7:00 P.M. on October 4, 2023 

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

Approval of Meeting Minutes: September 6, 2023- Motion to approve – Mio/Marhula. All in favor.  Conflict of Interest Disclosure: None. 

Planning Commission – New Business 

– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Application #23-15CU by Dennis Braaten and James Frohreich:  Tracts in Government Lot 4, Section Seventeen (17), Township One Hundred Sixty-two (162) North, Range  Thirty-two (32) West (Wheeler)- Parcel ID # 19.17.23.020 and 19.17.23.010. Applicant is requesting a  Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 902 of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance to move  more than ten (10) cubic yards of material within the shore impact zone of Lake of the Woods to repair shoreline  damage and to move more than 50 cubic yards of material outside the shore impact zone for the construction of a  dike. Lake of the Woods is a General Development Lake. 

Dennis and James were present at the meeting to discuss the request and answer questions from the board. The board  discussed the information in the application. The board then moved on to the findings of fact. 

Name of Applicant: Dennis Braaten and James Frohreich Date: October 4, 2023 

Location/Legal Description: Tract in Government Lot 4, Section Seventeen (17), Township One Hundred Sixty-two  (162) North, Range Thirty-two (32) West (Wheeler) – Parcel ID# 19.17.23.020 and 19.17.23.010. 

Project Proposal: Applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 902 of the Lake of the  Woods County Zoning Ordinance to move more than ten (10) cubic yards of material within the shore impact zone  of Lake of the Woods to repair shoreline damage and to move more than 50 cubic yards of material outside the shore  impact zone for the construction of a dike. 

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? Shoreline protection. 

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? Shoreline protection. 

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? Remain the same.

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? Lake of the Woods 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 (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Shoreline. 

9) Does the project proposal have a reasonable need to be in a shoreland location? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Erosion protection for Lake of the Woods. 

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 (X) N/A ( ) 

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: ____________________________________________________ 

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 (X) Approved with Conditions ( ) Denied ( ) 

Motion was made by Mio to approve the request as presented and seconded by Marhula. All in favor, motion  carried. 

– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Application #23-16CU by Terry and Susanna Brateng: Lot 13,  Block 1, Riverside Plat in Section Seventeen (17), Township One Hundred Sixty-one (161) North, Range Thirty one (31) West (Baudette) – Parcel ID#: 24.50.01.130. Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit as  required by Section 401 B of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance to use a Recreational Vehicle  (RV) in a Residential Development (R1) Zoning District on Rainy River. Rainy River is an Agricultural River  Segment. 

Terry was present at the meeting to discuss the request and answer questions from the board. The board discussed  the information in the application. The board then moved on to the findings of fact.  

Name of Applicant: Terry and Susanna Brateng Date: October 4, 2023 

Location/Legal Description: Lot 13, Block 1, Riverside Plat in Section Seventeen (17), Township One Hundred  Sixty-one (161) North, Range Thirty-one (31) West (Baudette) – Parcel ID#: 24.50.01.130. 

Project Proposal: Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 401 B of the Lake of the  Woods County Zoning Ordinance to use a Recreational Vehicle (RV) in a Residential Development (R1) Zoning  District on Rainy River. 

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? Recreational water frontage. 

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 ( ) NO ( ) N/A (X) Why or why not? ________________________________________________________________________ 

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? No change. 

5) Is the project proposal’s site location reasonable in relation to any floodplain and/or floodway of rivers or  tributaries? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A (X) Why or why not? ________________________________________________________________________ 

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 (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Riverside plat. 

8) Is the project proposal compatible with adjacent land uses? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Residential.

9) Does the project proposal have a reasonable need to be in a shoreland location? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Rainy River frontage. 

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 (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? Spell out in 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 ( ) 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. Holding tank only allowed until well is drilled and approved septic system installed. 

2. CUP expires 12-31-2025 and camper must be removed. 

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 made by Marhula to approve the request with conditions and seconded by Dunnell. All in favor, motion  carried. 

– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Application #23-17CU by Dallas Schwandt (Nels Holte Agent): A  tract in Government Lot Three (3), Section Seventeen (17), Township One Hundred Sixty-two (162) North,  Range Thirty-two (32) West- Parcel ID# 19.17.24.070 (For Reference Only). Applicant is requesting a  Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 401 B of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance to 

allow a commercial use consisting of a private winter ice fishing access road to Lake of the Woods in a Residential Development Zoning District (R1). Lake of the Woods is a General Development Lake 

Nels was present at the meeting to discuss the request and answer questions from the board. The board discussed the  information in the application. The board then moved on to the findings of fact.  

Name of Applicant: Dallas Schwandt (Nels Holte Agent) Date: October 4, 2023 

Location/Legal Description: Tract in Government Lot Three (3), Section Seventeen (17), Township One Hundred  Sixty-two (162) North, Range Thirty-two (32) West- Parcel ID# 19.17.24.070 (For Reference Only) 

Project Proposal: Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 401 B of the Lake of the  Woods County Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial use consisting of a private winter ice fishing access road to  Lake of the Woods in a Residential Development Zoning District (R1). 

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? Recreational development. 

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 ( ) NO ( ) N/A (X) Why or why not? ________________________________________________________________________ 

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? No change. 

5) Is the project proposal’s site location reasonable in relation to any floodplain and/or floodway of rivers or  tributaries? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A (X) Why or why not? ________________________________________________________________________ 

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 (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? County Road 4. 

8) Is the project proposal compatible with adjacent land uses? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Residential and special protection. 

9) Does the project proposal have a reasonable need to be in a shoreland location? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Access to Lake of the Woods. 

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 (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) 

Why or why not? 1 4×8 sign designating lake access will be placed on a seasonal basis. Dec 1 to April 30^th. 

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 (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? No parking on site. 

The specific conditions of approval are as follows:  

1. CUP expires upon sale of property to others, except designated agent per application. 2. No parking or storage on access road or property. 

3. Signage must state that this is a private road only. 

4. No parking allowed on County Road 4. 

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 made by Marhula to approve the request with conditions and seconded by Mio. All in favor, motion  carried. 

With no further business before the Planning Commission, Mio made a motion to adjourn and seconded by Dohmen.  All in favor, meeting adjourned at 8:18 PM.