Lake of the Woods County Board of Adjustment/Planning Commission Meeting 7:00 P.M. on September 2, 2020 

Tom Mio opened the meeting at 7:00 pm with the following member present: Dave Marhula, Scott Head, Reed McFarland, Wes Johnson, Ken Horntvedt and Marshall Nelson. 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/Head 

Approval of Meeting Minutes: August 5, 2020 – M/S/P McFarlane/Marhula 

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: 

– None 

Board of Adjustment – New Business 

– Consideration of Variance #20-06V by Dale Cook and Jeanette Rubelle  Towne: The West 250’ of Government Lot 3 North of Highway 11, Section  

Eleven (11), Township One Hundred Sixty (160) North, Range Thirty (30) West,  Parcel – 31.11.42.020. Applicant is requesting a variance from Section 501.2.3 of  the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance to split an existing non conforming lot of record which will not meet the minimum lot size requirement of  five (5) acres in the shoreland area of Rainy River. The Rainy River is an  

Agricultural river segment. 

Mio asked Mrs. Cook to come forward to explain the request. Mrs. Cook explained that they  would like to acquire the additional land for a mound septic inspection, as well as privacy. 

Discussion ensued between the Board and Mrs. Cook. Dimensions and trees were discussed. 

Mio asked if there was any more discussion, with no further discussion the Board 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: Dale and Louise Cook and Jeanette Rubelle Towne Date: September 2, 2020 Parcel #: 31.11.42.020 Variance Application #: 20-06V 

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? _Not going to change property use. Makes  room for further possible septic issues_____________________________ 

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? _No change_______________ 

3. Is the practical difficulty due to circumstances unique to this property?  

YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? __Septic sites______________ 

4. Is the need for the variance created by actions other than the landowner?  YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? __Property size_____________ 

5. Will granting the variance not alter the essential character of the locality? YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? ____Will not/Still Residential__ 

6. Does the practical difficulty involve more than economic considerations? YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? __Future septic issues_______ 

Condition(s): _Maximum of 35’ and meet property setbacks. Must be surveyed.____ 

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 ( ) 

Motion to approve with conditions: M/S/P Marhula/McFarlane 

– Consideration of Variance #20-07V by Derek and Brittny Johnson: Lots 21  and 22, Wabanica Beaches, Section Twelve (12), Township One Hundred Sixty one (161) North, Range Thirty-two (32) West, Parcel – 23.51.00.210. Applicant is  requesting a variance from Sections 503.6 and 508 of the Lake of the Woods  Zoning Ordinance to construct a structure less than the required one hundred  (100) foot setback and allow a guest house on a lot that does not meet duplex lot  size requirements within the shoreland area of Wabanica River. The Wabanica  River is a Tributary river segment. 

Mio asked Mr. Johnson to come forward and explain his request. Mr. Johnson explained that he  would like to build a new garage in line with the house and farther from the right-of-way. This  would place it about 80’ from the water.  

Discussion ensued between the Board and Mr. Johnson. They discussed additional setbacks,  septic and living space in the garage.

Mio asked if there was any more discussion, with no further discussion the Board 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: Derek Johnson & James Etterman Date: September 2, 2020 Parcel #: 23.51.00.210 Variance Application #: 20-07V 

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? _Waterfront residential___________ 

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? _Residential__________ 

3. Is the practical difficulty due to circumstances unique to this property?  

YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? _Setbacks from water, road and well 

4. Is the need for the variance created by actions other than the landowner?  

YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? _Lot size________________ 

5. Will granting the variance not alter the essential character of the locality? 

YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? __Will not/remains residential___ 

6. Does the practical difficulty involve more than economic considerations? 

YES ( x ) NO ( ) and Why or why not? _Lot size______________________ 

Condition(s): _Septic updates within two years, septic tank(s) must be at least 50’ from OHW.  Completed by 12/31/2022________________________________________ 

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. 

Motion to approve with conditions: M/S/P Head/Nelson 

With no further business, Mio entertained a motion to adjourn the Board of Adjustment meeting and open the Planning Commission meeting. M/S/P Marhula/Head

Planning Commission – New Business 

– Consideration of Zone Change #20-01ZC by S & J Real Estate, LLC: Lot 1,  Block 1, Lukes Estates in Section Twenty-four (24), Township One Hundred  

Sixty-two (162) North, Range Thirty-two (32) West – Parcel ID# 19.58.01.010.  Applicant is requesting a Zone Change from Section 303 of the Lake of the  

Woods County Zoning Ordinance to change the current zoning from Residential  District (R-1) to a Commercial-Recreation District. 

Mio asked Gary Moeller to come forward and explain the request. He explained that they would  like to place a three-bedroom cabin on this lot to be rented out on a short-term basis. Josh  Stromlund gave a brief description on the historic zoning of this lot. 

Mr. Mio read a letter from the public in to the record. 

Mio asked if there was any more discussion, with no further discussion the Commission moved  on to the Findings of Facts. 

Lake of the Woods County  

Rezoning 

Findings of Fact and Decision 

Name of Applicant: S & J Real Estate, LLC Date: September 2, 2020 

Location/Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 1, Lukes Estates of Section 24, Township 162N, Range 32W  (Wheeler Township) 

Current Zoning Classification: Residential Development (R1) Proposed: Commercial-Recreation Parcel Number(s): 19.58.01.010 Application Number: 20-01ZC 

The Planning Commission shall consider all facts from all sources prior to submitting a  recommendation to the County Board relating to a proposed zone change. Its judgment shall be  based upon, but not limited to the following factors as applicable. 

1. Is the zone change consistent with the Lake of the Woods County Comprehensive  Land Use Plan? 

_x__ Yes ___No 

Comments: Resort area, previously commercial, also within the growth corridor 

2. Are the existing surrounding land uses consistent with the proposed zoning  classification? 

_x__Yes ___No 

Comments: No change from past years, previously residential 

3. Will the zone change alter the characteristics of the neighborhood? 

___Yes _x__ No

Comments: No change 

4. Is there a potential for public health, safety or traffic generation impacts based on  the proposed zone change and how will they be addressed? 

___Yes _x__ No 

Comments: None/no change 

5. What additional public services would be necessitated and would existing utilities  be sufficient to accommodate the proposal? 

___ Yes _x__No 

Comments: No change/none 

6. Will the zone change impede the normal or orderly development and improvement  of surrounding property for uses permitted in the zoning district? 

___Yes _x__ No 

Comments: No change 

7. Has there been a change in the development in the general area of the property in  questions? 

___ Yes _x__No 

Comments: Same use 

8. Will the zone change have a negative effect on property values in the  

neighborhood? 

___Yes _x__ No 

Comments: Should improve values – replaced old trailer house with new rental cabin 

Conditions: None 

The Lake of the Woods County Planning Commission hereby recommends to the Lake of  the Woods County Board of Commissioners adopt the above findings and DENY /  APPROVE the application for a zone change be WITH / WITHOUT conditions. 

_____________________________________ September 2, 2020 Tom Mio Date 

Chair, Planning Commission 

This is in accordance with Section 1204 of the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance.  Motion to approve as presented: M/S/P Marhula/Horntvedt

– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit #20-06CU by Richard Schram: A  tract in Government Lot 2, Section Seven (7), Township One Hundred Sixty-two  (162) North, Range Thirty-two (32) West – Parcel ID#19.65.00.080. Applicant is  requesting a Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 902 of the Lake of the  Woods County Zoning Ordinance to allow the applicant to move more than ten  (10) cubic yards of material within the shore impact zone of Lake of the Woods  for the purpose of repairing shoreline damage. Lake of the Woods is a General  Development Lake. 

Mr. Schram was not present, so Josh Stromlund explained the request. Mr. Schram would  like to complete the shoreline protection project started in 2014 from the extreme ordinary  high-water event. 

Mio asked if there was any more discussion, with no further discussion the Commission moved  on to the Findings of Facts. 

Lake of the Woods County Planning Commission Findings of Fact and Decision 

Name of Applicant: Richard and Lynn Schram_____ Date: September 2, 2020__ 

Location/Legal Description: A tract in Gov. Lot 2, Section 7, Township 162 North, Range 32  West – Parcel ID #19.65.00.080 

Project Proposal: Place more than 10 cubic yards of material in the shore impact zone of Lake of  the Woods for the purpose of rip-rap. Lake of the Woods is a General Development Lake. 

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? __Will 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? ___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? ___Reason for project_____________________________________ 

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 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: _None______________________________ 

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 ( ) 

September 2, 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 as presented: Horntvedt/Marhula 

With no further business Mio entertained a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:48 p.m. Adjournment: M/S/P Horntvedt/Head