Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Board of Commissioners - Minutes - 02/21/2006
MINUTES OF THE OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Government Services Center, Commissioners' Room 500 Fir Avenue W., Fergus Falls\ MN Tuesday, February 21, 2006: 9:30 a.m. I Call to Order 1 The Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners convened ~uesday, February 21, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., at the Otter Tail County Government Services Center with Commissioners Roger Froemming, Chair; Dennis Mosher, Vice-Chair; $ob Block, Syd Nelson, and Malcolm Lee present. Aooroval of Aaenda Motion by Mosher, second by Nelson, and unanimously carried to approve the County Board agenda of February 21, 2006, with the following addition: 9:40 a.m. -Sister's Path Program Discussion Aooroval of Minutes Motion by Froemming, second by Block, and unanimously carried to approve the County Board minutes of February 14, 2006, as mailed. ' Aooroval to Pav Bills Motion by Mosher, second by Nelson, and unanimously carried to approve payment of the County Board bills per Attachment A of these minutes. Exemot Permit Aoolication Motion by Nelson, second by Mosher, and unanimously carried to approve, with no waiting period, the LG220 Application for Exempt Permit as submitted by the East Otter Tail Deer Hunter's Chapter for an event scheduled for April 21, 2006, at the Playtime Sports Bar located at 43974 390th St. in Rush Lake Township. Liauor License Aoolication 1 Motion by Mosher, second by Froemming, and unanimously carried to approve the following application for license: I Thomas Lorine Clitherall, MN 56524-9564 I Consumption & Display Permit Renewal I ' Aareement for Veterans Museum Aoorooriation Motion by Nelson, second by Block, and unanimously carried to authorize the County Auditor's signature to execute the Minnesota Historical Society Pass-Through Appropriation Agreement (aka MHS Contract 26C5747), for funding for the· Veterans Museum in Perham, MN, subject to the approval of the County Attorney. The motion further requested the County Auditor to draft a letter to the Minnesota Historical Society requesting release of the $100,000 appropriation. Prooosed Sister's Path Proaram Discussion New York Mills citizens Jim & Jayne Hofland and Agnes: Hofland, spoke to the Board concerning the proposed location for the Chemical Dependency Treatment Program entitled OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Page 2 the Sister's Path Program. They expressed a great deal of concern regarding the proposed location, the New York Mills Hotel, because they feel there is not enough green space for children to be safe at this location. They expressed concern that the advertising for the meeting that was held was not adequate and requested that another, well-advertised meeting be held regarding the proposed facility. Human Services Director, John Dinsmore, explained the concept of the proposed program. The County Board requested that Mr. Dinsmore meet with the Mayor of New York Mills and request an additional meeting in New York Mills regarding the proposed facility and program. Hazard Mitiaation Plan Aareement Clarification Leon Heath from Northwest Regional Development and Emergency Services Director, Tiny Holm, clarified some provisions of the HMP Contract that was approved on February 14, 2006. The contract with the State of Minnesota is for $30,000.00; however, that includes approximately $7,500.00 of local match. Discussion followed in regards to providing the local match in cash or as in-kind services. Motion by Block, second by Nelson, and unanimously carried to clarify the agreement between Otter Tail County and NRD, whereby $22,500.00 is the grant amount from the State and Otter Tail County would perform $7,500.00 of in-kind services to develop a Hazard Mitigation Plan. Recess & Reconvene At 10:11 a.m., Chairman Froemming declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners recessed for a short break. The meeting was reconvened at 10:17 a.m. Resolution Designating County State Aid Highway Location County State Aid Highway No. 67 Otter Tail Countv Resolution No. 2006 -17 Upon a motion by Nelson, seconded by Lee, and unanimously carried to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, it appears to the County Board of Commissioners of the County of Otter Tail that the highway right of way required for County State Aid Highway No. 67 under Project No. S.A.P. 56-667-30 should be accurately described and located by a highway right of way plat. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the County Board of Commissioners of the County of Otter Tail that the Board of County Commissioners for the County of Otter Tail is hereby designating the definite location of County State Aid Highway No. 67 in Sections 4, 5 and 8 in Township 135 North, Range 37 West and Sections 28, 29, 32 and 33 in Township 136 North, Range 37 West of the 5th Principal Meridian as shown on the three pages of OTTER TAIL COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 15. Adopted at Fergus Falls, Minnesota, this 21 st day of February, 2006. Dated: o.;;i,/;;.8/01,c, OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Attest: jt1/Mt -iJ ~ By: j ~' Rogief'Froemming, Board of Commissioners Chair Larry Krohn, Clerk I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes ] February 21, 2006 , Page 3 ' I Final Pavment-S.A.P. 56-605-08 Motion by Block, second by Mosher, and unanimously carried to approve Final Payment, payable to Central Specialties, Inc. of Alexandria, MN, per Estimate No. 7 in the amount of $38,614.05, for highway construction work completed on the CSAH No. 5 Overlay Project. I Enaineerina Deoartment Seasonal Staff Motion by Lee, second by Nelson, and unanimously carried approve the handout entitled "Highway Department -Engineering Seasonal Help" dated February 21. 2006, as presented by the Highway Engineer. I Bid Award -S.A.P. 56-686-01 After previously advertising for bids, Rick West, Highway Engineer, opened the following bids at 1 :00 p.m. on February 15, 2006, for reconstruction of CSAH No. 86: Central Specialties, Inc. Alexandria, MN Riley Bros. Construction, Inc. Morris, MN Mark Sand & Gravel Co. Fergus Falls, MN ; $660,406.76 I . $723,854.00 $725,693.25 Park Construction Co. . $879,921.69 Hampton, MN Motion by Mosher, second by Block, and unanimously carried to award the Reconstruction of CSAH No. 86 (Airport Road), S.A.P. 56-686-01, to Central Specialties Inc. of Alexandria, MN, as the low bidder at the bid price of $660,406.76. REGULAR TO MUNICIPAL ADVANCE RESOLUTION Otter Tail Countv Resolution No. 2006 -18 Upon a motion by Nelson, seconded by Lee, and unanimously carried, to adopt the following resolution: ' WHEREAS, the County of Otter Tail has obtained the Commissioner's approval of the plans for the following County State-Aid Project(s): · Project# S.A.P. 56-609-04 Project# S.A.P. 56-611-15 Project# S.A.P. 56-640-08 I Project# S.A.P. 56-646-07 Project# S!A.P. 56-667-30 I I I I AND, WHEREAS, said County is prepared to proceed with th~ construction of said project(s) by providing county regular funds to supplement the available funds in the County Municipal Account, and ' WHEREAS, repayment of the funds so advanced by the County is desired in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 162.08, Subd. 5, & 7 ari.d Minnesota Rules 8820.1500, Subp. 9. OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Page 4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Commissioner of Transportation be and is hereby requested to approve this basis for financing said construction project(s) and to authorize repayments from subsequent accruals to said Account, in the amounts as herein indicated. Transfer the Yearly Municipal Construction Allotment, beginning in 2006, to the Regular Construction Allotment until the borrowed funds are repaid in full to the Regular Construction Allotment Account. Adopted at Fergus Falls, Minnesota, this 21 st day of February, 2006. Dated: 11~ I d..°i< Io "° OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' I By:-~ 7~ Attest: Ro#r Froemming, Board of Commissioners Chair Larfy krciJn, Clerk ~ CUP Findinas for The Preserve At Echo Bav County Attorney, David Hauser, presented Findings for the approval of the Conditional Use Permit for The Preserve At Echo Bay. Solid Waste Transfer Services Aareement Motion by Froemming, second by Block, and unanimously carried to authorize the Chairman's signature to execute the Solid Waste Transfer Services Agreement between the County of Otter Tail and Ottertail Trucking of Fergus Falls, MN. The motion also approves the Solid Waste Hauling license for CY2006. Shoreland Manaaement Ordinance Revision Discussion Land & Resource Director, Bill Kalar, opened discussion regarding potential SMO changes. He referred to a draft dated 02-14-06 and discussion took place regarding the following items: Towers: The draft language added Towers as a prohibited· use in the shoreland area. After discussion, general consensus of the County Board is not to include this language change in the SMO unless the public has a large concern regarding towers. Lot Area: New language is proposed for Buildable Area and Sewage Treatment System Suitable Area. These proposed provisions would be for new plats and subdivisions. County Board consensus on the new language for Buildable Area and Sewage Treatment System Suitable Area is to move forward with this recommendation for revision to the SMO. Setback/Heiaht: A proposal to change the lotline setback for lots greater than 70 ft. wide from 10 ft. to 15 ft. with varying setback for lots less than 70 ft. wide. The rationale for the proposal to increase lot setback lines is to deal with storm water run-off more effectively. The County Board referred the proposed lotline setback to the Shoreland Rules Revision Committee. OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes i February 21, 2006 I Page 5 I ' A proposal for a 50 ft. structure setback for type 3, 4, and 5 wetlands. I Proposal to reduce the Height of a Building/Dwelling from 35 ft. to 30 ft. After discussion, the County Board did not wish to change the SMO regarding dwelling height. Proposed language regarding legally attached backlots for the purpose of creating orderly development around the lakes. The County Board consensus on the proposed language to attach back lots is to move forward with the recommendation.~ ' Toooaraohical Alterations: , The time limit to place fill (20 cubic yards of material or less) that does not require a permit is proposed to be changed from September 1 to October 1 and a proposed change to give Administrative Authority to the Land & Resource Office to extend time periods for Conditional Use Permits for shoreland alterations on a case by case basis. Commissioners were in favor of these changes. I I lnioetvious Surfaces: I I Proposed language to change Impervious Surfaces from 25%1 to 20% unless there is a Storm Water Management Plan that complies with standards based on the MPCA and must be developed by a licensed engineer. Discussion took place regarding whether or not existing resorts would need to comply with this provision. The County Board, by consensus, agreed with the language to change the Impervious Surface requi~ement to 20% as long as the Existing Resorts are not held to that requirement and must meet the 25% Impervious Surface which is State Rule. 1 Change definition of Impervious Surface from the statewide st.;mdards. Sutvevor's Sianature: Requires that all Preliminary Plats be prepared and signed by a Minnesota registered land surveyor, civil engineer, or architect. County Board agreed with this administrative requirement. Cluster Develooments: , A proposal to add a new section to the Cluster Development section IV.11, which is proposed as: E. Existing Resorts. This proposal allows more density; however, is based upon the setback and impervious surface requirements. Conditional Use Permits would be required if there are changes in the size and number of units, with] the Land & Resource Office approving some replacement if the Existing Resort stays within certain requirements. ' Discussion took place regarding conflicting statutes relative to Public Health Inspections that ' are administered by the State of Minnesota. 1 Recess & Reconvene 1 At 12:08 p.m., Chairman Froemming declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners recessed for lunch break. The meeting was reconvened at 1 :00 p.m. Soil & Water Conservation District Year End Review EQT SWCD Manager, Darren Newville, and WOT SWCD Manager, Brad Mergens, briefed Commissioners regarding the various conservation programs that took place in Otter Tail County during the past year. They discussed their respective Board membership, the OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Page6 Conservation Tree Program, Custom Grass Seeding, Cost Share Programs, Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program, Easement Program, the Farm Bill and other conservation and education initiatives. WesMN Resource Conservation & Develooment Motion by Froemming, second by Nelson, and unanimously carried to appoint Rod Wenstrom to the WesMN RC & D. Recess & Reconvene At 1 :26 p.m., Chairman Froemming declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners recessed for a short break. The meeting was reconvened at 1 :39 p.m. with Commissioners Froemming, Mosher, Block, and Lee present. Prooosed Patrol Station Location Motion by Lee, second by Block, and unanimously carried to approve the low bidder, Anderson Land Surveying, Inc. of Fergus Falls, MN, for Phase I survey work for property located in Section 14, Township 134, Range 39 in Otter Tail County. CUP Findinas for The Preserve At Echo Bav Motion by Mosher, second by Froemming, and carried with Lee opposed, to adopt the Findings memorializing the decision made for the approval of the Conditional Use Permit for The Preserve At Echo Bay (attached to official minutes as Attachment 8). Performance Evaluation Summarv Motion by Block, second by Lee, and unanimously carried to approve the positive Performance Evaluation Summary of Human Services Director, John Dinsmore, as presented, and to direct that the summary be placed in his personnel file. Continued Shoreland Manaaement Ordinance Revision Discussion Resort Owners, Mike and Cheryl Harris, requested that Otter Tail County adopt the State Regulations for Commercial PUDs. The rationale is to allow existing resorts some leeway to maintain and expand in order keep the resorts that are in business in the County. Lengthy discussion took place regarding the pros and cons of adopting the State Standards for commercial PUDs for existing resorts. Commissioners expressed a desire to assist existing resorts as much as possible and draft language for State Regulations for Commercial PUDs. Open space is clarified. Ex emotions: Proposed language to adopt one Grandfather Date for creation of lots; however, the septic system, setback and other requirements would take effect at the time of issuance of the Conditional Use Permit. Also, adding an exemption for hunting stands of less than 36 sq. ft. Commissioners asked that this language be referred to the Shoreland Rules Revision Committee. Other Issues: The County Board requested that issues regarding RV's and/or Tents; Duplex, triplex, & quads; and Guest cottages need to be addressed. I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Page 7 I Mr. Kalar stated that the language with changes requested by the County Board will be presented and reviewed with the Shoreland Rules Revision Committee, then draft language will again be reviewed by the County Board before a Public Hearing is scheduled. Mr. Kalar stated that his preference would be to wait until after the construction season to implement a revised SMO. : Letter Presented Mr. Kalar presented, to the Chairman of the Board, a letter dated February 17, 2006, from the City of Frazee Administrator regarding a proposed Otter Tail River Canoe and Boating designation. Adiournment 1 At 3:23 p.m., Chairman Froemming declared the meeting ofithe Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners adjourned until Tuesday, February 28, 2006. ! I c,.;,,_ /.J..& }Dlo OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS By: ~-;£. ... ~~• Rog~roemmir(g, Board of Commissioners Chair Dated: Attest: /au✓,, t{L Larry Xr,dhn, Clerk CB/kd 2/21/2006 12,13,46 OTTER TAIL COUNTY AUDITOR PANELSON RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS SYSTEM WARRANTS FOR PUBLICATION ! ' OTC Warrants February 21, 2006 Attachment A, Page 1 !FD66 COUNTY 56 PAGE l WARRANTS APPROVED ON 2/21/2006 FOR PAYMENT 2/21/2006 VENDOR NAME BRIAN ARMSTRONG ARVIG COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS ATSSA BACHMAN PRINTING COMPANIES BAN-KOE SYSTEMS INC BRANDON COMMUNICATIONS INC CHRISTENSEN CONSTRUCTION COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP COUNTRY WOOD PRODUCTS INC DAN'S EXHAUST PROS DEX MEDIA EAST ELECTION SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE IN FASTENAL COMPANY FERGUS FALLS ·NEWSPAPERS INC FLEET SUPPLY FORCE AMERICA DAVID GADOW GE CAPITAL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL GR GRAPHICS INC ST LOUIS NICOLE HANSEN GERALD HOLO INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LL INTERSTATE INC IRON HILLS PAWN SHOP K-MART KARVONEN FUNERAL HOME KELLY SERVICES INC LAKES RADIO MADDEN ' S ON GULL LAKE MAIN STREET GAS & GOODS MARTIN'S PAINTING & MORE MCM MCCOLLOUGH WELDING MID-CENTRAL EQUIPMENT INC NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC NORTHWEST DIVERS NORTHWEST IRON FIREMEN INC OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC OTTER TAIL CO TREASURER OTTER TAIL TELCOM OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY OVERLAND MECHANICAL SERVICES PCM PROFESSIONAL DISPATCH MGMT DONALD PEDERSON PERHAM CO OP CREAMERY PINE PLAZA TV APPLIANCE & CAMP SECRETARY OF STATE SHERWIN WILLIAMS AMOUNT ' 48.95 15.96 380.00 281.84 515.00 138.52 17,217.50 203.13 1,235.24 25.31 19.40 10,934.57 10.55 2,179.00 183.38 1,288.11 6.06 233.65 101.45 293.10 89.00 5. 53 461.02 1,086.27 210.00 277.48 365.00 1,812.89 783.00 573. 36 1,441.56 2,360.65 105.00 122.88 10.12 672.411 116 .99 199. so' 76. 10; 380.93i 120.0Q, 262.041 618.54 990. 001 48.57' 2, 9:24. 62· 367.37 40. 00! 94. 851 I OTC Warrants February 21, 2006 Attachment A; Page 2 COUNTY 56 IFD66 2/21/2006 12:13:46 OTTER TAIL COUNTY AUDITOR PANELSON RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS SYSTEM WARRANTS FOR PUBLICATION PAGE 2 •••• WARRANTS APPROVED ON 2/21/2006 FOR PAYMENT 2/21/2006 VENDOR NAME STEINS INC TE:CH DEPOT TRAIL KING INDUSTRIES INC VARITBCH INDUSTRIES VICTOR LUNDEEN COMPANY WAGON WHEEL WELDING SUPPLI8S & FIRE EQUIPM FINAL TOTIIL •..•••• AMOUNT 822.47 461.21 807.56 186.23 256.05 30.00 25.00 $54,514.92 •••• I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes I I February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 1 1 · 1 COPY In the Otter Tall County Board of Commissioners APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR . THE PRESERVE AT ECHO BAY . I An application for a conditional use permit for a cluster development was filed by Homeland lnvesbnent Company #1 on October 13, 2003. On November 18, 2003, the Otter Tail County Board ofCommissionm directed that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet be completed. On May 25, 2004, the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners placed a moratoriwn on any new cluster developments. "Die moratoriwn lapsed on May 25, 2005. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet for The Preserve at Echo Bay is dated August 24, 2005, and is incorporated by reference. A needs determination for an Environmental Impact Statement came on for hcarinS: before the County Board on November 8, 200S, at which time the Board continued the matter to receive additional information. The additional information was coru.idered by the Board · on November 29, 2005, and is incorporated by reference. On November 29, 2005, the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners dctcnnincd that an Environmental Impact Statement was not needed and subsequently issued a negative declaration for the need of an Environmental Impact Statement regarding The Prcsi:rve at Echo Bay dated November 29, 2005, a copy of which is anached hereto and incorporated by reference. I The application for the conditional use was presented to the Otter Tail County Planning Commission on January 4, 2006, at which time the matter was continued to February B, 2006. A copy of the January 4, 2006 minutes of the Otter Tail County Planning Commission is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit as reviScd. A copy of the February B, 2006, Planning Commission minules is attached hereto.and incorporated by reference. The matter came on for bearing before the Comity Board of - Commissioners on February 14, 2006. Prior to acting on the conditional Use pcnnit application, the County Board adopted Otter Tail County Resolution #2006-14 regarding the enacbnent of the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. I The Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners, being fully advised in the premises, makes the following Findings and Approval: FINDINGS I. The title of the proposed project is The Preserve at Echo Bay. 2. Toe proposer is Homeland Investment Company #1. OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 . Attachment B, Page 2 3. That the project is located on Fish Lake in Dunn Township. The location of the project is accuralely described in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. 4. The Preserve at Echo Bay was a proposal for a 252-llnit residential cluster development with amenities, including a restaurant, golf course, community center, nature trails, private roads and centralized docking for 87 watercraft on a 172.33 acre parcel of land. The project was accurately described in the EnviroM1ental Assessment Worksheet. This proposal was in compliance with the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance. 5. The project has been significantly reduced in size and now includes only· 209 residential units and 60 watercraft slips. 6. The 60 boat slips to be authorized arc fewer than would be allowed for a cluster development (planned unit development) pursuant to the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance and the Minnesota statewide standards in Minnesota Rule 6120.250 through 6120.3900. Under a lot and block development, there arc no limitations to the number of watercraft docking facilities which could be placed on the parcel. 7. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet describes changes in various cover types, which reduce the amount of wooded/forest areas, brushigrasslands, and crop land and increases the amount of lawn/landscaping and impervious surfaces that are not unusual for any development. The information available shows that the project is being developed without the potential for significant environmental effects. 8. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides extensive infom1atio:n about the= fish, wildlife and ecologlCally sensitive resources. Although comments raised questions about the effect the project will have on the high quality fisheries and wildlife habitat, the EAW and additional information already provide information on the fisheries and aquatic plants wildlife habitat Docking facilities will be centralized in this cluster development. The extensive infonnation already provided in the EA Wand the additional infonnation, shows that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. 9. Although the project will change the number or type of watercraft on Fish Lake and the other lakes of the Pelican Group of Lakes, ini:luding Pelican and Bass Lakes, they are minor compared with existing development on the Pelican Group of lakes, and will be limited to centralized docking facilities, minimizing any impact on the lake. Fish Lake has some shallow areas near shore with aquatic vegetation, most of which will remain undisturbed. Much of the bay is deep and appropriate for any boating activity. The change in the boating activity and water surface use does not have the potential for significant enviroM1ental effects. 2 I I ' 0TC Board of Commissioners' Minutes I February 21, 2006 I Attachment B, Page 3 I IO. Fish Lake is a general development lake appropriate for residential development end boating activities. It is a part of a greater chain of lakes including Pelican, Little Pelican and Bass Lakes. Little Pelican Lake, which is the farthest away from Echo Bay, is a recreational development lake, the others arc general development lakes. None of the lakes involved arc natural Cnvironment lakes. The surface waters of Fish lake and the Pelican chain of lakCs are adequate to handle the increased boat traffic. i l L. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet does indicate that there will be impacts on water resources. There wi11 be the creation of rain gardCns to collect water runoff. The wetland delineations arc accurate. The plans shOw that the water resources will be appropriately protected. This project docs Tiot have the pol.C'ntial for significant environmental effects on the water [esourcCs. 12. The project will involve the installation of water wells as is kcurately described in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The use of water on the proposed project is not of a magnitude to create the potential for si&"ificant environmental effects.. I 13. The EA W and additional infonnation show that surface water changes resulting from the earthmoving naturally associated with devclopmCnt have been adequately addressed. Proper erosion control and anti-sedimentauo'n measures are planned as part of the project so that it does not give rise to the Potential for significant cnvi[onmental effects. i 14. The project calls for alterations which will affect surface water runoff, but the Environmental Worksheet and additional information provide tborough information about the surface water runoff plans. Much of the site ~ill remain highly vegetated, especially in the buffer area around the lake, and fC"W nutrients will enter the lake. The project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. I I 1 S. The wastewater treatment facilities on the project are subject to permitting by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Comments from the agency indicate that the information contained in the Environmental Assessment WOrksheet regarding the wastewater systems fo[ the project is sufficient unless' the methods are changed. The system as proposed does not pose potential for siS"ificant environmental effects. ' I 16. There do not appear to be any geological hazards on the project site, and the soil conditions were accurately described in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. There does not appear to be any potential for significaflt environmental effects. · 3 OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 4 17. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet adequately describes the solid waste, hazardous waste and storage tank proposals for the project, which is primarily residential and the wastes normally associated with households. There is a plan for an above ground stora&e tank for bOat fuel. There were no comments on this topic, and there appears to be no potential for significant environmental effects. 18. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet and additional information adequately describes the traffic impacts of the project, including the adequacy of parking facilities. Traffic and parking created by the project do not create the potential for significant environmental effects. 19. The vehicle related. air emissions infonnation in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet appears to be adequate. Vehicle related air emissions as related to this project do not give rise to the potential for significant environmental effects. · 20. The stationary air emissions sources associated with the project are limited primarily to heating systems and fireplaces, and do not pose the potential for significant environmental effec~. 21. The Environmental Assessment Work.sheet 3.ccurately describes that no· odors, noise or dust issues having the potential for significant environmental effects are raised by this project. 22. As pointed out in the Environmental Assessment Work.sheel, significanl archaeological artifacls have been found on Sile. The appropriate archaeological studies have been performed. The Phase ill assessments will need to be conducted prior to distwbance of soil as planned. These proper studies being done, the project docs not have the potential for significant environmental effects. . ' 24. The project does not give rise to the type of visual impacts contemplated by an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, and do not give rise to a potential for signincant environmental effects. . j 25. The project is compatible with the land use regulations of the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance, and no variances are being requested. 26. No other potential environmental impacts have been identified. 27. Echo Bay and Fish Lake will be protected by a SQ.foot conservation casement, which pennanently preserves the area in its natural state. 28. The development of the residential units and boat slips will be phased in. 4 I I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes I February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 5 I 29. The Pelican chain of lakes is highly developed for residential purposes, and the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding area, bOth on land and water. I 30. The proposed cluster development, as revised, is a reasonable use of the I . land. NOW, THEREFORE, the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners hereby approves 1he amended conditional use permit application for The Preserve ~t Echo Bay as presented and revised during the presentation to the PlaMing Commission on February 8, 2006, and contained in the document from Homeland Developers, Inc. dat~d January 30, 2006, together with the anticipated phnsing plan dated February 8, 2006. The development is to be completed within ten years. I Dated: t,a,-,;!l-0'- i n -I '"1 .'c:"e-zU-v .r ~,.,._-_.-.., Rqjjer Froemming, ChairmaK: Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners . : I 5 OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 6 In the Oner Tail County Board of Commissioners NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE NEED OF AN ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT STATEMENT REGARDING THE PRESERVE AT ECHO BAY An application for a conditional use permit for a cluster development was filed by Homeland Investment Company #I on October 13, 2003. On November 18, 2003, the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners directed that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet be completed. On May 25, 2004, the Oner Tail County Board of Commissioners placed a moratorium on any new.cluster developments. The moratorium lapsed on May 25, 2005. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet for The Preserve at Echo Bay is dated August 24, 200S. Having determined that the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was complete, a copy was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board staff and others as is required by Minnesota Rule 4410.1500, and the availability of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was published in the EQB Monitor on September 12, 2005. The JO.day period for review and comment ended on October 12, 2005. The Oner Tail County Office of Land and Resource Management prepared a summary of responses to the Environmenta1 Assessment Worksheet for TI1e Preserve at Echo Bay, which is incorporated by reference. On November 2, 2005, the Oner Tail County Planning Commission met to review the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and comments. The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Commission is incorporated by reference. This matter came on for hearing before the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners on November 8, 2005, and the board having reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, the comments thereto, the analysis of its Planning Commission, and having received recommendations from the staff of the Otter Tail County Office of Land and Resource Management, the Oner Tail County Board of Commissioners detennined that additional information was necessary to make an informed decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement, and that the information could reasonably be obtained within 30 days. The Board continued the matter unlil November 29, 2005, to receive the additional infonnation. Having reviewed the additional information, as well as all the infonnation before it on November 8, 2005, the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners hereby makes the following Findings of Fact and Decision in the above-mentioned matter. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The title of the proposed project is The Preserve at Echo Bay. 2. The proposer is Homeland Investment Company #1. OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 7 ' 3. The responsible governmental unit is the Oner Tail County sbarc1 of Commissioners. I . . . . -. . . I 4. lbat the preparation and Environmental A3scssmcnt Work.sheet was mandatory pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.4300. Four separate thresholds were met, including: subpart 18, relating to volume of domestic wasr'cwater proposed; subpart 19, relating to the number of residential units in a Sewered unincorporated area; subpart 36, relating to land use convcrsio~ and ~ubpart 32, relating to the riitio of~ ~ixed residential-cor.unercial project. I S. That the project is located on Fish Lake in Dunn Township. The location of the project is accurately described in the Environmental Assessmellt Worksheet I 6. The Preserve at Echo Bay is a proposed 252 unit residential cluster development with amenities, including a restaurant. golf cowse, community center, nanu-e trails, private roads and centralized docking for 87 watercraft on a 172.33 acre parcel of land. The project is accurately described in the 1 1 Environmental Assessment Worlcsheet. I ' 7. The project magnitude is accurately described in the EnviroJental Assessment Worksheet. It is a large project, triggering four mandatoI'}' Environmental Assessment Worksheet categories. While this is a lar8er project than bas been previously developed in Otter Tail Cowity1 it docs not meet any threshold for a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement. The in.formation provided in the EA Wand the additional information adequately describes protection of the environment and the scope of the project Toe project, in light of all the information available, docs not give rise to the potential for sigllificant environmental effects. ! The Otter Tail County Sboreland Management Ordinance was amended to no longer require an analysis of .. crowding potential." i 8. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet accurately lists the permits and approvals required. \ 9. The past and present use of the land was accurately described,in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The type of proposed use is compatible with the Surrounding area ' 10. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet describes changes in various cover types, which reduce the amount of wooded/forest areas, brush/grasslands, and crop land and increases the amount of lawn/landscaping and imperviow surfaces that are not unusual for any development. Toe information available shows that the project is being developed without the pote~tial for significant environmental effects. 2 OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21., 2006 Attachment B, Page 8 11. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides extensive information about the fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources. Although comments raised questions about the effect the project will have on the high quality fisheries and wildlife habitat, the EAW and additional information aJready provide information on the fisheries and aquatic plants wildlife habitat. Docking facilities will be centralized in this cluster development, and boat traffic will be less of a problem than On other parts of the Pelican group of lakes. The extensive infonnation already provided in the EA Wand the additional information, shows that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. 12. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet does indicate that there will be impacts on water resources. There will be the creation of rain gardens to collect water runoff. Questions were raised about the accuracy of the wetland delineations, but have been resolved by the additional information' and are accurate. The plans show that 1he water resources wiU be appropriately protected. This project docs not have the potential for significant environmental effects on the water resources. 1 J. The project will involve the installation of water wells as is accurately described in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The use of water on the proposed project is not of a magni1ude to create the potential for significant environmental effects. 14. The proposed project is in a land use management district, specifically, it is subject to the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management OrcHnance. 15. Although the project will change the number or type of watercraft on Fish Lake and the other lakes oftbe Pelican Group of lakes, including Pelican and Bass Lakes, they are minor compared with existing development on the Pelican Group of Lakes, and will be limited to centralized docking facilities, -minimizing any impact on the lake. Fish Lake has some shallow areas near shore with aquatic vegetation, most of which will remain undisturbed. Much of the bay is deep and appropriate for any boating activity. The change in the baiting activity and water surface use does no! have the potential for significant environmental effects. 16. The EA Wand additional infonnation show that surface water changes resulting from the earthmoving naturally associate_d with development have been adequately addressed. Proper erosion control and anti-sedimentation measures are planned as part of the project so that it does not give rise to the potential for significant environmental effects. 17. The project calls for alterations which will affect. surface water nmoff, but the Environmenlel Worksheet and additional information provide thorough information about the surfaCc water runoff plans. Much of the site will remain 3 I I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 9 I highly vegetated, especially in the buffer area around the lake, and few nutrients will enter the le.kc. The project does nm have the potential for significant environmental effects... . I 18. The wastewater treatment facilities on the project arc subject.to permitting by the Mi.Mesota Pollution Control Agency. Comments from the agency incficate that the information contained in the Environmental Assessmenr Wo'rksheet regarding the wastewater systems for the project is sufficient un1ess the methods are changed. The system as proposed does not pose potential for sig'nificant environmental effects. I 19. There do· not appear to be any geological hazards on the project site, and the soil conditions were accurately described in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. There does not appear to be any potential for significant' environmental effects. I 20. The EnviroM1ental Assessment Worksheet adequately describes the solid waste, hazardous waste and storage tank proposals for the project, which is primarily residential and the wastes nonnally associated with housch~ld.5. There 1 • is a plan for an above ground storage tank for boat fuel. There were ho comments on this topic, and there appears to be no potential for significant envirowneotal effects. ! 21. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet and additional information adequately describes the traffic impacts of the project., including the adequacy of parking facilities. Traffic and parking created by the project do not create the potential for significant environmental effects. . I 22. The vehicle related air ·emissions information in the Enviro~ental Assessment Worksheet appcms to be adequate, and no comments wC'fc received regarding this issue. Vehicle related air emissions as related to this p 0 roject do not give rise to the potential for significant environmental effects. I 23 Th · . . . . d 'th th . I 1· . d . e stouonary a1r em1ss10ns sources associate wi e proJect are lm1te primarily to heating systems and fireplaces, and do not pose the potential for significant environmental effects. No comments were received oo ~s topic. 24. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet accurately descriJe, that no odors, noise or dust issues having the potential for significant enviroI1IJ1ental effects arc raised by this project. I 25. As pointed out in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, significant archaeological anifacts have been found on site. The appropriate archaeological studies have been performed. The Phase Ill assessments will need to: be . . ' conducted prior to disturbance of soil as planned. These proper studies being done, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. I 4 I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 10 26. . The project does not give rise to the type of visual impacts contemplated by an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, and do not give rise to a potential for significant environmental effects. 27. The project is compatible with the plan and land use regulations of the Otter Tail County Shorefand Management Ordinance. No variances are requested. 28. The project will impact infrastructure and public services. Some lO\.\'llship roads may need to be improved and utilities brought into the facility. However, they do not give rise to the potential for significant environmenlal affects. 29. The proposed project docs not involve any future projects, and is a project on an undeveloped portion of the Pelican Group of Lakes, the vast majority of which has already been developed for residential use. The surface water use srudies take into consideration the prior development. 30. No other potential environmental impacts have been identified. 31. In reviewing all of the information contained in the EA Wand the additional information, it appears that the protection of the environment is being properly addressed. This is a residential project, significantly below any mandatory threshold for an Environmental Impact Statement. The EnvironmentaJ Assessment.Worksheet is thorough and extensive, providing a great deal.of information. Together, the additional infonnation which was requested in certain areas and the EA W provide the County with adequate information to make appropriate decisions about the issuing of a Conditional Use Pemiit for a cluster development in accordance with all the rules of the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance and the Minnesota Rules relating to shorcland development, Minnesota Rule, 5120.2500 -6120.3900. Fish Lake is a general development lake appropriate for residential development. This project docs not give rise to the potential for significant environmental effects. 32. All of the procedural requirements for the preparation of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and the determination for the: need of an Environmental Impact Statement have been complied with pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.0200 through 4410.6500. 5 DECLARATION OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes [ February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 11 I NOW, THEREFORE, the Oner Tail County Board of Commissioners hereby makes a negative declaration for the need of an Environmental Impact 'statement. Dated: No,·ember 29, 2005 I I ~~ Robert Block, Chainnan I Oner Tail County Board of Commissioners I I 6 I I i I I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 12 OTTER TAIL COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Otter Tall County Government Services Center, 540 West Fir, Fergus Falls, MN 565~7 21&-996-8095 Januarv 4. 2006 Meeting of the Otter Tail County Planning Commission was held on January 4, 2006 at 6:30 P.M. in the Commissioner's Room, Government Services Center, Fergus Falls, Minnesota. Roll Call: Members Present: Jim Amo, Rod Boyer, Les Estes, Joe Maske, Bert Olson, Robert Schwartz, Rick Wilson and Leona Zimmerman. Members Absent Ken Erickson and David Trites. David Hauser represented the County Attorney's Office and Bill Kalar represented the Land & Resource Management Office. Minutes of December 14. 2005: A motion by Boyer, second by Maske to approve as presented. Voting: All Members in favor. The Preserve At Echo Bav/Homeland Investment Co. #1 • Tabled to Februarv 8. 2006: A Conditional Use Permit Application staling: Cluster Development of The Preserve at Echo Bay: 22 Multifamily homebuildings w/total 197 dwelllng units; 58 single family buildings; 1 golf club house w/pool, tennis, rec. equipment, etc.; 1 mixed use club house containing restaurant, meeting rooms, health club/spa, museum exhibits and 1 O dwelling units (included in above unit counts); hours of operation not llmlted; retail at Echo Bay Club, dock & golf club house and sale of gas at dock. The property is described as NE1/4 NW1/4 & E 10 Rd of SE1/4 NW114; Pt NE1/4 SW1/4 & Pt NW1/4 SE1/4; E112 NE114 Ex Trs & SW1/4 NE1/4 & GL 1 Ex Trs, Section 20 and Pt Lot 6 & of SE1/4 SW1/4 S of River, Section 17 of Dunn Township; Fish Lake (56-768), GD; Unnamed Lake (56-771), NE; Pelican River (56-PR), AG. · November 12. 2003 -Motion to Table for Preoaration of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet: A motion by Trites, second by Sha to table for the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) as it is mandatory due to the number of units being proposed. November 29. 2005 -Neaative Declaration for an Environmental lmoact Statement: The County Board passed a Negative Declaration for an Environmental Impact Statement, therefore the Conditional Use Permit Application needs to be considered. Dan Passolt, Jim Morken, Gene Miller, Jason Kirwin, Dan Skinner and Kris Svlngen represented the Application. Develo0ers Presentation: Dan Passolt. Homeland Investment Comoanv #1: Mr. Passel! introduced their team and provided the Commission with a copy of their Agenda. He updated the Commission on the project. Jim Morken. Homeland Investment Comoanv #1: Mr. Morken provided a description of the project and Its amenities, stating that they designed the project to fit the land. Gene Miller. G.A. Miller Enaineerina: Mr. Miller gave a description of the proposed roads, utilities, sewage system and storm water drainage plans; Indicating that they will comply with Otter Tall County and State Rules and Regulations. I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 13 Otter Tall Planning. Commission I January 4. 2006 Page2 Jason Kirwin. West Central Environmental Consultants: Mr. KirJin infom,ed the Commission that their company delineated the wetlands, Identifying them on a map. He also provided information regarding the archeologlcal sites onslte. I · Dan Skinner. Moore Enaineerinc: Mr. Skinner indicated that their company surveyed the project, following the requirements of the Shoreland Management Ordinance. Kris Svinaen. Attomev: Mr. Svlngen indicated that the Shoreland Manag1ement Ordinance has requirements regarding the use of land. He stated that the Planning Commission must decide ~ this project follows these requirements and then if a Condltional Use Permit should be recommended for approval. Juu.i!: At 7:30 P.M., the Commission took a 10 minute break. Public Comments: Tammv Noraard. Attomev Reoresentlna Pelican Lake Prooertv Owners Association: Ms. Norgard had questions regarding changes {by the developer} from the original request {I.e. the number of units being requested, the road, & the boat launch), and provided comments regarding the questions raised by the Planning Commission at their November 2, 2005 Environmental Impact Statement Needs Determination Meeting. She expressed concerns regarding the destruction of the natural area, safety, boat traffic, the sand bar, the conduciveness for high density development, the selling of a precedent, lopen space and questioned the gua_rantee of completion. Ms. Norgard requested denial, stating that the developer should file an appropriate Application at a later date. I Dave Malkrzak. Pelican Lake Pmoertv Owners Association: Mr. Majkrzek indicated that the Lake Association is Interested In water quality, the lake is already heavily developed, the DNR Public Accesses are heavily used. He expressed con:cems regarding oven:rowdlng, tax value and requested denlal. 1 Gree Jenson: Mr. Jenson stated that Fish Lake Is a little lake and that !hi~ development Is too large, the public access near the trailer park is currently too busy and requested denial. . I Ivan Howe: Mr. Howe expressed concerns regarding aquatic vegetation. I David Kraoness: Mr. Kragness expressed concerns regarding boat traffic, the boat club and questioned the monitoring of the project. He requested denial. : Cvnthla Slllers: Ms. Sillers stated that the role of the Planning Commission Is to plan. I Jim Bestln: Mr. Bastin indicated that this is a pristine area and that It should not be disturbed. . I Mike Osl..)'l!: Mr. Ostbya Indicated that there is only one area left on the lake that is pristine, and once this area is gone, there won't be any. §J:ti!!: /lJ. 9:35 P.M .. the Commission took a 10 minute break. Aoolicants Reauest Tablina of Condltlonal Usa Permit Aoolicatlon: \ Kris Svlngen, on behalf of the developers, requested a tabling for 30 days1to aliow time for the developers to provide a revised plan to the Planning Commission that wlll address the Issues that have been raised. "Ill "Ill 'II .. OTC Board· of Commissioners' Minutes f:ebruary 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 14 Otter Tell Planning. Commission January 4, 2006 Paga 3 Motion: A motion •by Estes, second by Wilson to table to February 8, 2006, at the Applicant's request. The Applicant shall provide clarification (including a new drawing) of their revised request,._containlng the following information: 1. The number (21_4• maximum) of units being proposed.' 2. The number (60 maximum) of boat slips being proposed. 3. A written statement specifying their,.re_quest and 1Nhat will be cons_id!!red, (i.e. number of dwelling units, number boat slips, commercial use, etc.). 4. The proposed,P,hases must be identified and coloi coded on the drawing. Voting: All Members in favor. Uodate -Blue Heron-Bav. Dead Lake: Bill Kalar updated the Commission on the Blue Heron Bay, Dead Lake (56-383), project. He indicated that the County· Board has chosen Wenck & Associates to assis\ th,e. County in preparing an Environmental Impact Statement. Mr. Kalar stated that once this is complete, the Planning Commission will need to -consider the Conditional· Use·. Permit Application. · · · · Adiourn: At 10:15 P.M., Chairman Olson set the Meeting. The next Meeting is scheduled for 6:30 P .M. on February 8, 2006. Respectfully submitted, A~/3~ Marsha Bowman Recording Secretary OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 15 OTTER TAIL COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Otter Tail County Government Services Canter, 540 West Fir, Fergus Fall&, MN 56537 218-996-8095 Februarv 8. 2006 Meeting of the Otter Tail County Planning Commission was held on February 8. 2006 at 6:30 P .M. in the Commissioner's Room, Government Services' Center, Fergus Falls, Minnesota. Roll Call: Members Present: Jim Arno, Rod Boyer, Les Estes, Joe Schwartz, Rick Wilson and Leona Zimmerman. Members Absent: Ken Erickson and David Trites. Maske, I I Bert Olson, Robert David Hauser represented the County Attorney's Office and Bill Kalar represented the Land & Resource Management Office. j Minutes of Januarv 4. 2006: A motion by Wilson, second by Estes to approve as presented. Voting: All Members In favor. I The Preserve At Echo Bav/Homeland Investment Co. #1 -Aooroved As Revised: A Conditional Use Permit Application stating: Cluster Development of The Preserve at Echo Bay: 22 Multifamily homebuildings w/total 197 dwelling lunits; 58 single family buildings; 1 golf club house w/pool, tennis, rec. equipment, etc.; 1 mixed use club house containing restaurant, meeting rooms, health club/spa, museum exhibits and 1 O dwelling units (included in above unit counts); hours of operation not llm!te_d; retail at Echo Bay Club, dock & golf club house and sale of gas at dock. The property Is described as NE1/4 NW1/4 & E 10 Rd of SE1/4 NW1/4; Pt NE1/4 SW1/4 & Pt NW1/4 SE1/4; E1/2 NE1/4 Ex Trs & SW1/4 NE1/4 & GL 1 Ex Trs, Section 20 and Pt Lot 6 & of ~E1/4 SW1/4 S of River, Section 17 of Dunn Township; Fish Lake (56-768), GD; Unnamed Lake (56-771 ), NE; Pelican River (56-PR), AG. I November 12. 2003 -Motion to Table for Preoaratlon of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet A motion by Trites, second by Sha to table for I the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) as It is mandatory due to the number of units being proposed. I November 29. 2005 -Neaative Declaration for an Environmental lmoact Statement: The County Board passed a Negative Declaration for an Environmental Impact Statement, therefore the Conditional Use Permit Application needs to be considered. I Januarv 4. 2006 -Tabled to Februarv 8. 2006: A motion by Estes, second by Wilson to table to February 8, 2006, at the Applicant's request. The flpplicant shall provide clarification (including a new drawing) of their revised request, containing the following information: 1. The number (214 maximum) of units being proposed. 2. The number (60 maximum) of boat slips being proposed. 3. A written statement !specifying their request and what will be considered (i.e. number of dwelling units, number boat slips, commercial use, etc.). 4. The proposed Phases must be identified and color coded on the drawing. I . Develooers Revised Prooosal: As requested by the Plal)ning Commission, the Developers submitted a revised proposal (attached), to Land & Re.source Management on January 31, 2006. The revision proposes a maximum number of 209 residential units and a ma,imum number of 60 boat slips. The detailed plans are on file at Land & Resource Management. I . I I I I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 16 Oltllr Tall Planntng, Commission February B, 2006 Paga 2 Dan Passolt, Jim Marken, Gene Miller, and Kris Svingen represented the Application. Da•,e Majkrzak, Pelican Lake Property Owners AssociaUan: Mr. Majkrzak distributed a handout (an file) on Pelican Lake and expressed concerns an retaining property values tt this project were ta be approved. Tammy Norgard, Attorney Representing Pelican Lake Property Owners Association: Ms. Norgard expressed concerns regarding the patent/al loss of serenity of the area, the potential increase In boating, the number of units being proposed, the number of docks being proposed in the bay-, and stated that the proposal is not appropriate. David Kragness: .Mr. Kragness expressed concerns regarding the control of boating in the bay. Motion: A motion by Estes, second by Schwartz ta approve the plans dated January 30, 2006 (received by Land & Resource Management January 31, 2006), Including the anticipated phasing (10 years} Indicated an the document (copy attached) received st the February 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting, This approval also includes the phasing al the docks/boat sllps as fallows: A. Phase 1: 1 dock with 9 boat slips (easterly side of project); B. Phase 2: 1• section of the circular dock wtth 23 boat slips (center of project); C. Phase 3: 1 dock with 5 boat slips (westerly side of project}; and D. Phase 4 & 5: 2"' section of the.circular dock with 23 boat slips (center of project). A reason for approval is the Developers proposal to· establish a 50' Conservation Easement adjacent to the Lakes and River (Worksheet B) which permanently-preserves the area In Its natural state. YQ.!lng: All Members in favor, e<cept Amo and Maske. , Loonv Ac.res -Prellmlnarv Plat Aooroved Mav 11. 2005: Bill Kalar discussed with the Commission, e request of the Developer (Joshua Hanson), to approva· a relocation of the proposed dedicated public road. Mr. Kaler Indicated that since the approval · of the Preliminary Plat, there is no longer an agreement from the adjacent property owner to allow the dedicated road to be located as approved. Since this is the case, It Is requested to . move the road easterly onto Mr. Hanson's property. Motion: A motion by Maske, second by Boyer to approve as presented on the map prepared January 13, 2006 (received by Land & Resource Management January 17, 2006), with the following conditions: 1. The garage Is removed. 2. An updated drainage plan Is provided. ~: All Members in favor. Adloum: Af B:20 P.M., Chairman Olson set the Meeting. The next Meeting Is scheduled for 6:30 P.M. on April 12, 2006. · Respectfully submitted, __},{_~J~ Marsha Bowman Recording Secre_tary ·~~· I 0TC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 17 1'1•,-:-_c~ ~ I . '. r ~ . .. , . ..... . 171200s ln respcnse to the Planning Comm1Ss1on 1/041".2006 reQuest that we provide a darification to our 10/13f.2003 request for a CUP We have provided the followlng information and drewlngs explaining: I 1.) Th• number of units being propo9ed -Number or units now being proposed is 20£Fi 103-"Single Famibes,-4 -6 plex,.1 -10 plex, 4-18·plex·) -Converted g plexes on Putnem Hill now 10 slngle faml\ies · · I .Converted 9 plexes on Whisper Lane now 6 single faml\les and a 6 p\ex -Converted multi-plex Gotf Villa$ on the Golf Course and reduced 9 units now 25 single families -Moved 2-18 plexes to tne MeadOw area and connected the Goll Club House / -lmperv1ou9 is now 15% -Rein Garden changed to Holding Pond next to the Golf Club House to hold Course drain'age · -Ope.n Space is now BS%. I 2.) The number of boat slips being proposed 1 -Number of boat slips is 60 (46-ln SW comer of Bay, g..NE comer of Wisc .. 5-at the Point) -See Plat for dock locations and type of dock. I ..,Eliminated the boat launch and storage building at the Dam and the herd surface road leading to It 3.} A wrluan statement specifying the request and what wlll be con&~dered / -Thls letter and detalls drawn into the Plat(e.g. cart paths, walking trails. water oriented s'tructure, etc.) will serve 85 our .,jJ darificalion of our revised request There are some commercial uses in our propasal b\Jt many of them require member..hip(e.g. Restaurant-Public, Golf Course, Boat Club, Gas -Private Membership'. 4.) The proposed Pha&es ldantffied -Also Included is a Phasing plan which takes into account the infrastructure limeline and the potential Maricetlng strates)'. Dan Passott-Jim Morken Homeland lnvH1ment Co.11 i i OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 18 Anticipated Phasing Plan J-ec,0 'J J--~_,o '( I' c.. ('1£!T" J,J 6 2/812006 The ls.sue of placlng yeerty schedules to our phasing plan requires explanations and assumptions that lnvolve marketing strategies and practical tt\Ought as 10 the installation of infrastructure and amenities. Therefore I nave prepared !his brief schedule of anticipated Phasing; 1-10 yea1'9(Se1es of Lots or Condos-many wlll nave to wait to build until Infrastructure Is brought to them or for Design approval process before they build} 1-2 years (Phase I const. begins (9 single ta_mlly ~nd cart/W'alking paths) and Marquart Trail and lnfrastruCbJre) 2•5 years (Pllase 11 canst. begins(10 sing1e tamlly,2•18 plexs,Club House and Course) and Echo Bay Tran and Infra.) 3-6 years (Phase Ill consl b_eglns(30 slngle femRy, 1·18 plex, 1-6 plex) end Beaver Bay Lane and Infra.) 4-7 years (Phase IV canst. beglns(13 single femlly) Golden Pond Lane 5-10 years (Phase V const begins(41 single famlly,3-6 plexs, 1-18 plex, 1-10 plex) and assoc. roads and Infra. Dan Pasaolt-Jlm Morken Homeland Investment Co. t1 OTTER TAIL COUNTY RESOLUTION #2006-14 OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 19 Upon the motion of Nelson, seconded by Block, and passed by a unanimous vote, the County Board o_f Commissioners adopts the following resolution: I WHEREAS, Otter Tail Cowity has had a Shoreland Management Ordinance since October 15, 1971;and I WHEREAS, in 1989, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources revised the statewide standards for "management of shoreland areas" which were codified in Minnesota'. Rules as parts 6120.2500 through 6120.3900; and I WHEREAS, the Minnesota Depanment of Natural Resources informed O~er Tail County in a letter dated Februery 5, 1990, to the Chainrum or the County Board, a copy of which letter is attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference, that the County had until Fcbruery 5, 1992, to comply with the new rules; and . I WHEREAS, prior to the 1989 statewide standards for management of sho~land areas, Oner Tail County had been treated as a single zoning district within the shoreland areas; and WHEREAS, under the unique and special circumstances of Otter Tail co1ty, the County Board determined that in order to best preserve and enhance the quality of surface watcr:S, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wiSe use of water and related land resowces, to continue the single district practice. All of Otter Tail ctiunty was, and is, essentially classified under the MiMesota Rules as a "high density residential district;" and WHEREAS, Oner Tail County has 1,049 lakes and l, 174 miles of river rrlntage. Most of the lake frontage and much of the river frontage has been developed. The developme~t hos been almost exclusively residential, with some resorts spread oui across the County and some Commercial development, none of which is concentrated. Then: arc very few elWilples in 1he 'county of anything meeting the definition of industrial use, and these too are not concentrated in any kea. There arc no places outside of municipalities in Otter Tail County which would be considered ~oncentraled urban, particularly commercial, land uses. There is no place in the County which WOuld 1be an appropriate place for a general use district. There is no concentration of resons, which would be appropriate in the County for a water-oriented commercial district. Then: are no "describeable" areas of Otter Tail County where no development is appropriate to be placed in a special protection district. While ;wetlands and bluffs can be found throughout the County, they arc otherwise i:--otected in Oner Tail County's Shorcland Management Ordinance, an~ arc not susceptible to protection by districting; and I . WHEREAS, all of Otter Tail County's shortland areas, and especially those areas not previously developed, meet the criteria for high density residential districts; a~d I WHEREAS, when considering lhe criteria for land use zoning district designation as laid out in MiMesota Rule 6120.3200, Oner Tail County is appropriate for a single district, Which was the intention of the Comity Board in adopting the statewide standards on February 5, 1992, rCI1'lains the appropriate form of control for Oner Tail County_and is "substantially compatible with the rn{rncwork. in subpart 4" (of Minnesota Rule 6120.3200), as is required by subpan 2 of Minnesota Rule 6120.3200; and OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 20 WHEREAS, Minnesota Rule 6120.2800, subpart 3, authorizes local governments, under special circumstances and with the Commissioners• approval, to adopt shorcland management controls that are not in strict confonnity with the minimum standards and criteria provided, the purposes of Minnesota Statutes I 0JF.20 I to I0JF.221 are satisfied. In conformity with the implementation flexibility provisions of the Minnesota Rules, Otter Tail County requested relief from the strict zoning district ·requirements. A copy of a letter to Russ Schult, Shoreland Hydrologist, Department of Natural Resources Division of Waters, dated June 13, 1991, is marked Exhibit 8, and incorporalcd by reference; and WHEREAS, the DNR did, in fact, approve Otter Tail County's Shoreland Management Ordinance which authorized the use of planned unit developments, called cluster developments in the Ordinance. The County Board detennined that planned unit developments, which are subject to conditional use permits, provide for greater protection of the environment and valuable shoreland resources, even with the potential for increased density, than traditional lot and block development. When applying the purposes ofland use districts as outlined in Minnesota Rule 6120.3100 and the criteria for the districts as outlined in 6120.3200, the Board detennined that all areas of Otter Tail County are appropriate for planned unit developments. A single district in Otter Tail County is compatible with the classes of public waters as outlined in MiMesota Rule 6120.300 and the standards for development vary depending upon lake classification. Because there are no areas within the County that cluster developments should not be allowed, they are specifically identified as being allowed in all areas of1he County. The provision of Minnesota Rule 6120.3800, subpart 2, which requires that ifa local government allows planned unit developments, the land use districts in which they are allowed· conditionBI uses must be identified in their official controls and on a zoning map is not applicable in Otter Tail County (the map would simply sbow all shoreland areas of Otter Tail County); and WHEREAS, attached hereto, and marked Exhibit C and.incorporated by reference is an October 19, 1992 letter to Otter Tail County from the Department of Natural Resources approving a grant for the administration of the County's Shoreland Management Ordinance. The letter specifically states, "Since your County has recently adopted a compliant Shoreland Management Ordinance, you are eligible for grant assistance." The Department of Natural Resources, which promulgated and enforces Chapter 6120 of the Minnesota Rules, has continually approved and supported Otter Tail County's Shoreland Management Ordinance as it was amended on February 5, 1992, lo comply with lhe 1989 slatewide standards and as subsequently amended. Also altached hereto, and marked Exhibit D aad incorporated by reference is a December 19, 2000 letter from the Depanment o(Natural Resources approving the January 1, 200 I revisions to the Shoreland Management Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, IT JS HEREBY RESOLVED, that Oner Tail Couniy continue to enforce its Shoreland Management Ordinance, including the authorization for planned unit developments, also known as cluster developments. 2 OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes 1 February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 21 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the attached map, dated February 14, 2006, which has been marked Exhibit E, and is incorporated by reference, represents a zoning map of OnC'I' Tail County showing the shoreland management district classifications based upon the public waters classification system. ; ., Adopted this 14th day offebruary, 2006. ATTEST: / . r,(/lil< ½c<li.---. Larry Krohn,1tlerk ' OTTER TAIL COUNTY ') ''A. By ; 'l 0Lw Chairman Board of Commissioners ) OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 22 .,.,.. STATE OF . ruf~[N!]rn~©iJ'ffe:, , DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ONR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 February 5, 1990 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD• ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA• 55155-40 The Honorable Sydney G. Nelson Chafnnan, Otter Tail County Board of Conmissfoners Root• 3 Sebeka, MN 56477 Dear Commissioner Nelson: NOTICE TO ADOPT REVISED STATEWIDE SHORELAND MANAGEMENT RULES fl&:CIIVID FEB Ot IHI .. ' .. -.;..;;,;.; On July 3, 1989, the revised Statewide Standards for "Management of Shoreland Areas" rules became effective (Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2500 • 6120.3900). Under the authority of Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2800, Subp. 2;'-you· are·:hereby notlf.led that your . . CJty,.(C_oun.ty_mus.t upgeade. ~.ts )arid' use ·controls or _shore 1 and .ordinali_ce'" 'by'.-iFelfruary ·5·;·· · ... ,. •-1992~-tCrtomp1J'.,.Wf~~~·th-e~~~~7:~u_1_es~"1 .. · · · · · · 1 ·The rules were developed through a consensus process by 23 groups representing diverse 1nterests from agriculture and environment to local and state governmental agencies Including the Department of Natural Resources. A series of ten hearings before an Administrative Law Judge in the fall of 1988 completed the public revfew process. The Legislature has provided grant monies to assist local units of governnent in adopting the new shoreland rules. A grant application form fs enclosed. Please return the completed form by March 5, 1990, to the Shoreland Hydrologist serving your region (see attached map): ROQlons I, 2, 3 Russ Schultz, Shoreland Hydrologist ONR-Oiv. of Waters 1601 H1nnes0ta Drive Brainerd, MN 56401 (218) 828-2605 Regions 4, 5, 6 DNR-Oiv. of Waters Shoreland Hydrologist 120n Wasnes Read St. Paul, MN 551D6 (612) 296-7523 The Shoreland Hydrologist Is your primary contact for the grant application, contract, eligible expensesr and related questions, The Area Hydrologist serving your city/county (see attached map/ will be your primary contact when it comes to the actual work of revising your zoning ordinance. Please feel free to call upon them for assistanc!. Sincerely, 01~0~/-_/ ~~;a~g. _Director ~ Enclosure _., / EXHIBIT A cc: Jerry Paul, Regional Hydrologist r;try Lejcher, Area Hydrologist · \Jfalcom Lee, Z.A., Zoning Amittt,~9~~Hl!l'R'f~'l:'lii1'l'LOYER i OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes I February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 23 .. ----1 I Department of I LAND & RESOURCE MANAGEMENT June 13, 1991 Ruaa Schultz "DNR 168 H Dr, Brainerd, ftN 56481 0.•r ftr. Schultz, COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL Phone :Z18-738-2271 Courl HoUIII ! Ftrgu■ Foll■, Mln._11 68637 A■ p•r our conversation of Jun• 12, 1991, thi■ letter w111; try to outline our id••• re,garding Land Uee Zoning Diatrtcta. While it ia apparent that the Otter Tail County Ordinance and th• State•ide atandarda have differwnt approaches to the zoning diatricta, the objeat.ivN U°e ■i■il■r. Tb& Planning Co■■iaaion, Board of AdjuatNnt and County Board held a joint -•ling concerning tl'I• adoption o1 the atatnide at■ndenla.1 On the iaaue o1 t■pl•-nting zoning diatricta, the Baarda 1elt OW" aethodal ••r. av.ffiatnt to proaote the orderly developNnt of l■keahore prop•rtJ 1w1thin Oll•r Tail County. It ••• al■o :felt the adoption of zoning diatricta,: alo119 wit.JI the oth•r requireaenta of our Ordinanc•, would lead to unn1CN■ar1 dupllaatlon of •1:forta. ' The duplication of •fforta coaea about beicauae a CondiUanal U■• P•r■it 1■ r•quir•d by our Ordinance tor all aon-reaid•ntlal, non-agricultural land u-•· Ve agr•• that Conditional Use Pvr11ita abould be required for non- p•r■itted uses. If•• er• re,quiNMI to zone each of our J,849 lakea, 1t would b• a very ti .. conau■ing proc.aa, which we do not 1 .. 1 would Mnefit our develop.,nt objective■• Since •• requir• a Conditional u .. P•r■it t.here are ad ..... te Afeguarda to prevent !■proper developNnl of our ahorelanda. Ve int1md ito continue to- conaider each Conditional Uae Perait epplication carefully, kHping in aind th• 12 nisting criteria in our curnnt Ordinance. Ve oan· add additional criteria if necn■■ry. I have diacuaaed thia iuue •1th the County Attorney•■ office and it doe■ not appear that the outco■e of the few aituationa 1n Which•• bave had difficulty would have been aignificantJy altered 11 •• would have had zoning diatricta. Additionally, there are potential altu■tlaft■ in which the cr•ation of zon .. _, r•ault in leaa ability to deny ■ 'conditional Uee I I Per■it. EXHIBIT B SHORELAND MANAGEMENT QRD,INANCE -8UBDIYl810N CONTROL ORDINANCE AIOHT.QF,WAY SETBACK ORDINANCE-SEWAOE SYSTEM CLEANERS ORDINANCE RECORDER, onER TAIL COUNTY P~NINQ COMM18IIION ! OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 24 Thank you for your conatder■tion of repreaentativ•• of Otter Tail County diacuaa this with you further. Aa pl■nntng to conduct th• public ■Httnga Ordinance in July. Any aaatat■nce objective would IMt appreciated. Sincaraly, {5;;.Q)~ Bill Kalar Acting Ad■intatrator •• P■g• 2 theea, co■■ent■• It rou d•atre, would ••lco■e tM opportunity to ••• diacuaaad, •• are tentatively to consider the change■ to our you can provide u■ in aettng that STATE Of Wl Wl rn ~©'if~ , I DEPARTMENT OF DNR INFORM.A. TION (612) 296-6157 October I 9, 1992 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD • The Honorable Andy Lindquist · Chair, Otter Tail County Boan! of Commissioners Route· I Fergus Falls, MN 56537 Dear Commissioner Lindquist: I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes : February 21, 2006 · Attachment B, Page 25 i NATURAL RESOURCES ' ' ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA • 155155-40 DEC O 3 1992 ADMINISTRATIVE GRANT APPLICATION FOR SHOREI..AND MANAGEMENT Enclosed are grant application forms designed to assist your county in[ administering shori:land management controls. · M.§!a!..~.Y.2,1!!.,..S.~':'.!l.~;"\~~a~!{~/d~-~., "~!PP..~t ~-~'?~~~~ management ordinance you·are eligible for giant assistaocei! It-is our expectation· and hope this proces•·wm'co"nunue on • ycmy_:basi,) . , I A base line administralive grant will be given to all eligible applicants. 1 Additional grant money · can be requested as provided oo the forms. The actual grant award can come from a combination of three categories below: . . . 1 I. ·Base grant: $3,000. . 2. . Expanded base grant for counties that demonstrate above average administrative costs. ' 3. New initiatives: (i.e., mapping land use districts, upgrading onsite sewage systems, develop ag. impact mitigation measures, develop stormwater plans Please return ,::mpleled application within 30 dav,; to: I ' EXHIBIT C AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006. Attachment B, Page 26 Page Two Russ Schultz, Shorcland Hydrologist, DNR -Division of Waters, 1601 Minnesota Drive, Brainerd, MN S640I or call (218) 828-260S. Sincerely, <27-lc WATF,~r-#U6!.~,,'\ Paul T. Swenson, · g Administrator Pennits ~d Land Use Section PTS/RS/BF:fw Enclosure cc: Senator Dallas Sams Senator Cal Larson Rcpiesentative Syd Nelson Representative Loren Thompson Representative Bob Anderson Jerry Paul, Regional Hydrologist Terry Lejcher, Arca Hydrologist William Kalar, County Zoning Administrator ,I <;)TC Board of Commissioners' Minutes I February 21, 2006 I Attachment B, Page 27 I I ,,o• """';,, • Minnesota Department of Natural. ResoJrces ~ fil .\OIi L;if,1yc11,: knail ~ IJJ :t-;a.-~~'I,.~ 51. l':ml. Mi111M.;>.111;.i 5.~ 1~5-•lll_ December 19, 2000 Mr. William Kalar Otter Tail County Zoning Administrator Otter Tail County Counhousc Fergu_s Falls, MN 56537 Deer Mr. Kalar: oEC, 2, G zooO OTTER TAJL COUNTY SHORELAND MANAGEMENT, ZONING ORDINANCE ' We ~ave reviewed the'.g'~~~~~~~ !h.£.9.!!~~-!~aij~~~~~?~;~~~J~§.~~nt Ordinance and find them to DC ~?.E:1P~.!~r:11 -y.oith .. ~4. ~~IJlphment!l)'~W,__,.Ji!ll.,~~s~~~} for Management ofShorcland Areas. Our understanding is the livestock excluSiOn amc"ndfficnt is still discussed with the County Board. The remainder of the amendments are hereby approved. Upon final adoption of the ordinance amendments, please send two certified lpics of the amended ordinance to Arta Hydrologist Terrence Lcjcher at 122 l Fir Avenue East, Fergus Falls, MN 56537 for our files. Thank you. For several years, Oner Tail County has been a statewide leader in the administration of shorcland zoning. We appreciate your effons in these land use decisions and Your excellent working relationship with the Fergus Falls DNR office. May we wish ·you continued good work in 2001. Sincerely, DNR Waters ~.~-!al L;nc Stine, Administrator Water Management Section c: Larry Kramka, Regional Hydrologist Terrence R. Lejcher, Area Hydrologist Russ Schultz. Shoreland Hydrologist EXHlSlT D DNR lnformalion: 651-296--6157 1-888-646-6367 • TIT: 651-296-5484 11800-657-3929 An Equal Opparur111t}' F.!rf.,lo,a () Pmrtd 01'1 Reqded Papar COIIIUl11g ■ Who Valuca DLl'fflll)' Mll'Wn.1111 ol llno Po11-consum.r Wuta I OTC Board of Commissioners' Minutes February 21, 2006 Attachment B, Page 28 ,111111111 i !l!l□ilOI 111