Skip to content

June 1, 2022


June 1, 2022

Lake of the Woods County Board of Adjustment/Planning Commission Meeting 7:00 P.M. on June 1, 2022 

Tom Mio opened the meeting at 7:00 pm with the following members present: Tom Mio, Nancy Dunnell, Ken Horntvedt, Monica Dohmen, Wes Johnson, Marshall Nelson and Dave Marhula. 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 – Dave/Ken. All in favor.  

Approval of Meeting Minutes: May 4, 2022- Motion to approve- Marshall/Dave. All in favor.  Conflict of Interest Disclosure: None.  

Planning Commission: New Business 

– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit #22-09CU by Robert Erickson: Tracts located in the Northeast  quarter of the Northwest quarter in Section Twenty-eight (28), Township One Hundred Sixty-two (162) North,  Range Thirty-two (32) West – Parcel ID#,, Applicant, as required by  Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance 902, is requesting the cumulative movement of more than ten (10)  yards of material within the shore impact zone of Bostic Creek for the purpose of a shoreline rip rap project.  Bostic Creek is a tributary river segment. 

Bob Erickson explained the history of the seawall and past rip rap projects with the group. There was no public  correspondence. 

The board then moved on to the findings of fact and decision.  

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? Prevent shore erosion 

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? Prevent erosion, bank stabilization 

4) Will the project proposal not adversely affect the site’s existing topography, drainage features, and vegetative  cover? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( X ) 

Why or why not? 

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? Stabilize the 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 ( X ) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Prevent erosion 

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? Reason for the project 

10) Is the amount of liquid waste to be generated reasonable and the proposed sewage disposal system adequate to  accommodate the project proposal? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( X ) 

Why or why not? ______________________________________________________ 

11) Will the visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters comply with Section 901 of the  Zoning Ordinance? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( X ) 

Why or why not?  

12) Is the site adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment systems? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( X) Why or why not?  

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 ( ) NO ( ) N/A ( X ) 

Why or why not?  

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:  

1.) Applicant to use typical cross-section design 

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 ( ) 

Motion to Approve with Conditions- Marshall/Ken. All in favor.  

Motion to Adjourn at 7:21PM – Monica/Wes. All in favor.