Skip to content

September 3, 2025

  1. Home
  2. L&W Minutes
  3. September 3, 2025

LAND & WATER

September 3, 2025

Lake of the Woods County Board of Adjustment/Planning Commission Meeting 7:00 P.M. on September 3, 2025 

Ken Horntvedt opened the meeting at 7:00 pm with the following members present: Tim Nordlof, Tom Mio, Ken Horntvedt, Wes Johnson, Marshall Nelson, Nancy Dunnell 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: Mio/Johnson. All in favor.  

Approval of Meeting Minutes: August 6, 2025 – Motion to approve – Marhula/Nordlof. All in favor.  

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: None.  

Planning Commission – New Business 

– Consideration of Interim Use Permit Application #25-07IU by Tyler and Hannah  Peterson: Government Lot Six (6), Section Six (6), Township One-hundred Sixty (160)  North, Range Thirty-three (33) West (Potamo) – Parcel ID# 28.06.32.000. Applicant is  requesting an Interim Use Permit as required by Section 1106 of the Lake of the Woods  County Zoning Ordinance to operate a short-term vacation rental in a Rural Residential  Zoning District (R2). 

Tyler and Hannah Peterson attended conference call 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: Tyler and Hannah Peterson Application Number: 25-07IU Date: September 3,  2025 

Location/Legal Description: Government Lot 6, Section 6, T. 160N, R. 33 W Parcel Number:  28.06.32.000 

Project Proposal: Applicant is requesting an Interim Use Permit, as required by Sections 1106 of the  Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance, to operate a short-term vacation 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? Residential use. 

  1. Is the project proposal consistent with maintaining public health, safety, and welfare? This  includes the following items: 

• Safe drinking water or other approved alternatives 

• Compliant septic system and sized accordingly 

• Smoke/carbon monoxide alarms

• Fire extinguisher(s) 

• Emergency contact list of numbers

• Egress windows 

• Evacuation plan and fire safety protocols 

 YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Per application. 

  1. Is the project proposal compatible with adjacent land uses? 

YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Rural Residential. 

  1. Is the site in harmony with existing and proposed access to the property?   YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? County Road 2. 
  2. Will the project proposal increase traffic to and from the site? If so, has the applicant adequately  demonstrated how the increased traffic is to be addressed?  

 YES ( ) NO (X) N/A ( ) Why or why not? No change. 

  1. Has the applicant adequately addressed how parking is to be addressed on the property? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? On site. 
  2. Is fencing and/or screening needed to buffer the project proposal from adjacent properties? YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A (X) Why or why not? _______ 
  3. 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? _______ 

  1. What is the maximum number of occupants and is this reasonable for the project proposal’s  location? 

 YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? 4 per application. 

  1. Are the proposed periods of use and operation reasonable in relation to the project proposal’s  location? 

 YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Per application. 

  1. Are the quiet hours reasonable in relation to the project proposal’s location?  YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Per application. 

The specific conditions of approval are as follows (Check all that are applicable to this request):   

The interim use permit terminates five (5) years from the date of approval or upon sale or  

X transfer of the property, whichever occurs first. 

X The septic system is sized for the maximum occupancy identified in the application. 

X The maximum occupancy is limited to the identified number in the application. 

X The established quiet hours are as identified in the application. 

X A valid Certificate of Compliance for the septic system is required. 

X No on street parking is allowed. 

X If applicable, applicant must meet the Minnesota Department of Health requirements. Additional Conditions 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 ( ) Approved with Conditions (X) Denied ( ) 

September 3, 2025 _____________________________________ Date Ken Horntvedt, Chair, Planning Commission 

This is in accordance with the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance 

Motion to approve with conditions by Nelson, seconded by Dunnell. All in favor. Planning Commission – Old Business 

– Consideration of Conditional Use Permit #25-05CU by Buell Consulting, Inc. on behalf  of Lake Area Construction, Inc.: The Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the  Southwest Quarter (SE¼SW¼SW¼), Section Twenty (20), Township One Hundred Sixty two (162) North, Range Thirty-two (32) West (Wheeler) – Parcel ID#19.20.31.000. 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 communications tower in a Rural  Residential District (R2). 

Blair Ransom attended via conference call on behalf of Buell Consulting to discuss the request  and answer questions from the board. Rex Block was also in attendance on behalf of Lake Area  Construction. The board discussed the information in the application. The board then moved on  to the findings of fact. 

Name of Applicant: Lake Area Construction, Inc./The Towers, LLC Date: September 3, 2025  Blair Ranson, Buell Consulting, Inc. as Agent 

Location/Legal Description: The SE¼SW¼SW¼, Section 20. T. 162N, R. 32W Parcel Number:  19.20.31.000 

Project Proposal: To operate a commercial communications tower in a Rural Residential 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? Communications. 

  1. Is the project proposal consistent with maintaining the public health, safety, and welfare? YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Communications. 
  2. 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? _______________

  1. 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? _______________ 

  1. 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? _______________ 

  1. 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? _______________ 
  2. Is the site in harmony with existing and proposed access roads?  

 YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? County Road 8. 

  1. Is the project proposal compatible with adjacent land uses? 

 YES (X) NO ( ) N/A ( ) Why or why not? Rural residential. 

  1. Does the project proposal have a reasonable need to be in a shoreland location?  YES ( ) NO ( ) N/A (X) Why or why not? ______________ 
  2.  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? ______________ 

  1. 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? _____________ 

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

  1. 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? ______________ 

  1. 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? _______________

  1. 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? ____________ 

  1. 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. Approval pending wetland conditions and FCC and FAA regulations. 

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 ( ) 

September 3, 2025 _____________________________________  Date Ken Horntvedt, Chair, Planning Commission 

This is in accordance with the Lake of the Woods County Zoning Ordinance 

Motion to approve with conditions by Marhula, seconded by Mio. All in favor. 

With no further business before the Planning Commission, Mio made a motion to adjourn,  seconded by Nelson. All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:24 PM.