LAND & WATER
January 8, 2020
Lake of the Woods County Board of Adjustment/Planning Commission Meeting 7:00 P.M. on January 8, 2020
Tom Mio opened the meeting at 7:00 pm with the following member present: Marshall Nelson, Dave Marhula, Reed McFarlane, Wes Johnson and Ken Horntvedt. Members absent: Scott Head Others present were: Land and Water Planning Director Josh Stromlund.
Introductions of Board of Adjustments/Planning Commission members took place.
Approval of the Agenda:
Motion to approve agenda – M/S/P Horntvedt/Nelson
Approval of Meeting Minutes: November 6, 2019
M/S/P McFarlane/Johnson
Conflict of Interest Disclosure:
– None
Board of Adjustment – New Business
– Consideration of Variance #20-01V by Ballard’s Resort Inc: The South 75 feet of Lot 8, and the North 33 feet of Lot 7, Riverview Plat, Section Twenty-four (24), Township One Hundred Sixty-two (162) North, and Range Thirty-Two (32) West, Parcel ID# 19.50.00.070. Applicant is requesting a variance as required by Section 1012 of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance, to replace an existing structure with a new structure that will exceed the allowable density within the shoreland area of the Rainy River. The Rainy River is an Agricultural River segment.
Gary Moeller came forward to explain the request. Mr. Moeller explained that they would like to replace the current structure with a 12 unit complex: one structure with twelve, 1 bedroom units. They would be adding 18 beds to their resort. They plan to do this project in phases, but are seeking permission for the entire improvement now. Discussion ensued between the Board and Mr. Moeller. Common area, cooking facilities, number of stories and density were discussed.
Mio asked the Board if they had any further discussion. Hearing none, Mio moved on to the Findings of Facts.
Lake of the Woods County Board of Adjustment
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
SUPPORTING/DENYING A VARIANCE
Name of Applicant: Ballard’s Resort, Inc. Date: January 8, 2020 Parcel #: 19.50.00.070 Variance Application #: 20-01V
A variance may be granted only where the strict enforcement of county zoning controls will result in a practical difficulty. A determination that a “practical difficulty” exists is based upon consideration of the following criteria:
1. Is the variance in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Lake of the Woods County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance?
YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? ____Resort area_______________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________
2. Is the property owner proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official control?
YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? ________Resort area_____________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________
3. Is the practical difficulty due to circumstances unique to this property?
YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? _________Shape and size of lot_____________________ __________________________________________________________________________________
4. Is the need for the variance created by actions other than the landowner?
YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? ____Shape and size of lot________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________
5. Will granting the variance not alter the essential character of the locality?
YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? ___Will not. Remains resort area____________________ __________________________________________________________________________________
6. Does the practical difficulty involve more than economic considerations?
YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? ___Update to current standards for ADA etc. Replacement of an old building_________________________________________________________________
Condition(s): __Plan completed by 12/31/2025, Setback may not exceed alignment with Sportsman’s Villas___________________________________________________________________________________
IF ALL OF THE ANSWERS ARE “YES”, THE CRITERIA FOR GRANTING THE VARIANCE HAVE BEEN MET.
Facts supporting the answer to each question above are hereby certified to be the Findings of the Board of Adjustment. This is in accordance with Section 1205 of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance.
APPROVED ( x ) DENIED ( )
January 8, 2020 ______________________________ Date Tom Mio
Chair, Board of Adjustment
Motion to approve with conditions: McFarlane.
Seconded by Marhula.
All in favor, none opposed. Motion carried.
Mio asked for motion to close the Board of Adjustment meeting. M/S/P McFarlane/Nelson Mio asked for a motion to open the Planning Commission meeting. M/S/P McFarlane/Marhula Planning Commission – New Business
– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit #20-01CU by S & J Real Estate, LLC: Government Lot Six (6), Section Thirty-six (36), Range One Hundred Sixty-seven (167) North, Range Thirty-three (33) West – Parcel ID# 06.36.44.000. Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 401-C of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance, to operate a commercial business consisting of a short-term transient rental in a Rural Residential District (R2).
Mr. Moeller also explained this request. They currently use the Island for shore lunches during the summer and would now like to rent it overnight. He explained that they would like to operate a short-term rental on Kirk Island, for 7 or more days at a time. They only plan to rent in June, July and August. He explained that someone from the business is usually out there every day during those months so they will be checking in on the renters while they are out there. Discussion ensued between the Commission and Mr. Moeller. Septic system, number of bedrooms, and the neighboring Special Protection parcel were discussed.
Mio asked the Board if they had any further discussion. Hearing none, Mio moved on to the Findings of Facts.
Lake of the Woods County Planning Commission Findings of Fact and Decision
Name of Applicant: S & J Real Estate, LLC Date: January 8, 2020
Location/Legal Description: Government Lot six (6). Section Thirty-six (36), Range One Hundred Sixty-seven (167) North, Range Thirty-three (33) West – Parcel ID# 06.36.44.000.
Project Proposal: A Conditional Use Permit, as required by Section 401-C of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance, to allow the applicant to operate a short-term transient rental in a Rural Residential Zoning District (R2).
1) Is the project proposal consistent with the Lake of the Woods County Comprehensive Land Use Plan? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ___Resort/recreation area_____________________________________
2) Is the project proposal consistent with maintaining the public health, safety, and welfare? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x )
Why or why not?
___________________________________________________________________
3) Is the project proposal consistent with the goal of preventing and controlling water pollution, including sedimentation and nutrient loading? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? _____With conditions______________________________________
4) Will the project proposal not adversely affect the site’s existing topography, drainage features, and vegetative cover? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ___Will not change_______________________________________
5) Is the project proposal’s site location reasonable in relation to any floodplain and/or floodway of rivers or tributaries? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ____Shoreline___________________________________________
6) Has the erosion potential of the site based upon the degree and direction of slope, soil type and existing vegetative cover been adequately addressed for the project proposal? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? ______________________________________________________
7) Is the site in harmony with existing and proposed access roads? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? ______________________________________________________
8) Is the project proposal compatible with adjacent land uses? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? ______________________________________________________
9) Does the project proposal have a reasonable need to be in a shoreland location? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ___Resort rental________________________________________
10) Is the amount of liquid waste to be generated reasonable and the proposed sewage disposal system adequate to accommodate the project proposal? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ___With conditions_____________________________________
11) Will the visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters comply with Section 901 of the Zoning Ordinance? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ___No change_______________________________________
12) Is the site adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment systems? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? ___With conditions___________________________________
13) Are the affected public waters suited to and able to safely accommodate the types, uses, and numbers of watercraft that the project proposal will generate? YES ( x ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? __In place/no change___________________________________
14) If the project proposal includes above ground or below ground storage tanks for petroleum or other hazardous material that is subject to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requirements, has a permit been sought? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? ____________________________________________________
15) Will there be fencing and/or other screening provided to buffer the project proposal from adjacent properties? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? ___________________________________________________
16) If signage is associated with the project proposal, has the applicant demonstrated the need for the number and size requested, and minimized the visual appearance as viewed from adjacent properties to the extent possible? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? _____________________________________________________
17) If the project proposal will generate additional traffic to or from the site, has the applicant adequately demonstrated how the additional traffic and parking is to be addressed?
YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( x ) Why or why not? ______________________________________________________
The specific conditions of approval are as follows: __Septic inspection and must meet standards, CUP stays with current owner, must meet MDH standards that apply_______________________
The Lake of the Woods County Planning Commission hereby recommends to the Lake of the Woods County Board of Commissioners that this proposal be:
Approved as Presented ( ) Approved with Conditions ( x ) Denied ( )
January 8, 2020
_________________________________
Date Tom Mio
Chair, Planning Commission
This is in accordance with Section 1204 of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance. Motion to Approve with Conditions: McFarlane
Motion to second: Marhula
All in favor, none opposed. Motion passes.
Motion to keep officers the same. M/S/P Nelson/Johnson
With no further business, Mio entertained a motion to adjourn the meeting. Adjournment: M/S/P Marhula/Horntvedt
The above is not a verbatim transcript, only a summary of what transpired, a complete version has been recorded digitally and upon request can be copied for individuals requesting a copy of the proceedings.