedar Point Road is a Township Road it's a public road of some sort cor right so what's the difficulty establishing the drive there then if it's a public road why does the why is the neighbor conflicted on where
establishing it here on the it would it would be so um the what they were um what they were considering before um is so there's Cedar Point Road you maybe
see on the map so Cedar Cedar Point Road um is um it it shows the road right so this is coming off of Cedar Ridge Road this this proposal um what was considered before was Cedar Point Road and um and that actually follows the neighbors driveway
and it's never been actually established as a public road um by the township so the township doesn't maintain it okay um and so there were conversations with the township about about providing access and um um and with the neighbors about
that the the road actually um comes right next to the the neighbor's house so like to to open that up would actually bring public traffic like within like 10 20 feet of the neighbor's home um so that was considered and it
was uh um it was a kind of abandoned as an idea nobody was in was really in favor of that but the petitioner might have more information on that those convers conversations than I do just I'm curious if retooling Cedar Point Road is a
lesser variance than and that's not our concern here necessarily but carving through the bluff with a new road as opposed to just reconfiguring an existing public road yeah that was that was considered in depth I think during the variance you have some comment
Jordan we talked about that a lot at that board of adjustment meeting and being that that Cedar Point Road is completely on the neighbor's property I believe the conclusion we had was that they would still
need uh some kind of easement to come from that road across just a little bit of the neighbor's property to access their property and like Lou said the neighbor didn't want all that traffic going right
by their house so they were not willing to consider an easement for that but with how it's drawn it would also provide access to that northmost parcel that's kind it's just off the the from the the bound that we're seeing there
which say someone bought that North Parcel they they would have to let you know you can't have a landlock parcel if you have a public road that can service it so what's the difference then if you know again this is conjecture and this is sometime down the road that North Parcel would have to be serviced by
Cedar Point Road anyway not necessarily they could deny that but it's a public road so they can't not C Point Road is oh I'm sorry point is not a public road but it's does it necessarily mean it's not a public
road it is it is it is platted um but the township has not opened it um and so um yeah there is some legal you know um if somebody wanted to push that there it'd be a um issue for attorneys to AB
to discuss just because the township doesn't want to pick up the responsibility of providing service to it doesn't necessarily mean it's a private road it just means it's kind of in a gray area of who maintains it and how do you do that and that's the agreement between all parties that
occupy that road um I I I just think it's I'm I wasn't on the disc discussion I'm sure this is the least variance approach I just it might be plotted but it doesn't mean it's an active road sure sure so the township would not have to assume that responsibility and it would
be right not to it sounds like a well you have to bring it up to grade and there's a lot of things that come into issue there yeah Louie if I remember my little law would I know about it but if there was three residences back on the road the township can be forced to take
it over if the people build it up to grade so I mean let's let's let this dog lay and let these people decide their own problem it's not our Forte to get into most townships won't accept the road unless it's four rods and I would put it
right in their living room you said four rods four rods that's 66 * 4 whatever that is 66 ft but this brushes right up to that house makes sense so it the house would be right on the
RightWay I see that Marsha had a question that I'm supposed to ask since she's not here um I thought she was on is this proposed driveway going to
be of adequate width and everything so that emergency vehicles can get up it without problems because she said in this topography that's a
a real bone and we've got enough reasons to have emergency medical Vehicles be abandoned and not be able to get people to man them so let's not make a bigger problem out of the one we already got right and
so the Emergency Services can they it's up to them how they feel the conditions are when they when when they're responding so um we did adopt um driveway standards uh that we're trying to get at U at at that very thing to
make sure that access is is safe and um able to be um accessed by emergency vehicles deliveries and um and others um and that's where the 12% grade um was adopted and there's a minimum width as well as the requirement for turnarounds
if the driveway is um is over 300 ft and so there would be need for um um for a some sort of a turnaround it that meets the the the zoning ordinance chapter 9 um so there are standards that are supposed to ensure that you know there's
a better chance of safe access um that said um emergency vehicles you know um depending on the conditions they do make that decision you know in the moment well I understand that part too um but yeah the the the standards
that we have the 12% grade for the surface of the driveway um the minimum width that we have in the ordinance and then the turnarounds we all um to address that issue that's all in this it's in the zoning ordinance and would be required it's stated that they have
the permit holder if we if it gets granted would have to abide by them um they would have to abide by it anyways as part of the zoning Ordnance and would be part of our review for the development certificate of okay and that's condition for back okay
any other questions L well did you say that there were five conditions or just these four well let's look again here I have four I see four as well what page well number 5 yeah there's 56 to was there
and that 56 addresses the skape slope um i' also point out that s swc has reviewed and has comments in your packet um as well and did not have I mean has some um suggestions that were um talked over with the property owners
and um it's understanding that they would incorporate into the plan so yes there are four conditions thank you thank you Luke you bet could I have uh the petitioners come forth
Beth Or Aaron are both of you me yeah state your name and address my name is Beth Turner and the address short sorry is 3301 26 Street South Lacrosse Wisconsin thank you uh the one thing I wanted to point out if you guys want to go to 72 on your binder uh this is the
additional requirements so we talked with uh Soil and Water to adding in some additional culverts and then also calling out um the geotextile fabric for erosion control on the up slope of the driveway and Shep if I may address your question that was even though was discussed in
the previous I'm just going to go in point please so if you're actually physically here this actually runs through their house so it's one of those where when we talked about it during the appropriation during the am I saying Appropriations board board of adjustment adjustments excuse me Board of adjustments is that the plat hasn't been
updated in over 100 years and so technically their house is running through the road and so and then to get the easement we had to drive in their front right in front of their driveway not in their front of driveway in their front yard so that's why we didn't go that route it makes sense absolutely it's just it was one of those where it looks great on the map and then when we
tried it then we found out that we pretty much run over their house I understand thank you that you're welcome because yes I would love that as an option to be honest but yeah it just a the map with the plat is out of date and then to have to drive in front of their front yard is a little tough um but yeah so we added with the
page 72 we added uh two additional culs um more towards the top of the driveway and then again just called out the geotextile fabric for erosion control and as mentioned by Lou meeting the width width requirements as well as having the turnarounds at the top and
the bottom of the driveways or driveway excuse me any additional questions questions for yeah do you have any intention so this is uh 92 Acres was it 136 much bigger um are you planning on maintaining uh all of it I see that
there's a kind of a Northern Area you know the long-term plan isn't to like split that off we're back to the same concern of how does that get serviced no I mean granted Nobody Knows the future however we have we have the we have the all the top field in CRP and then I put all of the forest in a managed Forest
land as well oh great yeah so the and the plan is to just keep it as residential um there's no plans to farm it do anything along those lines and we like the idea of having CRP uh in both of those fields currently are CRP um at the end of this year the the renewal is supposed to expect to go through and
we'll just do another renewal for another 10 years any other questions thank you D you're welcome thank you have a second I'll second second all in favor say I opening
public hearing I nay if you're opposed hearing none all in favor of the public hearing anybody wishing to speak for or against this petition please come to the mic state your name and your address and your concerns a nobody anybody wishing to
speak for or against this petition please come to the mic and state your name and address okay for the third time anybody wishing to speak for or against this petition please come to the mic state your name and address seeing
nobody I'll second all in favor to close public hearing say I I opposed to not closing it say nay hearing none we're all in favor of closing public hearing okay Commissioners so what is your
wishes backing is there a second of the motion okay any discussion before we vote I just want to say that uh I went on and visited the site you know a couple years ago and we had this at the board of adjustment
and we spent a long time trying to figure out other better Alternatives or if they existed and unfortunately I don't think they do um but I do think this is the best point you could possibly access the Township Road for this driveway and and it gets steeper as
you go downhill and uh it looked like it was the best option although it wasn't the one that I don't think even the land owners would have preferred but that's what we have to deal with and Jord do you mean that from like
even if they went through like the most legally fraught approach of rededicating a road and resurfacing I mean I don't know what the expenses and we can be European about it and not you know have to discuss the the money matter but
the I just I'm shocked that the approach that we're looking at here is less thoughtful in the long term than any other yeah I think it's just because the the neighbors were not willing to to uh
give up access through their property so they kind of just eliminated that entirely unfortunately yeah I guess that that's enough to kill it all right well speak speaking for the neighbor I would be the same position as the neighbor well I mean if I was the neighbor I would say all right take this road and put it on
your land dedicated on your side but SW doesn't allow that they can't move the road that far because they're still running allow that they to try to do the road where the one is now the driveway sure to
reposition that more as you look at it more to the right put you right down in the wood W again and some problems you're back to I yeah I'm going to have to defer to people that have actually been on site because I think they toiled with
that for two years now trying because they passed the board of adjustments in 23 yeah so there's been a lot of heads put together here and as you saw from your documentation a lot of consultants and Soil and Water and so on and so forth
does they really have a detailed plan how they're going to build it right down to the what kind of grass you're going to put in and they did look into the access road being uh so emergency can get there that's that limited
12% the maximum is 10.9 as I read it 119 119 thank you and that's stated in here and uh to try to change the grades differently would require enormous amount of Earth moving
so so with that said though we have a motion in a second to um with the finding is a fact and the conditions to recommend this to the County Board is that correct
Louie all in favor say I I all those not in favor say nay nay okay so we're six to one I I voted in favor clarify that so your next uh time with the County
Board is Tuesday April 8th at 9:00 a.m. okay now our next petition uh is duck at PC 03-20-2018 the following to allow modifications to
existing animal feed lot that results in a feed lot in excess of 300 animals units Pursuit into chapter 8.4.2 and chapter 104.61 of the wona County
ordinance change also to permit liquid manure storage area and location and Design uh with that said uh take it away for me thank you Mr chair it's a mouthful there I'm I'm glad you covered that for me
before I start um I'd like to introduce ran burum the new feed lot officer for Winona County this being a feed lot request in the future you'll likely be seeing can stand up the rest of the commission hasn't seen you all right can you repeat your name again because I'm
Brian ber you Brian all right thank you okay so this is an amendment of an existing conditional use permit which many of you probably have seen before but some of you perhaps not um action on it you know if it fails it reverts back to what was previously
approved in 2017 so you're not considering this project from a new you're considering the changes from what was previously approved so the summary here first we'll cover the existing conditional use permit that cup 1232 and then we'll
cover the the Amendments and they consist of the changes to the liquid manure storage area design changes to the proposed location and then a increase in animal units here is the existing conditional
use permit and it is to construct a and I'm not going to go through all the sizes here but to construct a milking parlor um a smaller liquid manure storage facility a two larger ones the prior the prior uh design was for a
two-stage pit so it would first go into a a settling pit and then it would go to a larger storage pit um and then there are additions to three barns on here and and they increase the
animal units at that time to here's the locations of uh and the various things I just covered the pink locations there are the previously approved Pit locations and I want to clarify when I say previously approved what I mean by that is the conditional
use permit for those facilities were approved in addition to that before one could construct they would need both a feed lot permit and a development certificate those permits were not sought or or issued but the conditional use permit is still valid then in red
there you see the proposed new location for the pit and that is that's scale drawn so the sizes are are representative of what's actually being proposed same information just seen in a 3D view um pretty flat ground up there but you you see some variation in the
landscape you note that uh kind of in the upper Center you see a lightish blue colored area that's a mapped Wetland so the the old facility was proposed in a location um which might have had some Alles in terms of the Wetland for
construction this is from the design that came forward and was approved in 17 and that's that two-stage pit again you see the smaller more Square feature um first and then going to the larger rectangular feature as I noted before that the
initial the first one the smaller square that was proposed to be concrete the larger uh structure that was proposed to be a synthetic liner these are not actual on-site facilities these are just examples but
that is a example of a concrete manure storage area and that is an example of a synthetic lined manure storage area so the requested design changes so the original the two-stage design as I
said with an estimated capacity of 15.5 million gallons now being proposed is a single concrete storage area with a capacity of 11 and A4 million gallons Amendment as it relates to change of
location so the new facility is proposed approximately 100 ft South and slightly to the east of the previously proposed location we look at that in the context of required setbacks from dwellings the yellow circles
represent th000 foot setbacks from existing dwellings and I'll note that there is a right there that does not have a buffer added to it because it is it is occup IED by the uh operator of
the feed lot and in addition it is already within the croach setback area from this particular feed lot and the feed lot expansion is proposed to the east so further away it's not getting any closer to that house than it PR previously
was um going to cover some things here related to kst a as the new location being proposed would have perhaps a different a different um impact on the C so here you're seeing the cross-section from the proposed pit
the bottom of the of the pit being proposed at I'm squinting here 12,36 and5 ft and the Bedrock estimated at 122.8 FT so a this separation distance of a about 15 1 12
ft here you're seeing the same Farm instead with the carst map on it so you see sink holes mapped um all around the the vicinity of the proposed location and there's one you'll see that's mapped right smack dab in the middle of The Farmstead and we'll spend some time
talking about that one this is a similar map it's not quite as zoomed out and this was prepared by the engineer who did the carst evaluation for the design of this project and you'll see on the map the different features are labeled fs and E
so F1 is the is the feature that showed up on the carse map that was right in the middle of The Farmstead and this is an e excerpt from the kst report um and it describes what they found at F1 and I guess I'm going to read this in so this is a feature that
had previously been disputed by the landowner and subsequently excavated in the past and was found to be a buried carcass or carcasses from the farm operation I personally spoke with the former nrcs District conservationist Mr Mark on March 4th of 2025 and he
attested to the fact he was on site when the excavation took place and the dead animal remains were exposed he specifically recalls the incredible pungent smell of the rotting animal The Remains were reburied and then it provides the approximate ground
elevation where that excavation occurred and this is correspondence related to that same feature that F1 um and this is a an email sent on March 17th from that prior conservationist Mark G to Pete frier the
engineer who did the cars devaluation and he says this email is in response to your request for information relative to a site inspection I was part of approximately 20 years ago as USDA nrcs District conservationist in Winona County Minnesota I'm going by memor here
but Jack Miller had a possible sinkhole in his building site as located on the Winona County sinkhole map according to the Miller family the alleged sinol site was actually a spot where they had buried a dead cow years prior the site was excavated by BHO and no evidence of cars
geology was found subsoil ex excavated was dark colored and had very nasty smell consensus at that point was that the site was not a sinkhole which which concurs with your inspection we discussed and then finally another piece of
Correspondence and this time it is from uh again the engineer who conducted the cars investigation report Pete frier and this is to the applicant and he writes Rob I received this from mark C this morning Mark is referring to feature F1 from my carst investigation this is for
your files and for the county and PCA if they need additional documentation to have the feature marked as F1 from my carst investigation removed from the Cars inventory okay so um spent a lot of time on on F1 don't want to beat a dead dead
horse or cow nothing okay so moving down to F2 that's the other one I'm going to zoom way back up so we can see it on the map again F2 is within that half mile radius that Circle a half mile from the proposed pit location F2 there just below the I believe that's a Township
Road F2 so this is a feature s that was shown on the existing cars map no evidence of a low in this location at the time of the site investigation on March 3rd of 25 specifically investigated this area for evidence none found and again this
is taken from the kst investigation report and then the ease and again I'm going to zoom back up a lot of ease just north of the proposed site noted in the carst investigation so the
ease no SS depressional areas or cars features and that's just a general statement about the entire half mile survey he did but then he goes on to talk about the ease and he says I did however identify several interesting features that are described for this investigation so that the features are
not interpret interpreted later at some point in air I will refer to them as e features and are shown on the transc 1000 foot map any questions on any of this carst investigation that I've covered so far
or if any arise while I'm in the midst of the presentation please interject okay I'll keep going here so this this map shows the initial car survey and each of those black dots there are 17 of them those represent
backo pits that were dug transitioning now to Winona County's regulatory role this is language from the Winona County ordinance that allows for a discretionary option for an additional carst investigation initially there was some
miscommunication between the design engineers and the engineer who did the Carston investigation and then the design Engineers took his report and interpreted to mean that additional investigation was
needed that was subsequently clarified and in that report this this page and the work that this page depicts was actually the additional investigation work that the Pete frier the engineer who did the carst investigation took it upon himself
to do so after reviewing the backhole pits and doing his initial investig ation he then went and walked each of those lines to survey for cars so in your initial uh staff reports there may have been some reference to perhaps a
need for additional investigation we in the time between when those were provided to you and today uh we clarified what the engineers involved that they feel that they have done this is above and beyond what would have normally happened in a standard cars investigation and they both feel that
this is a a satisfactory in additional geotex or Geo technical investigation please you you got 1260 on that slide
yeset now is that standard footage or not I don't know with confidence the answer to that I can tell you that the feed lot specs key off of a th000 feet so you get we we'll get into a soil or maybe we
won't get into it in my presentation but in your packets you might have you might have seen mention a soil collapse risk factor and those numbers are arrived at based on the numbers of CST features sinkles within a th000 feet of The
Proposal so in this case 1260 at a half mile he's he's going slightly Beyond where that that regulatory distance but I don't know if that's the the standard or that just happens to be what he did in this case that's why they hire an engineer to do it okay
okay so this is correspondence between myself and the project design engineer The Firm that actually designed the pit and they were the firm that initially suggested to us that we needed to do an additional
investigation so here it starts on the top and she's telling me that I'm correct on both accounts and I POS two questions down there and I say is it msa's position that no additional C investigation is needed and she replies correct no additional C investigation is
required as Peter frier has completed this already and those are those those Transit walks and then I ask viewing figure two is guidance figure two is a mpca guidance figure that um is associated with with assigning risk to a project is
the project as designed appropriate in the proposed location based on the professional EXP experience and Judgment of msa's Engineers and she replies yes the design project is appropriate uh for the proposed location and these this was sent the
17th so very recently that's everything I had on kst any questions on kst before we we jump forward all right animal units um conditional use permit from
2017 placed an animal unit SE ceing of 921.166380 as far as I'm aware that conditional use permit is still in effect they're not asking for action on that conditional use permit here today though they're asking for action on conditional use permit 1232 which has a a different animal cap
ceiling uh in 2017 as I said they registered at or the cup placed them at 9.21.2 at September 21 a feed lot inspection occurred and on it it noted that they were registered at 99.6 animal
units on uh March of 2020 but we were unable to locate any record of the registration and it was never put in the state database so we believe that may have been a typo of sorts questions on animal units yeah we have discussed this many many many many
times when you issue a cup like I live in Warren Township and if Warren Township like you stated issued them a cup for 998 animal units that's grandfathered
in from every aspect I ever saw before I wouldn't disagree with you I wouldn't use the phrase grandfather didn't I would say that it's a still still a valid conditional use permit we don't have a lot of uh information related to that we did find the actual permit but in terms of you know what the
proposal was um it's a fairly thin file thin as in one sheet we just had one guy working on yeah um no I guess I would not dispute that it's perhaps a valid conditional use permit but again we're here because they applied to amend a
different conditional use permit I'm just putting that up there because it is a relevant fact so zoning um it's in the a district a district all around it ordinance pathway I'm not going to rate all this but this is how you would
arrive at um you know someone being able to do what they're proposing to do in that location I I will note that uh G to your point assuming that higher animal unit cup is still active we've got language that it
requires a conditional use perit for any change in operation so they would arguably still need to come in to propose a different style of pit or propose a pit from no pit yeah I understand that more more ordinance
pathway site characteristics so Warren Township uh this happens to transcend two different Parcels not not an ideal situation but in this particular site looks like a situation that has been allowed in the past because the partial angle is right through the
barn um it's off of County Road 25 and it's a rural setting here's a slope map yellow means flat pretty flat out there permanent history so that was in your packets um it's limited to the permanent actions that are relevant to
feed lots more involveed feed Lots it was extensive it is not presented as comprehensive uh no comments on this other than from the township and their comment was simply checking the box that they support the application and final thoughts again
they're asking to amend it they're not asking to permit a new a manure storage facility they're asking to change a previously authorized um design and location um should should the uh Amendment be approved they would then
seek a construction short form I'll note here that we are I'm I'm calling out one of the conditions that we're placing on there and that is that language and we're proposing a condition that reads that the county shall not issue a Fe spe lot permit for the construction of the
lmsa until npca has completed a review of the lsma design and verified that all applicable design standards are are satisfied it is a a bit of a complex design it has uh transfer of manure among existing pits it's probably above
the pay grade for for zoning staff here to to go through that design and make sure it's all met but we've spoken with PCA about and they're willing to assist us with that review uh in addition to the feed lot permit would also need a development certificate um you know same guidance as
always a review all the material and testimony uh you've got an analysis from staff and you've got draft findings from the attorney's office and should you move to recommend approval youve got proposed conditions
as well anything for me yeah um as these structures are uh extending past the property line I mean they own both Parcels correct they're going to be foot printed on corre common
ownership yes okay so I guess my question is are we able to permit something to come into existence and immediately be legally non-conforming well great question um I have sought guidance on whether a
property line setback or an area for that matter should be calculated on a per parcel basis or based on the outermost boundaries of all commonly owned Parcels since my arrival here and yet to receive it um I will tell you that in the other counties I've been in
Lacrosse County did not do it cumulatively they did it on the parcel basis in Houston County we did it cumulatively so if somebody owned 40 and needed to split off five acres so a bank would load them money to build a house we wouldn't say that the house is on 5 Acres we would afford them the you know
the acreage they need needed to build in that District here um you know I come across examples of it being done both ways but it really should be something that's it's not clearly articulated in the ordinance perhaps it ought to be or if not that it should be clearly U laid
out in in a policy of some sort so we do it consistently it's not in the ordinance all right great any other questions for Aron yeah reference the curs grown underneath there the pit is actually
smaller than what he currently has is that right it's going to be cement rather than a combination nearly right he so he doesn't currently have the other pit he's looking to change the design for a a pit that was approved as part of a
conditional use permit but never constructed okay but you are correct that um the this new proposal should be safer for storage I would think it is a concrete pit there's no liner and it is a um less volume than
the two before yes I'm sorry so to summarize your question were you those was the whether it would hold it on that terrain no better model now with a cement pit rather than a textile one for
that was actually planned to be a bigger holding tank you know the new proposal is actually a safer proposal I would think for the sink holes and cursed ground I that's that's probably a subjective thing and that I wouldn't but
but but in terms of your answer in capacity it appears to have less capacity and in terms of the answer to you know synthetic liner versus concrete it is concrete the old approval was for synthetic anything else thank you Aron you're
welcome can I have uh the petitioners come up State your case um state your name and address you want my living address or the facility address I would say your living address because we want to know where you're from all right Rob
Miller I live at 26747 Rush Creek Road which is about two miles west of there and then one thing to note also on the new engineering specs we um by moving it there we also have uh
considerably greater uh Bedrock setback so um according to the engineering specs we now are actually exceed kfo specs for the Bedrock separation you define that Kos concentrated animal feed lot operation thank
you so even though we are not a kfo um site yet um we are already um meeting the more stringent standards so um we just decided that we
um we felt that was safer to um go with full concrete instead of the liner um we've known there's some been some issues with some some you know some synthetic liners there have been some technical issues and then it also um moves it away further away from property
lines any questions uh yeah I have a question just in terms of what was previously approved so that kind of that fuchsia area yes um how long ago was that approved is 2017 2017 and it just through the specs it just didn't make sense to forward um no
actually uh right after we got those uh designs made there was a anerobic digestor company that was potentially coming into the county and uh we decided to hold off to see if that was a viable option you know and um through the
course of the years that option became non-relevant you know so we decided to revisit the pit um the pit specs if we would have been with a digest would be um slightly different that's why we didn't want to build a pit and then have
to modify it immediately so we decided to hold off Louie you had a question all of you got how much volume with our current animal units um this one should hold 14
months this way um because the new mpca recommendations they are not they're not statute set they're not ordinances um they basically want uh minur what they're they're trying to eliminate winter time spreading so um but they
also want to do with nitrate issues they want to have it so that uh minur application windows fall after November 15th and before freeze up because otherwise if you put manure on the ground earlier than that and the ground temperatures are above 50° the
biological activity turn um the Nitro the nitrogen which is in manur which is an ammonia ammoniated form into nitrates and because nitrates have a negative charge along with soil having a negative charge that's why nitrates leech so by
delaying the application so what we're trying to do is basically get ahead of those you know CU they've been they've been trying to get those for several years and uh this summer is a new proposal time for the npca so they are going to be proposed again they don't
know if they're going to be enacted into law or whatever you want to call it but like I say we just wanted to have things set up so that we didn't have to modify or do things anytime soon any other questions
go ahead Jam uh I don't know if this is question you can answer Rob but um if this we give you a amended cup then you would be grandfathered in
so you wouldn't have to worry about that right you know I don't know how the logistics of that occur at the county level but I can ask Steve yeah would there be any reason you wouldn't want this
cup uh animal unit number to match the one from 2007 or the one that war in Township approved for 9.98 for 9998 um just if you go over 700 cows it automatically triggers triggers
the kfo and with the um animal or the calf units that we have there that's where the number comes to okay so that's the number you plus we're amending 1232 if I remember that number and that would be back further so we're going back to a baseline
okay you know so but basically with this design we're trying to um increase the environmental safeguards you know that was one of the you know one of the things that we're trying to do just to confirm it as I read through
your proposal I see you're going to use a drag line for app that is our intentions yes um the only thing that would stop that would you know um equipment time availability but that is our that is our desire yes and we are also um yeah trying to do
that to eliminate traffic on the roads you now I can understand that for the land you own and operate within reasonable proximity but yes I understand that you own part of
pulley's farm you have Luther Al's Farm yep you're gonna have to you're gonna have to haul that in transports um we do not currently spread Miner over on the pulley Farm oh okay and um the majority of our land base is
within 2 mile radius which is definitely doable by drag line the the aage that we are required to meet our um in management plan is close enough that we can drag line most of it so so
there may be a farm like over by my brother Luke that we would haul some but it would be a small percentage of the the men are in this in the pit yeah I understand but any other questions Rob thank you Rob if you have any more
questions just just feel free to ask right thank you thank you very much for your consideration on this project motion to open the public meeting all second all right all in favor opening public meeting say I I oppos say nay hearing none we're all in
favor opening public meeting anybody wishing to speak for or against this petition please come to the microphone state your name and your address anybody wishing to speak for or against this petition come to the podium
and state your name and your address for the third time anybody wishing to speak for or against this petition please come to the microphone and state your name and address see no
one close the public hearing is there a second and Lou you second it all in favor of closing public hearing say I I oppose n it's so so move you all in favor okay
Commissioners what do you want to do it's an amendment to okay what exists I guess I have um I the way I understand it from what's
been presented and all the talk this is just for the cup right then there's two other steps that we we don't have anything to do with before they can actually start
to build this right well they have other agencies they need to go through that is correct okay okay Y and some this is just for the cup for the amendment of the c y okay 1232 I believe is the one
we're amending to allow to switch from what was formally there to a new site yep is there a second I'll second make sure you mention the findings of fact and uh well yeah
and I'll go over that we have a motion in a second and that is to accept the uh findings of fact as well as the uh in this case five conditions correct Louie yep yes sir any discussion before we
vote this is to recommend the amendment to your cup they have all in favor say I I post n hearing none all in favor uh and your next hearing then will be for the County Board Tuesday April
8th at 9:00 a.m. thank you now we uh amended our uh agenda to discuss uh the new uh comprehensive plan uh Louie you brought that up but uh we all know that that's in the works
and uh Lou I'm going to call upon you to tell us what you know and then uh the commissioner is going to ask you questions sure I can give a little background and then we can just open up to kind of informal conversation but um
um I was before you um I can't quite remember exactly when but last fall uh to let you know that we were starting to consider um um uh planning for um uh the com comprehensive plan we had um put
together a request for proposals uh that was open in October and into November and then um as the county evaluated those proposals and um around
um oh just after the holidays um were before the County Board uh to discuss proposals and the project and then um brought forward a a selection for County board approval in
February um and a consultant was uh was contracted with at the end of February they are srf Consulting Group out of um uh they have offices in Madison and Minneapolis um but they were the top um
scoring um U proposal out of eight so we had good um good responses for the um for that request for a proposal and we're happy to um welcome srf on board and looking forward to working with them over the course of the project which
should last um U probably a solid year um 12 to 14 months is uh the projected U time frame um I can also tell you that there will be a uh steering committee
established um which is appointed by the County Board um and which is going to be on the county board's agenda on Tuesday next Tuesday uh for consideration um they're going to be looking at the process and make up of the board and try to come to
consensus on that um and then um we'll move forward with uh what's being proposed which is a application process similar to the rest of our committees here at the County uh where people could apply uh we're thinking that it'd be
open for a month um and then we'd bring it back to the County Board to make actual appointments based on the Slate that they um agree to uh next week um with that time frame um if everything goes as as planned and we're
able to uh get a a stearing committee appointed and in May then we could potentially have first steering committee meeting in um in June um but um I guess these dates are they're they targets they're not written
in stone they're subject to uh to change um um but um but that's the the current proposal so um I guess that's all I have for the update at this time but if you have questions I'm happy to
discuss long it take to get that done the whole planning process like I said um 12 to 14 months is what we're what we're we're projecting um those processes can go um Can can go really quick I I I haven't seen one go shorter than
what what's projected but sometimes they do go a bit longer depending on um the process Jordan you had a question is is the makeup of that steering committee something that's yet to be decided or is there framework already in place for
that there's a framework proposed um to go to the County Board on Tuesday um and um um it's in I I don't know if it's been released yet I guess I haven't gotten the email but um it comes out in the County Board um agenda packet and so you you'll be
able to see there's just two pages um and uh honestly if you wanted to see I could share it with you tonight something that staff put together or is that part of the Consulting we put it together together uh as as a as a team okay yep um but essentially it's looking
at um you know a makeup of of of the steering committee would be um we're looking for somebody from uh one or two members from the County Board one or two members from Planning Commission uh Board of adjustment
um um members from agricultural community in the county members from Township uh representation um some Municipal some Municipal representation uh again all this is um
um and then some at large members that can you know for just Joe public to be able to um um apply and also be placed we're looking somewhere around 15 people to be um on the steering committee we don't want to get too big because it becomes harder to
manage I think Mike can talk to that uh based on his experience um at the 2014 update um but it is up to the County Board and um so they do hold that um that decision-making um Power
so anybody from any industry around here job market or something um we don't have one specifically called out but that would be a great um um that' be great to have somebody from that um same with banking we don't have anything you know actually
set aside for financial institutions but if there was somebody who wanted to um uh apply there's at large um positions and the County Board is able to look at it and be like hey we've got some really good candidates that we want to make room for and they can they can adjust
that um that slate so my question is when there's a body of probably 12 people that sit within the count look for a whole hell of a lot less money pending consult unless somebody wants
C who who would be sitting to to do that for a lot less money the Planning [Music] Commission but I believe last time Mike be probably speaking all that report yeah I can speak to that last time we
did it uh we did it with an and Jason uh our planning or our director then uh we tried to do it by taking the 2020 or 2010 one I believe it was no it was
20 2000 2004 it's 10 years yeah and we don't always hit that 10 year mark because it carries on and uh it's a lot of work out we're talking about a group of 12 to 15 and
last time when I shared it we had 23 and it's hard to put a committee of 23 together have an organized meeting that lasts less than two hours and when you got too many chiefs in there pretty soon you don't get anything done because
we're we're a group of nine we'll triple that almost uh but we do have extra people com in staff's coming in and there is a outline I think our current uh comprehensive plan is about 200 pages is
that about right somewhere in there I won yeah I won't argue with you we try to make it shorter but then everybody wants their little bleep in there and stuff and then pretty soon the pages expand but the principle behind it is guide to County
on where you think we should be and then you put your ordinances in after that so what what is your vision what should we be join and what isn't working cuz if we can adjust that why wouldn't we want to do that that would be a good topic to sit into what is
working and what isn't working absolutely that'll be part of the evaluation right no I I believe when I believe we met 15 times before we got it done and we didn't meet every month so there was some gaps in there our goal was 12 but
you know again with with 23 different ideas it takes a lot more work and we didn't have perhaps a consultant for kind of tying up some red tape maybe if that's what it is but we know in my
opinion as a Planning Commission well we get the uh solar things coming in and we're like wow we had a little more information that where's where's that going and where's the uh Recycling and you know where the
lines and things I'm only using that as one example the other example I'm going to use here we see many things that come before us that I really don't think should be a conditional use permits like we we've
okayed uh dwellings in bass cam how many three totally templated we didn't change anything and I'm what I'm suggesting is make this little more streamlined because I think if we do a
good job on the comprehensive plan and we do a good job on the zoning the less cups you need the less variances you need the better okay because then it's concrete whoever the applicant is can come in and and get business done in an
earlier way now there is things that I think should become before board really do I mean they're in Gray areas but some that I can recall for Board of adjustments dresbar has a sewer problem
so when they sell a a dwelling down there most of women can't put in a full sewer they have to put in a h holding tank right yeah you don't have to go through a variance hearing to know you have to do that or I think the staff is
more than capable of makings just as well as we and I think if more of this is delegated to our staff it's going to make their job easier okay uh because you see how much volumes of stuff we got here uh now some of them are required
I'm not saying they're not but some of the things we do routinely like a variance on a or a conditional use permit on a rural uh residential dwelling I think we can change the parameters on that to make it more clear
and we have a housing problem in the county anyway so why do we put all the wall up okay and we talk a long time about prime Eggland when it's site they're looking at has an acre and a half of of
potential Garden land and I've told you before some of you know I tell you my brother can't even Park his planter and tractor on that you know so we're not really preserving Agland because they're not using that
Eggland in serious ways and I live on a farm this that way it's a razor back it's not your 300 bushel corn so I only use a couple examples and you can think of a lot more things and this is what this committee should uh
brainstorm how do we make this realistic uh something enforcable but something that has vision and helps our community and our County grow I I have we had two instances here
that family owner and sew and all the other things met the qualifications they just wanted to put another relative on the land that was there and there was a relative before there on that land I can't remember the B if it's already been permitted like
that for I don't think it has to come in front of this body I think you can make a value judgment at staff say how's will be a major focus of the of of the plan um and some of those kind
of more flexible um housing Arrangements um um like what you're talking about might be something to consider we got experience I have experience on others that can bring these problems that have been there staff you can bring them too where should be looked at any we will
certainly be leaning on the public yeah well we'll be certainly leaning on the public there'll be extensive public engagement and we'll be back in front of you guys to ask you your opinion as well and um you guys will be the um um the folks
that are considering this um for a recommendation to the county board for approval so we want to be checking in with you making sure that you um are aware of what's going on you get your input and everything all your ideas incorporated as well um as well as the
general public so there there'll be a lot more public engagement this time around um um than um was in 2014 certainly and certainly even the committee or the the group that they appoint there will be public input
hearings not everyone because you've got a work session but when they get a certain amount done they'll ask the public for their input as well Jean before we adjourn you had a question yeah um I guess I've just got a general
comment we put this off for two years because we didn't have a administrator and we're in the same boote again and I don't
think given uh overload that the Monona County Planning Commission has that we should even be considering doing this until we get somebody in a leadership position
to direct this like a planning director yeah best laid plans Jean I mean we did our we did our best we thought we had everything lined up and um um you know Personnel issues happen um we can't
control those um but um we're going to do the the best we can and um and um um I think that with um um folks in the county I know marine and um um our supervisors in the planning environmental service department are on
board and um um taking an active role um we'll we'll we'll get it done we'll move it forward question for these comp plans that come in when we contract that out is there any like um studies done by this firm so they can State like what
our housing looks like or is that done like as a separate thing are there studies that that the firm has done yeah or like or that that will like feed into the the the comp plan right I just I want you know if we get 15 you know
well-minded people but if they aren't too terribly aware of what the barometer check is how can they be making the best plans sure and so um I can share with you the work plan and that lays out um um the process the the planning process that we'll be going through um
Consultants are already um crunching data and collecting information right now um but we'll be looking at um housing study that was done here at wona County just a couple years ago that will be um part of the data set um there'll be a lot of other sources of information that will be pulled in to create a
county profile um that will um essentially be ready for the um steering committee um um to start learning and getting like um processing that data at their first
meeting um uh we will be taking a like all of jurisdictions within the county and reviewing their comp comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances um to see what their plans are for growth and how the county might need to react and um what we might need
to be aware of when we're making our own plans so um so yes there's a lot of information to um synthesize and um and distill um down into the um during the planning process thank you so hopefully the staff and the consultant will also
use the resources like goodu County they updated there 5 years ago well there's about be good points in that so they'd be researching that because they're a River Bluff similar County uh so we have resources out there that we're going to try to bring in true uh as a county that
they may be useful they may not we'll find out from who's ever on the work group part might beate part of the reason that we like these Consultants is that they did have a lot of experience with um with County Government and doing comprehensive plans for counties uh and
Rural counties um similar to to to ours um not all all not all the counties had as much experience so um we are um um happy to have a a firm that um hopefully can bring um um some of that knowledge to
Bear they're at Minneapolis St Paul area at the Metro or they have an office in Minneapolis and an office in Madison okay yeah but there's a lot of work ahead and it just click your fingers and happen like I said the last one took well over
a year it could take two years don't say that don't say that whatever we all need to move on with our lives too but um um a serious group and you say I want to
cover this much and then go back and you've had to revisit so be it last time we we outlined what do we want to do the next meeting so before everybody came you got mailed what area we want to cover with supporting
documentation think about it right right so well it gives you time to prepare before the meeting because you know what what you're going to talk about and then the sporting documentation might be what agriculture what businesses it
depends on what part of the comprehensive plan you're working on but if you're just sitting there looking at the sky going what's going to happen and when we did the last one I told L this earlier and I ched it I limited the meeting to two hours because after two
hours you start deteriorating you could get anything done and uh when people were pushing yes we're pushing your luck tonight but what happens is if you go beyond that then people just feel like they got to preach to you and you don't get answers or
anything positive so I actually had to put a time limit on people I said I'm going to give you one more minute to wrap up your thoughts because other people want to talk about it okay uh so yeah there's parts of doing it that you bog down and there's parts that you can
go through really fast I mean they're just different things that are defining our coning so if you break it into pieces it looks easier okay absolutely that make sense yeah
so think about I think luk suggested maybe two of you guys want to participate in this huh think about um getting an application in and um looking for that um to come out we'll probably reach out to Planning Commission members
as well would love for um at least two of you to um to be excited to par participate um the bottom line is the County Commissioners will appoint word County Commissioners that's the that's our proposal to them um of course they
can you know have different ideas so we'll see what they have to say on Tuesday um I guess last thoughts on that though um I just want to say that we do want to make this this is a this is a comprehensive plan for the rural areas of the county um our zoning ordinance is
for the rural areas on Incorporated areas of the county and so this our goal is to make this a a Grassroots um rural citizen driven process um you know the municipalities we do need to interact with them and and
get get their feedback but um they all have their own comprehensive plan their own zoning ordinance and so this is for the rural areas and we just really um that's that's uh the our goal is to make that um rural lead and um and um and uh
um and hopefully it's something that U people can be proud of and and ums around at some point there is a lot of work back and forth cities for industrial develop jobs that's you can
gr feed wona I know this a little bit off topic but wona has never recognized what the hell it is been a Transportation Center Timber we have the river here that River
affects agriculture of the world yeah absolutely y so I mean we're integrated both together that us it's integrated and we should be working together for get and we and we will we just want to make sure that um
you know um that uh rural voices are heard and um the committee represents um um people from the unincorporated areas that this uh this you know the land use uh that we're looking at will affect you know so have one issue this n thing
going on and they may sit around spend a lot of money but all they're going to argue over is between 30 and 50 pounds of actual end going on how much yield you want project and out of it drop it you may not change the
nitrogen levels in the [Music] water well anyway think about it think about it you guys because if let's say it's 15 we want a well-rounded 15 people that are very Diversified but are
knowledgeable and their unique areas so so anyway it's coming and we'll find out after the County Board gives us a little more information on what they want to do we haven't been invited yet but to come right there we'll be
reaching out um and um we will be checking in with you as well throughout the process and giving updates like this keep you informed so so it'll be part of our agenda you know as we go a little update we won't dwell on it but we'll work on it get
informed I think so that's my next thing motion make motion and Louis is second in it yes all in favor say I I oppos nay