[0:00] Ready? >> Yes.

[0:02] » All right. Good evening and welcome to the Morrison County Board of Adjustment

[0:05] uh public hearing for uh today's date, September 1st, 2026. Uh please stand and

[0:10] join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[0:16] United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation

[0:21] under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[0:27] [clears throat]

[0:29] All right, I have a few items to cover before we get started. Please sign in at

[0:33] the door if you've not already done so. Uh there you'll find a detailed handout

[0:37] of a step-by-step procedure that we're going to be following tonight. If you

[0:41] wish to take one, please do. Uh putting electronic devices in a silent mode at

[0:46] this time. Also, please note that all testimony is being recorded for the

[0:49] record. Members of the board of adjustment are

[0:52] appointed by the uh county board of commissioners with one member from each

[0:56] of the five commissioner districts. Land services staff is here to assist the

[1:01] board of adjustments with its duties. Uh the task of the board of adjustment is

[1:06] to consider a request for variances and appeals from an order requirement or a

[1:11] decision made by a county zoning official in accordance with state law

[1:15] and county ordinance. Each request is considered on its own merit. The burden

[1:20] of proving a practical difficulty rests with the applicant. If a variance is

[1:25] granted, it's granted to the land, not the land owner. There's a pro protocol

[1:30] for how we will proceed tonight for each variance request. Uh on the agenda,

[1:34] we'll hear a staff report. Uh we'll hear testimony from the applicants and then

[1:38] the board will discuss and gather more information as needed. Next, I'll ask if

[1:43] there's anyone from the audience wishing to speak to the request. I'll ask each

[1:47] party to come to the podium right over there uh state their name for the record

[1:53] uh and give their testimony. Please be as factual as possible and direct all

[1:57] statements and questions to me. Uh after all testimony is complete, I will close

[2:02] the public hearing portion of the process. Uh the board will then review

[2:07] and discuss the case in terms of our findings of fact criteria as required by

[2:10] Minnesota statute and county ordinance. will have a series of votes, discuss

[2:15] whether conditions be made, and have a final motion to approve or deny the

[2:19] request based on those findings. After the final vote on your request, uh you

[2:25] can leave if you wish. Uh our first

[2:31] um agenda item tonight is Rainbow Acres Dairy LLC. if uh those representing will

[2:38] come to the front table here and then just state your name and address for the

[2:42] record. Make sure the microphone is working and we'll move on.

[2:48] » Dave Vanal, >> you say address too.

[2:51] » Address 153 145th Street Swindle. >> Right. Thank you, Dave.

[2:57] Um with that, Amy, do you have a staff report for us?

[3:01] » I do, Mr. Chair. This request is to encroach on the road right ofway with an

[3:07] expanded animal holding area. The ordinance section is section 128 and

[3:12] that requires a 200 ft setback from the road right of way. Here's an aerial

[3:17] photograph of the uh property.

[3:25] And then here is a site sketch.

[3:33] Here [snorts] are some photos taken at the site viewing on the 28th of August.

[3:46] This property is a registered tier one dairy feed lot. The applicant recently

[3:51] combined the property with the parcel to the south. However, it has not been

[3:55] updated in the maps yet. So, that's why you see the two parcels. A variance was

[4:00] granted to the property in 2014 to place a 68x 125 total confinement barn 45 ft

[4:07] from the road right ofway. The applicant proposes a 68x 120 foot addition to the

[4:14] south end and a 68x76 addition to the north end of the 2014

[4:20] barn. Since the original barn encroaches on the north and south property lines

[4:25] and these additions won't further encroach on those setbacks. Per

[4:29] ordinance section 1282, a variance is not needed for those encroachments. A

[4:35] variance is required for the encroachment on the setback from the

[4:38] road right ofway and the barn is 45 ft from the right ofway. The surrounding

[4:44] area consists of feed lots, agricultural fields, and rural residences.

[4:49] And here's just a more detailed drawing as far as um that existing

[4:54] non-conforming barn that essentially sets those north and south setback

[4:58] limits. and then the barn that was approved by variance in 2014.

[5:06] And then here are criteria questions, Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you, Amy.

[5:10] And just for the record, on Friday,

[5:15] uh, August 28th, 26 about 1:00. Most of us were there. Greg was there. Marv was

[5:22] there. I was there. And George was there. Clint, I believe, was there the

[5:27] day earlier? >> Thursday. Yep. About 9:00, 9:15,

[5:31] somewhere in there. >> 9:30.

[5:33] » All right. So, Dave, the entire board got to view what you had out there.

[5:37] You've heard the staff report. Uh, is what Amy presented here accurate?

[5:42] » Yes. >> And this is your opportunity to add any

[5:45] information that you think the board should hear or know about your operation

[5:49] or your plans or what you're doing out there. So, uh, feel free to enlighten us

[5:53] on anything you want. Well, we've had a very successful

[5:58] operation out there the way we have it. And um we need some more room as we're

[6:03] milking more cows now. And um in my mind, it will not affect the uh

[6:10] visibility in terms of the highway. Uh we have that row of trees in there plus

[6:14] some small pines. We had pines the first time, but they didn't take very good, so

[6:18] we put some more in a couple years ago. Uh we try to keep it as neat as we can.

[6:24] And um I I think it'll be just a fine operation

[6:29] when we get this completed. >> All right. Anything else?

[6:34] » All right. The board might have some questions for it. So I'm going to turn

[6:36] it over to the board. Um questions of the board.

[6:43] » Mr. Chairman, >> George. So this question is for Amy. So

[6:47] Amy, what what parcels were uh put together there? Was it the one to the

[6:53] south or? [snorts] >> Yes. Let me get back to the slide here.

[7:02] So, it was this one and this one were combined. So, essentially this property

[7:08] line goes away then. Uh but uh then there is other acreage that's contiguous

[7:14] to this to make up the contiguous 20. >> Okay. And that I guess that's where I

[7:19] was going with it. That south property line does disappear then.

[7:24] » This this south one does not. >> But that doesn't meet that one either on

[7:29] the south. >> Yes, it does. But this this one goes

[7:32] away. But we're looking at um this encroachment here. This barn would need

[7:38] to be this is as far as that one can encroach without needing a variance.

[7:43] » Okay. Gotcha. >> And it's not going that far. So

[7:46] » Okay. Okay. And then Dave, have you talked with the state or Mandat or No,

[7:53] » but they were I'm I'm assuming they were okay with the last variance.

[7:56] » Yeah, the water all goes that way. >> Water goes south.

[8:00] » Okay, >> Mr. Chair,

[8:03] » go ahead, Amy. >> Um, Mindot was invited to the

[8:06] development review team meeting and they did receive the packet as well. And so

[8:11] generally mindot doesn't get real concerned. Um as long

[8:17] as you're not in their right of way, they generally don't have comment. Uh

[8:22] and so they've been notified of this request. Um and we have not received any

[8:27] comment. >> Okay. Thanks. That answers my questions.

[8:32] » All right. Thank you. Other board members,

[8:33] » Mr. Chair >> Marvin.

[8:35] » Uh, so there was brought up about uh storm water plan and you had mentioned

[8:40] about the water flowing towards the ditches and um I noticed in a dirt

[8:45] meeting here Shana made a comment about she'd like to see the water uh not just

[8:51] for going towards the ditches. With that being said, I'm uh proposing that we um

[8:58] have as a condition a storm water plan submitted to u either soil or uh water

[9:06] to that with uh their approval of it.

[9:15] » Okay. So your recommendation is to have a storm water plan submitted

[9:20] » and approved by the uh soil and water. >> Okay.

[9:27] » And I think you understand that you know because you you uh obviously there's a

[9:31] lot of roof in that soil will probably handle it and it does look like it is

[9:35] flowing towards the ditch but when you add more roof there's a lot of imperous

[9:39] surface for that area and you know we get a major rainfall. uh so it uh would

[9:46] be diverted in a proper way. So thank you.

[9:50] » Thank you Marvin. Any other board members?

[9:53] » Mr. Chair >> Clint. Okay. Um

[9:57] then uh Dave the basically the fields all to the west. That's irrigated.

[10:02] Correct. >> Yes. Most of it.

[10:05] » Most of it. Yeah. Okay. And then um I noticed that on site it's pretty clean

[10:10] around there, you know. Um, don't look like you store a lot of feed or bedding

[10:14] or anything there. Is that stuff all like hauled in as needed or maybe just a

[10:18] little bit on hand? Maybe you can explain that a little bit.

[10:21] » Uh, the bedding is hauled in as we needed and goes in the barn. Uh, we do

[10:25] have a little bit of dry manure stacked on the back side of the longer barn.

[10:29] » Yep. >> On cement pads. Um, sometimes gets a

[10:34] little messy, but we try to keep it clean.

[10:36] » Yep. We usually take that manure out of there

[10:39] about once four or five weeks and haul it out.

[10:43] » Okay. >> It's dry. It's kind of dry manure

[10:45] because it's calf, mostly strong. >> So then your feed kind of just gets

[10:49] hauled in. >> Okay. The feed is mostly milk of course.

[10:54] Y >> and then um

[10:56] » a shell pellet mix, shell corn pellet mix that goes in a tank and then we use

[11:01] a little bit of dry hay and that's also stored inside. Okay. basically no feed

[11:05] outside. >> Yep. Okay. So, kind of what where I'm

[11:09] going with it is part of the thing that um we look at, you know, we got that 200

[11:13] foot set back. You got a variance um already, you know, in 2014 for what's

[11:19] there now. Um you know, now you're 45 ft from Road

[11:24] Rightway. Part of the reason we want them back a little farther is, you know,

[11:27] people start putting a lot of things in between the buildings and the road right

[11:31] away and things like that. And that's where I was going with um your stored

[11:35] feed and stuff. There's never nothing there. So um I know this case by case,

[11:39] but so I don't think that's And then looking at the map, you know, uh

[11:43] Department of Transportation didn't say anything good or bad about this. So we

[11:49] assume that um they're fine with it. I would say if you were down closer to the

[11:53] curve, it'd be a little bit different even in my thinking because then when

[11:59] you got to redo a road or something on a curve, then it's getting a little tight.

[12:02] I think where this is situated, um, if the road was to be rebuilt, I don't

[12:08] believe that they'd go past what their road right away is. So, um, but if we

[12:12] were creaturing down towards the south to that curve, it'd probably be a little

[12:16] different situation. So, um, that's why I asked about the feed and bedding

[12:20] stored on site. I didn't see any didn't see any remnants of it. Um I figured

[12:24] that's how the operation is in proximity to the home farm that things are just

[12:28] hauled back and forth. So and then everything's pretty uh everything here

[12:32] is 100% confined. The only manure that would ever leave the confinement would

[12:36] be anything that's stacked on that slab for a little bit. Yeah, we do um in the

[12:41] winter time we do put a row of round bales or two on the south west corner of

[12:49] Long Barn to uh give us a windbreak for the hutches that are out there.

[12:53] » Okay. Y Okay. So now if this expansion goes through then is there going to

[12:58] still be a need for hutches on this property or

[13:01] » there'll still be a few hutches? >> Yeah. Not as many. Yeah.

[13:04] » Okay. >> They might be there but there won't be

[13:05] as many cabs in it. They'll they'll stay in the same pro spot they are now. Yes.

[13:10] » Okay. >> So, they'll probably be used less. A

[13:13] » little less, but as we melt more cows, they might be full as well.

[13:17] » Okay. All right. >> Our nursery and the original barn is uh

[13:22] too tight. We're going to move part of that in farther to the south. And um our

[13:28] [clears throat] uh waiting facility is too small. And so uh because

[13:34] and then when we take our milk pens which they're automatic

[13:39] feeders or actually this north part of the addition will be for baby baby cats.

[13:44] » Y >> okay

[13:46] » south end will be wean kids. >> Okay. So basically this request will be

[13:51] all 100% confinement. >> Yep.

[13:53] » And then where you have the hutches now >> y

[13:57] » that's probably not going to expand at all or much ever because now you don't

[14:02] have the room either. So >> okay. So, just just wanted to be clear

[14:05] on that because on how we're looking at this um we're kind of looking at

[14:09] nothing's going to really change from the open animals,

[14:15] but uh here what we're looking at for the new proposal is all confined.

[14:18] » Yes. >> Okay. I think that's all I have for

[14:22] right now, Mr. Chair. >> All right. Thank you, Clint. Any other

[14:24] board members questions? >> Yes, Mr. Chair.

[14:26] » Greg, go ahead. >> Uh being your shed is getting bigger

[14:29] like in the wintertime going to the north there, you're going to have a lot

[14:32] of storage for snow. What about to the south? You going to have enough room for

[14:37] » We got you got a bad snow pile. >> We got plenty of room for the south. The

[14:40] north is is going to be the tight part. >> Okay.

[14:43] » Yeah, we would pile it closer to the highway.

[14:47] » Okay. Just >> there is still enough room along side of

[14:50] the building. We got a little road there. Plus, there's a lot of grass

[14:53] area. >> Okay. Just wondering sometimes in winter

[14:56] time it gets to be a tight thing.

[15:00] » Any other comments, questions of the board?

[15:03] If not, I have just maybe one. Dave, uh we're talking about the encroachment

[15:08] here on the road rightway. And sometimes, um in the past, we've had uh

[15:14] concerns about the parking of vehicles or farm implement equipment along that

[15:21] stretch. I would assume, and correct me if I'm wrong, that that's not your

[15:25] intent to have parking out there close to the road as these buildings occupy

[15:30] more of that space. Um we we still have some room in front.

[15:35] We usually have about three cars there at a time. We have to come in there with

[15:40] a cattle trailer to load calves out of there and bring calves in daily. Plus,

[15:44] we have to bring a tank of milk over there to pasteurize

[15:48] » on that. Yeah. On that east side now, we're talking uh just 45 ft. And

[15:54] » some of that is taken up by the u by by the the trees and you've got your

[16:00] roadway in there, but it's not your intent to have anything parked

[16:03] permanently along there. >> There is a road right there and then

[16:07] there's some grass and then the trees start. Yeah, we weren't planning on

[16:11] that. >> All right. Are you opposed to a

[16:13] condition being that uh we write in there that uh there won't be any parking

[16:18] of implements or farm equipment in the >> in that encroached area?

[16:23] » Yep. When we bring straw over to the farm to the calf facility, we park

[16:28] [clears throat] a trailer on the south side. It might sit there a day or two,

[16:33] but they'll load it right away and then we come back. Nothing along that side.

[16:36] » Yeah. Sometimes we've had a few of these that are just like this and that's one

[16:40] of the conditions that sometimes we recommend and

[16:44] » All right. If you're not opposed to that, I'd re I'd recommend that as well.

[16:47] » Okay.

[16:51] » Any other questions of the board? Otherwise, I'm going to move this to um

[16:56] uh public comment.

[17:01] » Okay. I haven't called I haven't called public comment yet, but I'm going to

[17:04] here shortly. I was just asking the board if they had any more questions.

[17:07] All right, no other questions from the board. I'll move it to public comment.

[17:11] If you have any public comment that you wish, please go to that podium over

[17:15] there. Microphone should be on. Go ahead and state your name and address for the

[17:19] record so we know who's representing. >> Good evening. My name is Jill Schultz.

[17:24] My husband Charlie and I own the land north and

[17:29] west of of this. And um we rent our land, our field land to Dave, which is

[17:37] fine. Um but we have a few questions. Um you said the north side is already got a

[17:44] variance or something, so we have no say. Um you know, and if if someday we

[17:52] decide to put our own fields in or sell if we want

[17:57] to be able to use all that land. Um, right now we can barely get a tractor

[18:03] around that north side and uh to have more

[18:12] building there I think is going to really take up more room around with

[18:17] things, tractors, cleaning machinery. So, I do have some concerns

[18:23] to the north and to the to the west that there isn't maybe not quite enough room

[18:29] for all of this farming to go on in that smallest space.

[18:36] Um, I I don't want to be a dick at all. [laughter]

[18:39] I want to be a great great neighbor, but I want to be able to use my field as

[18:44] necessary someday. if I want to sell it, I want to be able to have them use all

[18:51] of that. And uh I I guess I didn't realize that we had no say in the north

[18:57] end whatsoever, even though it's getting quite close to our land.

[19:02] They can't even It's very hard to get a tractor on the north side of the

[19:05] building the way it is now. So, I have some concerns with that.

[19:12] » All right. Thank you, Joe.

[19:17] Yeah, the letter was misleading because we had no idea that the variance was

[19:21] already in place on the north end encroaching on

[19:26] » Yeah. And it is encroaching on our lines. I think it's

[19:29] » says it's already been approved. >> Yeah. And I guess in 2014,

[19:33] » we'll address some of those uh concerns as we move forward, but we appreciate

[19:37] your comment, Jill. Thank you. >> Uh I made a request for public comment

[19:41] once. I'll make a request for public comment the second time. If anyone has

[19:44] any comment, please step to the podium and

[19:49] let us know. I'll make one final call for public

[19:55] comment. The third and final call. Any public comment.

[20:00] Having none, I'll uh entertain a motion to close the public portion of the

[20:03] meeting. >> Mr. Chair, I make a motion to close this

[20:06] portion of the meeting to the public. >> Okay.

[20:08] » I'll second it, Mr. Chairman. A motion made by Clint, seconded by George to

[20:12] close the meeting. All in favor, starting with Greg.

[20:15] » I Marv >> I.

[20:16] » Clint I. >> myself is I and George.

[20:20] » Hi. >> All right. The public portion of the

[20:22] meeting is now closed. Now we'll circle back and answer some of the questions

[20:26] there. Um I'll direct maybe first to you Dave if you'll address that. You heard

[20:32] the concerns of Jill regarding the >> the compactness on that north and west

[20:37] side. So, we'd like to hear from you first.

[20:40] » Yeah. Uh the north side, you can see the light ground on the other side of the

[20:46] blue line to the north of Blue Line. That is on their land. And of course, we

[20:51] rent it and we do go through there. Uh basically, because we have not um we

[20:57] have not added on to that barn at all. That's the way it was. Okay. that the

[21:02] the barn on the west has never been touched other than we covered up a

[21:07] little bit of an area. >> We never had

[21:14] north side. >> That was all there, right? We just

[21:18] covered the room. >> We put that we covered it up.

[21:21] » Yeah, that was all there. And so again, it goes back to the size of the lot from

[21:28] pre971. Uh the chicken barn. It was a layer

[21:32] barn. Started out as a >> It was a pullet barn.

[21:35] » Pullet barn. Then they made a layer barn. Yeah. And um on the back side it

[21:42] was a mess for quite a few years after we got over there and we poured some

[21:46] cement to u to put the um straw pack on there. And we could pour some more as

[21:53] well. Um, we do uh that grass that's there,

[21:58] Charlie and Jill. Is that some of that's on your land and some's on ours?

[22:03] » Well, the line is pretty much on the gravel

[22:08] » line is on the gravel. >> Dave

[22:11] » Dave, if you have something, just state it to us. We don't want to have a

[22:14] conversation between you and the audience. So,

[22:16] » okay, that's fine. Yep. So, so, um, we had a mess there right after we got into

[22:23] this facility. It was muddy back there and just a mess. So, we poured some

[22:29] cement in there and then built a driveway along there. And we think

[22:34] that's probably on the line. And then there's grass after that. Uh, it's on

[22:39] Charlie and Jill's land. We seated grass in there. And um it's uh a lot better

[22:46] than what it was. Um it does get a little bit we probably could do a little

[22:52] better about cleaning it more often. Um we usually haul they take the manure out

[22:58] of there with a skid loader, put it on this cement and then about once every

[23:02] five, six weeks we go there with semls and haul it out of there.

[23:06] And yeah, it's tight. We're we're encroaching on their land uh pretty much

[23:12] to go around that side. We won't be encroaching any more than what we are

[23:16] right now. Um same way on the west side. >> Yep.

[23:24] » Okay. Thank you, Dave. >> The go one more. Go ahead. The new barn

[23:28] will not affect anything that goes on behind

[23:33] behind there uh to the west and it should not affect anything

[23:39] more trips around the barn on the north side either. But but we do go on Charlie

[23:44] and Jill's land. I do rent it, but her concern is later on. I understand.

[23:51] » Okay. Thank you. Um Amy, maybe just uh could you for the enlightenment of the

[23:57] the public comment here um what we're addressing on the new structure as

[24:03] opposed to what's already been there. >> Yep. Yep. Happy to break that down. And

[24:08] I own that mistake that was uh in the letter. So I had it in my head that we

[24:14] were doing um an encroachment on the property line as well. Um but because of

[24:19] that original barn, there's a right there that um they have. So we have an

[24:27] original barn running north and south and it's a tier one registered tier one

[24:33] feed lot. Um by the ordinance tier one if you stay within your tier and he's

[24:39] not moving tiers. He's not adding enough animal units to move tiers. If you have

[24:44] a nonconforming uh feed lot, which this is, it's not on

[24:48] enough acreage on its own and it doesn't meet setback from the north and south

[24:53] property lines. Uh if you are expanding up to the top of your tier, uh you can

[24:59] expand to the limit of whatever existing legal

[25:04] non-conforming setback you've got. So when you look at that original barn

[25:09] running north and south, as long as the any expansion any as long as he's

[25:15] staying in his tier and as long as any expansion does not go beyond that, he

[25:21] has that right and does not need to ask for a variance for that. The variance

[25:27] that was given before was for encroachment on the road rightway

[25:32] because that that new barn is a further encroachment. the original barn does not

[25:37] meet the setback from the road rightway and he was proposing a further

[25:41] encroachment. That's why he needed the variance for that second barn. And now

[25:47] um because that got there with the variance, any expansion of that, he's

[25:51] also he's intensifying that uh encroachment on the road right away. So

[25:59] um yeah, so that that was a mistake that was it was advertised incorrectly. It

[26:05] should have been just an encroachment on the road rightway, not on the north and

[26:09] south um property lines. I would say the trespass essentially is

[26:16] what it is to onto the property to the north. That's that's really something

[26:21] that uh you know if you go to sell it and and a new property owner isn't

[26:26] willing to allow uh Dave to either lease or rent the property and or use the

[26:32] property for access, then that's going to have to be something that gets worked

[26:35] out. either he purchases a per and and does a property line adjustment to give

[26:40] him room to get around that barn, but that would be something that would need

[26:44] to, you know, be be worked out and it's a legitimate concern. Um, I think let's

[26:50] see. I think that's all I had written down, Mr. Chair.

[26:53] » All right. Thank you, Amy. And hopefully, Jill, some of that answers

[26:57] your your comments and questions up there. You heard from Dave and you heard

[27:01] the county's explanation of uh why it isn't um the north and south lines that

[27:08] we're dealing with here tonight as a variance. We're dealing with one

[27:11] variance, the setback to the road right of way.

[27:16] Does that make sense? >> It does. It does seem like a lot of

[27:20] building for a small space. >> I get that. Thank you.

[27:24] » Not arguing that, >> Mr. Mr. Chair.

[27:27] » Yeah. One thing I was looking through maybe Amy um I look back at 14's

[27:33] variance and then in this one here it never gives us a it don't give us a

[27:37] distance from that barn to that north property line

[27:41] » because it wasn't it it wasn't at hand. >> Okay. because because the the existing

[27:48] barn was closer and so we didn't address it

[27:53] » cuz I don't know if it's 15 ft or 10 feet or 20 feet. You know,

[27:57] » I can go I if >> it's fine. I just I thought it just be

[28:01] pertinent to help with the >> the other thing or whatever.

[28:04] » Yeah. The other thing I'm going to say is our lines in Beacon may not be what

[28:08] the property line actually is on the ground. Only a survey can answer that.

[28:14] And so right now it looks like he's going onto your property. He may be, he

[28:20] may not be. Um, so if a property owner doesn't know exactly where their line

[28:26] is, >> good idea.

[28:28] » Yeah. So if you want a gentleman's handshake as to where that is,

[28:33] » yeah. >> Yeah. But that's just that's just our

[28:37] disclaimer that >> [clears throat]

[28:38] » um we would never use this for legal purposes as far as where your property

[28:43] line is. >> All right. Uh so we'll bring this back

[28:48] to the board uh now. Any other uh comments uh from the board members?

[28:54] » Mr. Chair Mark, >> as what was brought up from Schultz's

[28:57] here? Uh I'm thinking Dave's given this consideration, but uh it would be at a

[29:03] higher cost being you have purchased that adjoining land and you were

[29:08] combining with that instead of adding on to this barn uh on north and south. uh

[29:15] have you given it thought of moving it on that uh piece of property to the

[29:20] south and to the west and then you would meet all the setbacks?

[29:28] I don't know if I made setbacks there either. Property line setbacks. This is

[29:33] only How wide is this? Plus, there's an irrigator going across

[29:38] there. >> That parcel that's in the yellow, it's

[29:42] » a 10acre parcel. >> Okay. 10 acres.

[29:48] » Right. >> That's correct.

[29:50] » So, you have the adequate acreage right next to it, which you could uh have a

[29:55] conforming barn. There is an irrigator there.

[29:59] » All right, we'll bring this back. Uh, we've got the comment from a board

[30:03] member. Any other comments from board members?

[30:04] » Mr. Chair, I do have Go ahead. >> So, when I was looking through all this,

[30:08] you know, cuz I knew there was going to be people saying we got a big structure

[30:11] on a small acreage and this and that and you know, part of when we look through

[30:15] our agriculture goals and objectives, you know, when you go through all these,

[30:19] I think he meets the criteria of all them. We want to save a highv valued egg

[30:25] land, things like that. Um, not limited to egg land, but also for production

[30:29] like as far as meat, milk, all them types of things. The one that I looked

[30:33] at when I'm um, looking at this and we're looking at the set back to the

[30:38] road right away was goal 3A. Understand the positive and negative impacts of

[30:44] emerging agricultural practices and use in agricultural products or lands. So

[30:50] when I look at this, if I'm looking at because we're just looking at the set

[30:54] back to the road rightway, hearing nothing from Minnesota DOT, they're 45

[30:59] ft back from the rightway plus they have the rightway. It does not 100% follow

[31:05] ordin county ordinance. But is it detrimental? I don't I don't believe so.

[31:10] When I look at the positives, yeah, you could take and build a whole

[31:16] new thing out in the middle of any one of them fields, but now we're just

[31:20] taking away prime valuable egg land. We don't want houses out in there, so why

[31:24] do we want barns out in there? Um, so that's how when I'm looking at it and

[31:29] looking through the ordinance and and what's going to happen, um, like in my

[31:33] thoughts and votes, them are some of the things I look at. And if if I can kind

[31:38] of go through all the goals and objectives and agree that this applicant

[31:41] meets them and then when I get to a goal A3, that's how I kind of went through it

[31:47] to look at the negatives and the positives. And I think being in an

[31:51] agricultural zoned area by adding on to something that's already established and

[31:55] is there rather than build something new somewhere else, I think that that's more

[32:00] positive. I think it'd be more negative to the egg uh zoning or the egg land

[32:06] that's out there if we would put it on um out in a field or something. So that

[32:11] that's just when I'm going through this. I just wanted to comment on that.

[32:15] » All right. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[32:17] » Thank you, Glenn. We'll now uh move to the uh discussion of the findings of

[32:22] fact questions. Uh if there's no other uh comments by board members

[32:29] hearing none, I'll uh I'll start off with uh you Marv. Is the request in

[32:34] harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Morrison County land use

[32:38] ordinance and comp plan? >> You said me.

[32:42] » Yes. >> Okay. I believe it is. Uh I add uh on

[32:47] the most part it is in harmony uh protecting uh uh prime eggland having no

[32:52] objection from uh the state uh highway department having heard nothing about

[33:00] it. Uh and the the the shrubs and trees that are already in place there uh make

[33:09] it look like uh it's hardly there and as they grow up you won't even know it's

[33:13] there. And as you go around that neighborhood, um yeah, that's there's

[33:17] egg piece uh egg um buildings right next to that place all over the place and I

[33:25] feel it does fall within the ordinance. >> All right. Thank you, Marv. Uh any other

[33:31] board members?

[33:34] Hearing none, I'll move on to question number two. Uh, is the applicant

[33:38] proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the

[33:42] land use ordinance? And I'll take that one. Um, you know, the land use

[33:47] ordinance is talking about a 200 foot setback for the tier one um, operation

[33:52] that exists there. Um, much of this is already at 45 ft based upon a previous

[34:00] variance. Um and due to that variance uh he has a right to move uh north and

[34:06] south along that same uh stretch. He's not taking up uh as Clint had mentioned

[34:12] not taking up valuable egg land uh for the purposes of uh putting in uh

[34:18] structural buildings there. is looking to maintain that uh current operation

[34:23] and the flow of animals um inside from from um holding area to uh growing. Um

[34:32] and it makes sense to have it there rather than on another part of the farm

[34:35] that was um discussed uh on our site visit. Um it is egg expanding in egg

[34:42] land. Um so I think that's reasonable. There are those uh rows of buffers out

[34:47] front of trees between the road when we're talking about the rightway because

[34:51] this is what we're talking about is just the rightway. Um there is those two rows

[34:56] there. Um the first row looks to be uh plenty tall and if the second row

[35:02] actually comes up and goes, I I think that's in good shape. So I think um he's

[35:07] proposing to use it in a reasonable manner, continuing to do egg and egg

[35:10] land uh area um much of which is already at 45 ft by 45 ft by a previous uh

[35:18] variance. And he's just expanding the buildings to the north and the south.

[35:24] And I might add um he's not he's not uh expanding north and south to the extent

[35:31] that he could. um he actually could go further to the north and further to the

[35:35] south and that's not what he's proposing. And I think he realizes, this

[35:40] is my thought, not his. I think he realizes he needs that parking. He needs

[35:43] that turning around area to maneuver um uh both manpower, equipment, and farm

[35:50] operations. So, uh that's what I've got to say. Anything else from other board

[35:54] members on question two? If not, I'll move to question three.

[35:59] Question three, will the issuance of the variance maintain the essential

[36:02] character of the locality, George? >> Uh, yes, I believe so. Uh, you know, the

[36:07] proposed construction will fit in nicely on this lot. Uh, it's not going to

[36:11] affect the surrounding crop land. Uh, there is an irrigation pivot um, west of

[36:17] the building. Uh, there's scattered residents and there's no further

[36:21] encroachment on the north and south property lines. only encroachment is on

[36:25] the Minnesota 238 rightway which is 45 ft from that edge of that rideway and

[36:32] the variance if approved will maintain the essential character of this area.

[36:37] All right, thank you George. Any other comments from the board on question

[36:41] three? If not, I'll move to question four.

[36:44] Moving on to question four. Is the alleged practical difficulty due to

[36:48] circumstances unique to the property? Clint, if you'll take that one.

[36:52] » Um, yes. I think what's really unique about this property is uh numbers and

[36:56] numbers of years ago that this uh was uh petitioned off to a small acreage lot

[37:03] that had an old poultry building on it. Um so there's nothing new to the area.

[37:08] It's been there for a long long time. Um we have a applicant that uh purchased

[37:14] it, retrofitted it, and used something that was old and made it into something

[37:18] that's usable. um not like a lot of people that buy houses and uh just bows

[37:23] them down and build out in the field instead of building where the old house

[37:27] was. Um but anyways here uh I think uh [snorts] using what Brent had stated

[37:33] using that footprint without even going to the max um all the factors that uh

[37:40] they put into thought with the trees and all them things. But anyways, we're

[37:44] looking at the road rightway and I think uh they can't they can't expand towards

[37:48] that road. They're not encroaching on the road right away anymore. They're

[37:53] staying with what's already there. Um it just to I think the practical difficulty

[37:59] here is to uproot all that and [clears throat] move it into some

[38:04] valuable farmland. I think the that's where a lot of the practical difficulty

[38:08] lies. Um, it just it's to me when you use a farm operation and how it's not

[38:14] always how much money you spend on putting these buildings in and stuff or

[38:19] yeah, it might cost more if they build something else somewhere, but it's

[38:23] logistics on how you do your daily work and and uh here's something that we

[38:27] already have and it'd be just a shame not to utilize the full potential of it.

[38:33] » All right. Thank you, Clint. Any other board members have comment on question

[38:36] number four? If not, I'll move on to question five.

[38:41] Hearing none. Question five is the need for the variance created by actions

[38:45] other than the landowner or prior land owners. Greg,

[38:49] well, they did [clears throat] stick this on a very small plot of land. So,

[38:53] if it had been a little bigger, it'd be a little easier. But I believe he is

[38:58] using the land. Like I said, what he has, he's maximizing it. Definitely

[39:02] maximizing it. It is

[39:05] it does fit the boundary lines. So I believe he's utilizing it

[39:12] the he should. >> Okay. Thank you, Greg. Other board

[39:17] members, question number five. >> Uh [snorts] Mr. Chair

[39:20] » Clint, go ahead. I would just add that again um it's created by actions is just

[39:26] how this uh parcel was created originally um and then how it was

[39:30] allowed to keep moving forward you know um 2014 they got a variance um yes part

[39:37] of it was this landowner could be part of it with the previous landowners but

[39:41] it's also um just how to it was created county ordinances or county or however

[39:48] the regula regulatory agencies that just allowed us to keep moving forward is

[39:53] also part of it. So, >> all right. Thank you, Clint. Any other

[39:56] board members? Question number five. >> Mr. Chairman, just one more question on

[40:00] that. You know, the other the other part of the need for the variance is

[40:03] preserving preserving the surrounding egg land for

[40:06] crops. I guess that is probably another part of this.

[40:10] » All right. Thank you, George. All right. Hearing none other, I'll move

[40:14] on to question number six. Uh, does the alleged practical difficulty involve

[40:19] more than just economic considerations? And Marvin, will you take that one?

[40:24] » Yeah, I'll take it. And part of it is the conditions that we put on it that

[40:30] involves more just an econom economics. Uh, would this be time to uh uh before I

[40:37] answer this, could Amy, could you share them conditions that we uh recommended?

[40:43] » Mr. Chair, >> go ahead Amy. I have two written down.

[40:48] One is that a storm water plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the

[40:54] soil and water conservation district. Um and the other one would be no parking of

[41:00] equipment andor supplies um between the barn and the roadway.

[41:07] » Thank you. So with uh that being part of the conditions and thinking about the

[41:12] practical difficulty in that small area with him will uh willing to work with

[41:17] soil and water and possibly divert the water so it doesn't create any issues in

[41:22] a future u and uh few other practices like they've uh already planted the

[41:30] shrubs and trees in there. uh he's in uh thinking about more than just economics.

[41:37] » All right. Thank you, Marv. Any other uh comments from the board on question

[41:41] number six?

[41:44] » Hearing none, uh we'll move on to the vote on the findings of fact and

[41:48] criteria questions. Uh board members, keep in mind the two conditions that

[41:52] were just read by Amy as we go through our vote. Question number one is the

[41:57] request in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Morrison

[42:01] County land use ordinance and comp plan. Marvin,

[42:04] » yes. >> Myself is yes. George,

[42:07] » yes. >> Clint,

[42:08] » yes. >> Greg,

[42:10] » yes. >> Question number two. Is the applicant

[42:13] proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the

[42:17] land use ordinance? Myself is yes. George,

[42:20] » yes. >> Clint,

[42:21] » yes. >> Greg,

[42:22] » yes. >> Marvin,

[42:24] » yes. Question number three. Will the issuance

[42:27] of the variance maintain the essential character of the locality? George,

[42:31] » yes. >> Clint,

[42:32] » yes. >> Greg,

[42:33] » yes. >> Marvin,

[42:34] » yes. >> Myself is yes.

[42:37] And then question number four is the alleged practical difficulty due to

[42:41] circumstances unique to the property. Clint,

[42:44] » yes. >> Uh, Greg,

[42:46] » yes. >> Marvin,

[42:47] » yes. >> Myself is yes. George,

[42:49] » yes. Question number five is the need for the

[42:52] variance created by actions other than the landowner or prior land owners. Uh

[42:57] Greg, >> yes.

[42:58] » Marvin, >> yes.

[43:00] » Myself is yes. George, >> yes.

[43:02] » Clint, >> yes. Question number six. Does the

[43:05] alleged practical difficulty involve more than just economic considerations?

[43:10] Marvin, >> yes.

[43:11] » Myself is yes. George, >> yes. With the conditions,

[43:15] » Clint, >> yes.

[43:17] » And Greg, >> yes.

[43:19] » All right. Um, do I have a motion to approve the

[43:23] request? >> Mr. Chairman, I'll make that motion to

[43:27] approve this variance. >> Motion by George.

[43:31] » I'll second that, Mr. Chair. >> Seconded by Clint. All in favor,

[43:35] starting with Greg. >> Yes.

[43:37] » Marvin. >> I.

[43:38] » Clint. >> I.

[43:39] » Myself is I and George. >> I.

[43:42] » Motion uh to approve the request is been granted. uh and your variance is

[43:50] granted with those two aforementioned conditions. So, um you'll need to work

[43:54] with uh soil and water on a storm water plan and then also remember that that

[43:59] parking uh ban is in place there. >> Thank you.

[44:03] » Thank you.

[44:22] All

[44:44] right.

[44:48] All right. We'll move on to the uh second uh agenda item tonight and it is

[44:53] an application by Marita uh Ho Hoy

[44:58] » Van Hoy >> Van Ho Vano I'm sorry I'm seeing both

[45:01] here >> Vaneki

[45:04] well if you come forward to the front table here and state your name correctly

[45:09] as I didn't for the record we'll appreciate that and then state your

[45:14] address and we'll make sure the microphones are

[45:18] I got the first name right, so that's great.

[45:22] » My name is Marita Van Hookie, 21828 205th Avenue, Little Falls.

[45:30] » All right. Thank you. Um, and let's see, Amy, do you have a staff report ready

[45:38] for this one? >> I do, Mr. Chair. This is a variance

[45:42] request to create and develop a parcel that cannot support a type one septic

[45:46] system. The ordinance sections that apply is section 131

[45:51] and 151. Here's an aerial photograph of the

[45:56] property outlined in blue. And then here is a survey provided by

[46:01] the applicant with the proposed parcel split.

[46:07] And then here are some site photos taken at the viewing on the 28th of August.

[46:16] This is a 27.64 acre parcel with a dwelling on it. The applicant would like

[46:22] to split uh 8.85 acres, convey it to a buyer, and retain the existing home and

[46:27] remaining acres. [snorts] In preparation for that, septic soil borings were

[46:31] completed and it was found that there was only a 3-in separation to the water

[46:35] table, which requires a type three mound septic system. The septic designer has

[46:40] determined that adequate soil separation does not exist on the property. To

[46:44] install a type one septic drain field for a type one mound system, at least 12

[46:50] in of separation between the soil and the seasonally high water table is

[46:54] required. Those 12 in of soil contribute to the 3 f feet of soil treatment needed

[46:59] needed for septic effluent and again uh 3 in of separation was found on site.

[47:05] The surrounding area consists of crop fields, forests and sparse residences.

[47:10] There is available dwelling density within this quarter quarter for an

[47:13] additional dwelling. And then here are criteria questions, Mr. Chair.

[47:18] » All right. Thank you, Amy. And just for the record, um, on 82826,

[47:23] uh, everyone with the exception of Clint was

[47:26] there and I believe Clint viewed this property and they Tuesday I went. I did

[47:31] not walk around the property cuz I didn't know if anything was even staked

[47:35] and I wasn't going to through the woods, but I did get the just of it.

[47:40] » All right. So, all of the board members last week were out to the property and

[47:44] did have an opportunity to view it both on Friday with you and a drive by uh as

[47:49] stated by Clint. Um you heard uh the staff report. Is everything that Amy

[47:54] presented to us uh accurate? >> Yes.

[47:58] » And uh this is your opportunity now to provide us with any additional

[48:02] information that you feel uh we as a board should hear and should know uh

[48:07] moving forward on your request. >> Yep. I um am looking to um again just

[48:13] make another um create a a lot um and whether it's buil you know we do have

[48:21] someone who is interested um they've not said if they're going to

[48:26] build or not build um there is no purchase agreement yet um and so we just

[48:32] I want to help someone live a dream just like I did um it's a part of a great

[48:39] community. Um, we've got really great neighbors. Um, and I want to give

[48:43] someone else the opportunity to to do that uh right along with when I was able

[48:49] to do that. >> All right. Thank you. Anything else?

[48:53] » No thank >> All right. Thank you. Um, and let's see,

[48:59] board [snorts] members. Uh, any questions?

[49:01] » Mr. Chair >> Clint, go ahead. Since it wasn't there

[49:03] Friday, was there anything I mean, did you walk any of that or is there

[49:07] anything that I should know that >> uh on Friday? I asked Amy and she just

[49:11] pulled it up now to have a topographical map of elevations here for us so that we

[49:15] could see that because walking out there, you know, in there um we could

[49:20] see the uh the stake uh by this line. I'm pointing to the 1270 line. There was

[49:27] a stake here that went out and up and over uh marking off the eight acres.

[49:32] Then other stakes were out here >> um maintaining the driveway in for her.

[49:37] So it came up and it went out >> 12 ft.

[49:40] » Uh but we did not walk out in the woods itself. U but seeing that the elevation

[49:45] is important. It's up there for us. No, I think the elevation map was great

[49:50] because that's about how I envisioned it from me just looking at it is kind of

[49:56] how that works. So, okay. Thank you.

[50:00] » Yep.

[50:03] Um any Let's see.

[50:10] » Any other questions? Board members, Mr. Chair,

[50:14] » go ahead. >> Okay. I got um

[50:17] um so Marita maybe uh I know your place is

[50:22] kind of wet you know I mean it's uh not like flood driven or anything like that

[50:27] I'm not saying that um but is that just because of the soils because it's a lot

[50:33] of clay there or is is that's why um cuz when I when I looked you know I mean you

[50:39] got a meadow on the backside or upland meadow I would say maybe it's not like a

[50:43] real bad meadow to the north. Um the woods there's, you know, popples as to

[50:47] the west. As you gradually get towards your house, it changes a little bit and

[50:52] you could see that with the elevation. >> Um so when we look at these, this is its

[50:57] own case. We look at different ones for type three sewers. Um to me, they tend

[51:01] to look a lot lower than this did. Um and then here you only had 3 in of

[51:06] separation. And so that's why I asked that question because uh it just uh I'm

[51:11] not going to say this is prone to flooding or anything like that, but it's

[51:14] just kind of wet in that area and that's probably due to the clay or

[51:18] » That is exactly right. When we did the building, um the clay is about 2 feet

[51:23] below below the surface. Um and it's solid dense clay for when we dug like

[51:30] the driveway and stuff, it was clay for a good four or five feet. So, it is it's

[51:37] not only rocky, but it's also very clay. >> Okay.

[51:43] That's basically the only question I really had, Mr. Chair, was just kind of

[51:47] hear from the applicant. Um, when you see, you know, we haven't seen many of

[51:51] these with just 3 in separation. Not that it I mean, it does matter, but it

[51:56] don't matter because it can't meet separation, but I just wanted to point

[52:00] that out that it's not cuz it's a swamp. It's just the soil type. So,

[52:05] » all right. Thank you, Clint. I do have um I'll get to you in just a second,

[52:09] George, but I do have a question maybe for Amy.

[52:12] » Um so, my question is um since this meets a dwelling density

[52:17] in the area, if not for the the the the sewer,

[52:23] » if this would have been land that would support a type one, everything would

[52:28] proceed without the need of a variance. Is that correct?

[52:30] » Yes, that's correct. >> Okay. And so, uh, the reason we're here

[52:34] is because of the 3-in separation, not the 12 in. Um, and would it support a

[52:41] type three? And that's the decision that we're making tonight. I just wanted to

[52:45] clarify that for the record so everybody here knows what we're considering.

[52:49] » Thank you. >> Other comments of board members,

[52:52] » Mr. Chairman. >> George, go ahead.

[52:54] » So, just an observation. And so I'm looking at this top topographic map here

[52:58] and if you'll go on the west side of the road, you see an elevation of 1258.

[53:02] Well, off to the northwest corner of this parcel that that she's proposing to

[53:07] create, there is a there is a residence where we turned around off the northwest

[53:12] corner. So, so and I would venture to say that that falls. So, that's about

[53:18] the same elevation. So, so if you look at all these elevations here, it's it's

[53:22] it's a fairly flat piece of land. Yeah, I I would agree. Thank you. Uh

[53:29] George, any other comments uh by board members?

[53:31] » Mr. Chair, just one more. >> Go ahead, Clint.

[53:33] » Marita, yours is a type three at your house.

[53:36] » It is. >> Yes, that's what I consider. Okay.

[53:39] » Okay. Just wanted to put that on the record, too.

[53:42] » Okay. Uh Mr. Chair >> Marvin,

[53:45] » uh just a few comments. Uh, one I noticed most of the trees are ash and

[53:50] papa which thrive in lower wet areas but uh to my surprise as I was driving by

[53:56] slowly there were oak trees here and there so it can't uh if it can support

[54:01] oaks and not die off apparently it's not too wet.

[54:05] » Right. Exactly. >> Just a comment. So my from one of my

[54:10] observations and another thing I look at this year we talk about our comp plan

[54:16] and uh protecting prime egg land. Well obviously this isn't prime egg land.

[54:21] This is exactly what we like to see and you could put this in a couple acre

[54:25] parcel and sell it off. Instead you're going to make put in 8.85 acre parcel

[54:30] which is a nice big chunk of property nowadays. Just another comment. So,

[54:37] thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Marvin. Any other

[54:38] comments from the board before I move on to uh public comment?

[54:46] » Hearing none, I'm going to move on to uh public comment. I'll make a call three

[54:49] times for anyone wishing to speak uh regarding this uh variance request to

[54:54] step up to the podium over there. Microphone should be on. First call for

[54:58] any public comment. >> Mine is more just a question.

[55:03] » That's fine. Just go to the state your name and your address for the record so

[55:06] we know who's representing you. >> I'm Ken and we live just south or just

[55:12] north >> Jason.

[55:14] » All right. >> So 220

[55:18] it's more just a question. Not that I have any opposition or opinion on on

[55:24] this but if there wouldn't be a variance can the type one be just remedied bying

[55:34] make the mountain higher. >> We'll we'll actually we'll actually

[55:38] answer that question here in just a little bit.

[55:40] » Okay. And it's it's not that I'm expressing any type of opinion. It's

[55:44] just a question I have. >> Thank you.

[55:49] All right. First call. Second call. Any public comment? Please step to the

[55:53] podium and state your name and address for the record.

[55:59] » One last and third final call for any public comment.

[56:05] All right. Does the township have anything to uh let us know?

[56:12] » I guess not. [laughter]

[56:18] » Okay. [laughter] >> All right. Um with that, uh I made three

[56:24] calls for public comment. Um no further public comment. I'll ask uh for a motion

[56:29] to close the portion of the meeting. So moved.

[56:33] » Second here. >> Motion by Marvin, second by George to

[56:36] close the meeting. All in favor? Greg? >> I.

[56:39] » Marvin, >> I.

[56:40] » Clint, >> I myself is I George

[56:44] » I. >> The public portion of this meeting is

[56:47] now closed and we'll bring this back to the board. Um,

[56:58] uh, >> answer about this.

[57:01] » Yeah. So, uh, to answer your question, Ken, I'm going to have Amy just give us

[57:08] a a slight lesson in type one and type three, and I think it's going to answer

[57:13] your your question. Uh so in order to get adequate treatment

[57:21] of sewage, you need at least three feet of good soil. So what we're looking for

[57:28] is so as soon as you hit anorobic conditions, which is where water

[57:32] regularly sits, you stop treatment. And so what we're looking for and by state

[57:39] law, um, a type one septic system offers at least 12 inches of native native soil

[57:50] for treatment. And so you can have a type one mound system where you've got 2

[57:55] feet of sand and then your third foot of treatment is that native soil. That's

[58:03] considered a type one mound system. You can have other type one systems. If you

[58:09] have a lot of separation, then you can have an atgrade system and all of that.

[58:14] And that's relying completely on the soils on site to provide treatment.

[58:20] Those all fit into the category of type one septic system. And by law, if you

[58:26] are creating a new parcel, your new parcel must have adequate soils to

[58:31] support a standard system. Um, in cases like this where you either get have 12

[58:39] in or zero. So if you have three inches, it's zero. If you have seven inches,

[58:46] it's zero. There's no treatment. So you're creating that entire treatment

[58:52] system above grade. So you are hauling in sand, but you're

[58:57] hauling in three feet of it because all of that treatment is happening in above

[59:04] grade before it hits the soil. And so and that's considered a type three

[59:10] system and they need more maintenance. Um you need to take care of them. You

[59:17] need to monitor them. Um and they're not guaranteed. They're they're not a

[59:21] guaranteed system. and you and a property owner who puts one in has to

[59:25] sign acknowledging I understand that I am putting in a nontypical system and I

[59:33] have some obligations and no one's guaranteeing that this thing is going to

[59:37] work. And so that is the difference between the two. So, yes, you do the

[59:43] mound and you do just haul in sand. But, um, anytime you're replacing any native

[59:49] soil, that's a type three system because you're you're messing with what was

[59:54] already there. Does that answer your question?

[59:59] » So, so it would have to be type. This one there is no choice because this

[1:00:06] soil does not offer any sewage treatment. And so you you would you must

[1:00:14] um install a type three mound which all of the drain field is above grade.

[1:00:23] Yeah, that's the only option. >> Mr. Chair, if I could just add on to

[1:00:29] that. So basically, if you own a property and you know it's too low for

[1:00:33] type one and let's say you add four feet of fill on that whole property and 10

[1:00:38] years later your plan is to sell it, they're still going to do the soil

[1:00:41] borings. The soil boring is still going to go through your four feet and find

[1:00:45] that virgin soil, the soil boring going to be 4T below that that dirt you filled

[1:00:52] in and it's still going to give you the same reading if you filled it in or not.

[1:00:56] Well, essentially now you're automatically type three because you've

[1:00:59] got a disturbed site. Yeah. Because if you haul in fill and it's not and you're

[1:01:05] not looking at native soil, >> right out [snorts] of the gate, you're a

[1:01:08] type three because you don't have native soils.

[1:01:10] » Y >> All right. Hopefully, Kim, that

[1:01:14] addressed your question. I said we'd get around to it. Um when you get when we

[1:01:18] get into sewers, it gets a little more complicated than most people uh

[1:01:23] understand. But uh suffice to say that that the separation will occur above the

[1:01:30] ground, not utilizing any of the current existing ground. It's got to be

[1:01:34] separated above ground uh on a type three. So that's the difference between

[1:01:38] a type one and a type three in [clears throat]

[1:01:41] layman's terms. Um

[1:01:45] we'll now move to uh findings of fact criteria questions. We'll kind of go

[1:01:49] through those with the board uh since the public uh portion of the meeting is

[1:01:54] now closed. Question number one is the request in harmony with the general

[1:01:58] purposes and intent of the Morrison County land use ordinance and comp plan.

[1:02:03] And I'll take that one. um as stated here in the discussion it it

[1:02:10] meets the dwelling density in the area um but it does not meet um the adequate

[1:02:16] soil for a type one. So um in today's world um you have to have um a variance

[1:02:24] to uh determine or once it's determined that um there isn't adequate soil uh

[1:02:32] separation on the land itself and u you have to have a variance for a type three

[1:02:37] septic system. And so that's what this variance request here is in front of us

[1:02:43] tonight for um you know there is no egg land being destroyed by this. This is a

[1:02:49] wooded parcel. There is residential uh homes in the immediate area uh and

[1:02:56] meeting that density dwelling um criteria. um it is a a a part of uh land

[1:03:03] in uh that area that is suitable for development and so in that regard I

[1:03:09] think it is in in re u it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of

[1:03:14] the land use ordinance any other comments from board members

[1:03:19] hearing none I'll move on question two is the applicant proposing to use the

[1:03:23] property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the land use ordinance

[1:03:28] charge. >> Uh yes, I believe so. Uh the surrounding

[1:03:31] area has homes on what I assume to be assumed to be five plus acre parcels. Uh

[1:03:36] topography on the surrounding small acreages in the immediate area. Uh also

[1:03:43] are very similar to this. Uh applicant is requesting a variance to

[1:03:48] create a lot for a home with a type three system. And this is a reasonable

[1:03:53] request in this area being it is not uh valuable farmland. It's a wooded

[1:03:59] acreage. All right. Thank you, George. Any other

[1:04:02] comments by board members? Hearing none, I'll move on to question

[1:04:06] three. Will the issuance of the variance maintain the essential character of the

[1:04:11] locality? Clint, I think two parts. One is there's uh if you look in the

[1:04:17] surrounding area, it's uh some farms. There's also some rural residents out

[1:04:22] there. They're kind of mixed in between in all that. So, I think from a central

[1:04:27] character that way it'll fit in. Then when we look at the type three sewer

[1:04:31] system that way, um, you know, I don't know for sure, but I'm going to say

[1:04:35] majority of all them homes that are right in that vicinity. More of them are

[1:04:39] type three than not. And uh basically that eastern side of Morrison County is

[1:04:45] is a big percentage of uh buildable land is requiring type three just because of

[1:04:51] the way our soils are in that part of the county. So I think um from both of

[1:04:55] them aspects it will maintain the essential character.

[1:04:59] » All right. Thank you Clint. Question number or any other comments from board

[1:05:02] members on question three. If not I'll move on to question four

[1:05:07] hearing none. is the alleged practical difficulty due to circumstances unique

[1:05:12] to the property. Uh Greg, >> uh because of the soil around here, it's

[1:05:17] very typical. I mean, I guess Clint just stated that too that I almost all them

[1:05:21] houses in that area are with that lower ground, you're going to need this type

[1:05:26] three septic system to make anything work because of its and that's typical

[1:05:31] to most of this ground in this area because we just had that one two weeks

[1:05:34] ago. Kind of the same type of soil. So, it is

[1:05:39] It is uh unique to the property. >> All right. Thank you. Any other comments

[1:05:44] from board on question four? >> Mr. Chairman, I just got one more

[1:05:47] comment here. And you know, without a variance for this piece of property, it

[1:05:51] would not be a buildable lot. I mean, it would be be wasteland basically.

[1:05:56] » All right. Thank you, George. >> Mr. Chair Clint,

[1:05:59] » I'd just like to add the practical difficulty here is it's a buildable

[1:06:02] site. Um with the clay soils in here, it don't meet the soil borings. Um, I think

[1:06:08] the elevation of it, unless they do right by the road because that's the

[1:06:11] lowest elevations, but when you look at the elevations of this property, I think

[1:06:16] there's more than enough adequate building space and it can't meet the the

[1:06:20] soil borings because of the clay ground and the water retention. So, I think

[1:06:24] that is the practical difficulty here. >> All right. Thank you, Clint. Any other

[1:06:29] comments? Hearing none, I'll move on to question

[1:06:32] number five. is the need for the variance created by actions other than

[1:06:36] the land owner or prior land owners. Marvin,

[1:06:39] » yes. And the reason why is because of these new uh regulations requiring type

[1:06:44] three uh variances for type three systems is the need for this. And as uh

[1:06:53] we probably all know there were numerous systems put in that uh if they were

[1:07:00] having to be redone would be basically all type three in this area. So the need

[1:07:05] for it is uh the separation of it and um you know not having adequate separation.

[1:07:14] » All right. Thank you. Uh any other comments from board members on question

[1:07:18] five? If not, I'll move to question six. Question six, does the alleged practical

[1:07:24] difficulty involve more than just economic considerations? Uh, back to me

[1:07:28] on that one. Um, you know, here, uh, the practical difficulty is is is the land.

[1:07:36] Um, and the soil that is on the land. I think that's what's been stated here.

[1:07:41] Um, we have a buildable lot um, with um, oaks and poppel and ash. um but it

[1:07:49] doesn't have the the soil needed for a for a type one. So we have to go uh to a

[1:07:54] type three. And to get to a type three um you need a variance to do that. Um it

[1:08:00] costs more money to get a variance. It costs more money to haul in more sand.

[1:08:05] It costs more money to have a type three system. And it uh is going to require

[1:08:09] more monitoring ongoing and into the future. So um this is more than just

[1:08:14] economic considerations. This isn't a cheap route. this is an expensive route

[1:08:18] and it's buyer beware on this uh moving forward. So, uh hopefully you relay that

[1:08:24] information to them and they're well aware of it and they know what's going

[1:08:26] on there. Any other comments from board members?

[1:08:30] » Mr. Chair, I just say with any of these with not just this one, any of these

[1:08:34] there needs to be adequate uh acreage to put more than one of these. You know, we

[1:08:39] have to have two spots. So, I just wanted on the record and with this uh

[1:08:43] this proposal and the acreage size of it, there is plenty of room for multiple

[1:08:48] sites. So, just wanted to add that into this answer and for the record.

[1:08:53] » All right. Thank you. Uh if the board is ready, we'll now move on to the findings

[1:08:58] of fact criteria questions. And there are no conditions as of yet on this uh

[1:09:05] for consideration. Question one is the request in harmony

[1:09:09] with the general purposes and intent of Morrison County land use ordinance and

[1:09:13] comp plan. Myself is yes. >> Uh George,

[1:09:17] » yes. >> Clint,

[1:09:18] » yes. >> Greg,

[1:09:19] » yes. >> And Marvin,

[1:09:20] » yes. >> Question number two, is the applicant

[1:09:23] proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the

[1:09:27] land use ordinance? George, >> yes.

[1:09:29] » Clint, >> yes.

[1:09:30] » Greg, >> yes.

[1:09:32] » Marvin, >> yes.

[1:09:33] » Myself is yes. Uh, question number three. Will the

[1:09:36] issuance of the variance maintain the essential character of the locality?

[1:09:41] Clint, >> yes.

[1:09:42] » Greg, >> yes.

[1:09:44] » Marvin, >> yes.

[1:09:45] » Myself is [snorts] yes. George, >> yes.

[1:09:47] » Question number four. Is the alleged practical difficulty due to

[1:09:51] circumstances unique to the property? Greg?

[1:09:55] » Yes. >> Marvin?

[1:09:56] » Yes. >> Myself is yes. George,

[1:09:58] » yes. >> And Clint,

[1:10:00] » yes. >> Question five. is a need for variance

[1:10:02] created by actions other than the land owner or prior land owners. Marvin,

[1:10:07] » yes. >> Myself is yes. George,

[1:10:09] » yes. >> Clint,

[1:10:10] » yes. >> And Greg,

[1:10:12] » yes. >> Question number six. Does the alleged

[1:10:15] practical difficulty involve more than just economic considerations? Myself is

[1:10:20] yes. George, >> yes.

[1:10:21] » Clint, >> yes.

[1:10:22] » Greg, >> yes.

[1:10:23] » Marvin, >> yes.

[1:10:25] » Uh, I have all of these questions answered in the affirmative. Do I have a

[1:10:28] motion to approve the request? >> Mr. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make that

[1:10:31] motion to approve this request. >> I'll second it, Mr. Chair.

[1:10:36] » Okay, we have a motion by Marvin and a second by George. Uh,

[1:10:43] and we'll do a roll call vote starting with Greg. All in favor say I.

[1:10:47] » I. >> Marvin,

[1:10:48] » I. >> Clint,

[1:10:49] » I. >> Myself is I. George.

[1:10:51] » I. Uh the motion uh to approve the request passes and thank

[1:10:58] you for uh presenting tonight. Um any questions you have, please follow up

[1:11:04] with land services during business hours.

[1:11:06] » Thank you. >> You're welcome.

[1:11:18] And moving on, um, we have some minutes from our previous meeting.

[1:11:24] » Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion we approve those minutes.

[1:11:28] » I'll second it. >> Okay. And just for the record, those

[1:11:30] were the meeting minutes from August 18, 2026.

[1:11:35] Uh, all in favor? >> I

[1:11:40] » I >> Clint I. Myself is I George.

[1:11:43] » All right. >> All right. Um, old business. Any old

[1:11:45] business, Amy? >> Mr. Chair, I do not have any old

[1:11:48] business. >> New business?

[1:11:50] » I do have new. All right. >> Um,

[1:11:52] » the uh, as you know, the way you're going through your voting um, has

[1:11:59] changed where you're always making that motion in the affirmative uh, to grant.

[1:12:06] And um so what we're going to do is we're going to and I'm going to send

[1:12:10] these down each take one. Um I just the voting sheet is going to change and it's

[1:12:15] really just assuming that that motion is always going to be to approve. So then

[1:12:22] it's just going to be this voting block down below where we're going to keep

[1:12:27] track of who makes the motion, who seconds it, and then I keep track of

[1:12:31] whether it passes or not. this way. I do this with the county board as well and

[1:12:37] so number one it'll be consistent between the two and it's uh I think

[1:12:41] maybe a little bit more straightforward and easy for someone to follow. So

[1:12:45] anyway um next meeting you'll see this for planning commission and for board of

[1:12:50] adjustment you'll see this voting block like this.

[1:12:54] » Okay. >> Okay. It won't change your procedure any

[1:12:57] just know that this is what we're doing. >> Otherwise that's all I've got.

[1:13:01] » All right. Thank you. >> Just Mr. Chair, just one thing with that

[1:13:04] cuz sometimes I think some of us getting confused yet. So we always make a motion

[1:13:08] to approve. So if I make a motion approve, I could still say no

[1:13:12] » when you vote. >> Yes.

[1:13:14] » So just because somebody made the motion, that's how we're going to do it

[1:13:18] every time. So just understand that. >> Um I think sometimes it gets a little

[1:13:23] confusing. >> Yep. Agree.

[1:13:24] » It's just we all choose that we're just going to make a motion to approve every

[1:13:28] time. Yes. >> And if it's

[1:13:30] » five to zero, no. That's how it is. It's just

[1:13:32] » Yeah. >> Yes. And so then essentially the motion

[1:13:35] fails and by law um the way the law is set up that a failure to pass it is a

[1:13:43] denial. So that's that's how that works for you.

[1:13:48] » All right. That's all I have, Mr. Chair. >> Yeah. The only thing I got to comment on

[1:13:53] with regard to this, it's always kind of confusing. Now we do our opening

[1:13:57] statement. And in our opening statement, this last paragraph,

[1:14:01] we'll have a series of votes, discuss whether conditions be made, and have a

[1:14:05] final motion to approve or deny the request.

[1:14:09] » And we read that to the the public every time. I'm wondering if we're going to

[1:14:13] make that change. Yeah. >> Do we need to delete that deny?

[1:14:16] » I think so. Yes. So, we'll update that. >> That's always kind of confusing to me

[1:14:20] when I go through that going, "Well, we're going to approve or deny and then

[1:14:24] we're not." >> Yes. Agreed.

[1:14:27] » Okay. Uh that's it for new business. >> Motion to adjurnn.

[1:14:31] » Second >> to adjourn by Clint, second by George.

[1:14:34] All in favor starting with Greg. >> I.

[1:14:36] » Marvin >> I.

[1:14:37] » I. >> Self is I. George

[1:14:40] » I. Meeting is adjourned at 7:13

Morrison County Board of Adjustment - September 1, 2026

Transcript