On Monday, February 6, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission Chairperson Eric Minks called the regular meeting to order. Other members present were Steve Heinks, Larry Ziebarth, Greg McBroom, Carl Sanford Sanford, Dale Rothstein, and John Roxbury, Jr.

A motion was made by Larry Ziebarth and seconded by Dale Rothstein to approve the minutes of January 9, 2006 as printed. Motion Carried.

The Planning Commission discussed the Feedlot Ordinance. The Mille Lacs County Zoning Administrator, Michele McPherson was present to answer questions regarding the Feedlot Ordinance. Eric Minks asked the question, who is going to administer it and do we need to adopt an Ordinance of our own? Michele responded that the County would be administering it and only if you want to administer it, do you need to adopt a Feedlot Ordinance of your own. If you want to be more restrictive of the standards that we have set, you need to adopt a Feedlot Ordinance of your own.

Eric Minks indicated that he had a copy of the County Ordinance. Eric Minks asked, where do the setbacks start from? Michele McPherson indicated that they are measured to the edge of the Feedlot area itself, not the property line. She explained that the Feedlot area is basically any area on the site where animals are kept in such concentration that vegetation can no longer be maintained at all. So if they have 120 acres and the disturbed areas up by the farmstead, then that is where we start the setback, to measure the setback from.

Eric Minks inquired about the chart in the Ordinance. He inquired that for a minimum continuous parcel, depending on what tier you are, would the acreage be measured in circumference? And if the Feedlot is along a Township or County road and on the other side is a new parcel, how does that work? Michele McPherson indicated that the setback would still be measured from where the Feedlot area is, even if you're crossing a County road or Township road or wherever. If the setback is 100 feet from the Feedlot area, it is from the boundary of the Feedlot and not from the parcel.

Eric Minks inquired, if someone wanted to start a dairy, and they have a parcel of land and there is a road, and they want to put their Feedlot next to the road, and on the other side of the road is a different parcel, is that contiguous parcel of the 80 acres, does it have to run around the entire Feedlot? So being that on the other side of the road is a new parcel they don't own, would they be able to put in a Feedlot? Michele McPherson indicated that as long as they have 80 acres, contiguous basically means wholly contained or adjacent to, so if they had 2 40's right next to each other, that ran parallel the long way to the road, that to me is an 80 acre parcel, and yes, they would be able to start a Feedlot or a dairy operation on that site. It is possible, very odd, that they could have an operation such that they didn't have a Feedlot. They could pasture their cattle or move their cattle in such a way that they could maintain vegetation all over their site, probably unlikely that anyone would take the much care and patience to do that, but it is possible. Eric Minks asked that in the language in this Ordinance, was it taken from the state statute or was it taken from the group? Michele McPherson indicated it took 15 months to draft that Ordinance and that her understanding is that a lot of it is coming straight out of state statute, not quoting exactly which provisions came from statute and which provisions came out of input from the group. Excess animal unit density probably came out of the statute or came out of someone else's Ordinance from somewhere else in the state. She explained that there are no original thoughts, we just steal what we think are other peoples good thoughts that might apply well to us.

Eric Minks asked, why put a cap on the size of the Feedlot? Michele McPherson asked if he was talking about tier 4. Eric Minks indicated yes, that no Feedlot may exceed 1500 animal units. Michele McPherson indicated that there is a provision in statute that talks about that and anything over that, than we can get the MPCA involved. They get involved in regulating Feedlots over and above a certain number of animals. Eric Minks asked if an operation is over a certain amount, does the state come in and regulate that. Michele McPherson indicated that, yes, they do become involved and then after a certain level, you start getting into environmental assessment worksheets and potentially environment impact statements, and part of the reason that they cut it off is because there is a certain level of staff expertise that needs to be available to make those determinations.

Eric Minks stated that the Planning Commission was supposed to discuss the Feedlot Ordinances and asked them if this is something that they think the Township should just let the County deal with it or do they want to adopt something of our own? Eric Minks then indicated to John Roxbury, Jr. that he mentioned that he thought that they should make it more restrictive. John Roxbury, Jr. said that they can take a look at it. He said that he had been asked to recommend that by some of the Town Board members. Whether they want to change any of the numbers, he doesn't think they want to get into doing all the work that they are going to be doing, if this is acceptable.

Michele McPherson indicated that they were going to be out here visiting some people tomorrow. John Roxbury, Jr. said that he knew she had visited with a number of them and the Township already, and said that when we get into this EADU, it's going to be a real mess.

Michele McPherson indicated that there is processing and there is a lot of people out there. She said that they have probably in the last week, not necessarily in this Township, but just in the County in general, there were probably a half of dozen people coming in and saying that, I'm thinking of expanding, do I need a conditional use permit? So people are aware. Everybody that wants to expand is going to fall into the conditional use permit. Taking on Feedlots means taking on a whole lot of other stuff like what the 7020 statute covers. When we do Feedlot inspection, we are looking for distances to drain tile, distances to public waters, wetlands, how much buffer, how are they handling manure storage, what do they have for separation to mottled soils or manure storage, do they need a concrete pad for storage of manure, land application of manure, there's a whole lot of other stuff besides just regulating the number of animals. It's all the other miscellaneous things that are hiding in the 7020 that don't show up in the Ordinance that we are doing.

She indicated that she is going to send three staff people out there, one is our so called expert, we're never going to experts at it, plus, the other two that are learning the ropes. They are probably going to spend two or three hours on site documenting the existing conditions and documenting how they do or do not comply with 7020 and then documenting what needs to be fixed and setting up a work plan in order to get them in to compliance with 7020. This person is looking at expanding their operation and so it's not just as easy as thinking about having a more restrictive Ordinance, it's how do you deal with all of the other messy stuff that comes along with it.

Michele McPherson indicated that they get some money from MPCA for regulating Feedlots, especially in the shoreline areas, because that's the intent of 7020, is to protect surface and ground water, especially surface water, but it is not a lot of money. This year, for the 100 and some odd Feedlots we have registered they're going to get $8700.00 from the state to administer those Feedlots.

Michele McPherson indicated that they work closely with the SWCE so sometimes they'll be their first contact with the landowner, because SWCE and NRCS have more money to help with improvements and they're not as scary because they're kind of the friendly people and we're the bad regulatory people. So a lot times what will happen is we'll get Feedlot complaints and we'll actually see if we can get NRCS or SWEC to make the first contact because the landowners aren't as much on the defensive. Sometimes we have to step in and take care of that.

Michele McPherson indicated that she was not trying to discourage the Planning Commission from choosing to explore adopting their own Ordinance, she was just letting them know that there is a lot of other stuff that somehow they have to figure out if they want them to continue to do that piece of it and if so how do we establish that relationship.

Eric Minks asked if there are registered Feedlots in Mille Lacs County. Michele McPherson indicated yes. Eric Minks then asked if there are permits, any conditional use permits in Mille Lacs County. Michele McPherson indicated that she has not gone through all of the files yet. Over time they have inspected quite a few of them, but they have to be re-inspected because people tend to get a little lax and kind of let things slide and let their cattle go.
Michele McPherson indicated that they have on their registered list about 107 registered, and some of these folks have fewer than 50 animal units and some of them have several hundred animal units. They have another list of non-registered that they observed just driving through the County, and that list is close to 300 Feedlots all over the place. They have those sorted by name, property owner, Township. Michele McPherson indicated that she could send a piece of their 300 list over if the Planning Commission was interested in seeing that. That spreadsheet has the MPCA registration number on it so they'll be able to tell which ones are registered and which ones are not. Eric Minks asked is Connie Heinks would like to have a copy of that and Connie indicated that she would and that she would keep it on file in the office. Michele McPherson indicated that the spreadsheet she created for those working in her office, is just the basics, name address, PID number, Township, and whether or not they are registered and whether or not they have inspected it or if NRCS or SWEC is working with the particular landowner just so they are not duplicating visits. Michele McPherson indicated that with field observations or properties that the assessor has run across as they have been out in the field, they have noticed that some folks are keeping animals, and that they should keep them on the radar.

Eric Minks asked for the feeling of the board, if they should just wash their hands of it or let the County administer it and take care of it. Greg McBroom indicated that it came down to whether they feel this is adequate for what they want for the Township, or if they feel there is anything to be improved on or do they feel this is satisfactory and what's best for the Township. Greg McBroom then indicated that before they can make that decision they need to see some of the information that we've talked about. Out of those 193, how many are in our Township. Greg McBroom indicated that they could make it as restrictive as they want, if they're going to control a guy that's got two horses or whatever. He said that there is a new development that's proposed to go in, that's 20 acre plus lots and that's what the intention is for the development, is to have horses. Eric Minks asked which development that was. Greg McBroom indicated that it was Winkelman's. He also indicated that in a situation like that it is either going to be covered with covenants, which is something that is out of our hands or is that something that we want to regulate.

John Roxbury, Jr. suggested that the Planning Commission table the topic until they can see what more information Michele McPherson could send them and the between Eric Minks and Steve, they could address it with the Town Board at the next meeting and see if they have some areas of particular interest they want the Planning Commission to look at. Otherwise, we'll leave it alone and let the County do their thing for us. Eric Minks asked Steve if he had any inkling about what the Town Board may think about this and Steve responded that he can only speak for himself. He said that he would like to do what John Roxbury, Jr. says, and they can look at it, but he wouldn't want to change nothing that the County just adopted unless they see a major, major problem. Otherwise follow what they are doing and if we get into this and start seeing problems with the Feedlots than we may have to be more restrictive, but to start this thing out he didn't see why they would have to be more restrictive than what the County is.

John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that the public agencies that Michele McPherson was talking about, like NRCS and Pollution Control Agency and the state guidelines they're basically somewhat copying, really should be adequate. Meaning, they have their own set of rules, the NRCS, and Pollution Control, they're fairly strict, and if you have to bring these agencies in like you have to do with the County, which covers us, it would be adequate.

Michele McPherson indicated that the issue you get into, is that people want to move into the country because they want the open space, they like the character, failing to recognize that part of that includes animal operation and so you get issues of odor and noise and things like that and that's were you kind of get some of the culture clash. Those are legitimate issues but if you can see an operating farm that is right next door to a piece of property that you are purchasing, one would hope that there would be some expectation that there might be some associated noise and things that would go along with that.

Michele McPherson indicated that the Ordinance is designed to take some of that into account and 7020 is geared to protect the environment. Eric Minks indicated that part of the decision on the Planning Commission's part is how active a role is the County going to take in enforcing it. Michele McPherson indicated that the County would be pretty active in that effort, and the County policy is that they are not actively looking for complaints. They just do not have the staff and the time.
Michele McPherson indicated that Feedlots are a little different. She said they are going to try to be, and to some extent, they have to be, more active, but trying to get to 300 Feedlots a year is almost impossible because to do good enforcement they really can only do that during the growing season. That is really the key, is to figure out how much vegetation do you have that can act as a buffer. So they're looking at April 15th through October 15th as their time period, and they have to balance that with wetland enforcement and everything else they do. So they're going to try and get to a third, or a quarter of them. They're also going to focus on those that are potentially impacting shoreland or wetland areas first and work their way in, and if we do get complaints they'll obviously respond to those quickly. Complaints would get bumped into the priority list, if they're starting with Feedlots that may impact shorelands or wetlands, but if they get a complaint from an adjacent property owner, that's going to get moved up into the priority list.

Eric Minks asked what an example of a complaint that the County would get. Michele McPherson responded that it could be someone who knows they have a neighbor with a Feedlot adjacent to them, that they know that was registered for X number of animal units four years ago, and they think that they have added more animals. Another example of a complaint that they just dealt with over the Christmas holiday, was a gentleman who has a relatively small parcel has horses, piles his manure right on the property line or adjacent to the neighbors property line, and they have dealt with this person before, he's now piling it up against the barn, and that is not exactly an appropriate way to store manure. In talking with that person, they had discovered that he has excess animal units. He is only supposed to have X number of horses, he has X plus, so they are trying to work with him to reduce the number of horses that he has. So those are some examples of the complaints that they get. Obviously when we get odor complaints, it's a little harder to deal with, they try to deal with concrete complaints that they can actually, physically and literally do something about.

Greg McBroom asked, can you really enforce this? Michele McPherson asked in terms of what. Greg McBroom explained that there is a gentleman in Princeton Township that has gone to court over and over again in a different County and he seems to win. Michele McPherson responded that he is a lucky dog. Michele McPherson responded that the unfortunate thing is, as she has experienced it, in the three cities that she has worked for, and she'll see how well the County responds to, is that, when it comes to land use issues, the courts have not been as favorable in their viewpoint, as, say, if it were criminal situation. Michele McPherson indicated, that she just spent eight hours today in wetland conservation act and administration training and the DNR conservation officers arc frustrated because they take somebody to court and the judge says, well that's not a wetland, even though it is, it doesn't look like a wetland because it doesn't have open water and they throw it out and unfortunately this person has run into some very sympathetic judges. All they can do, is make this person abide, at least they can attempt to make them abide by the rules and they'll see how it works. She said that she thinks it's the person that they're going to inspect tomorrow.

Greg McBroom asked, what's the County boards feeling on the Feedlot Ordinance. Michele McPherson said, that's a good question, I haven't been her long enough to have dealt with the County board on a particular Feedlot case so I can't speak to that issue right now. Greg McBroom asked, does the County board have to direct you to enforce this or do you enforce this on your own. Michele McPherson said that it's part of her job, it's in her department, and it's part of the zoning and development code, therefore she enforces it. Greg McBroom indicated that if she may not have the backing of the County board. Michele McPherson said that the only way she would find out is if they get somebody in the middle of a process and the County board calls her in for a closed session and tells her not to do that. But she was hired to administer the development code, that's a section of the development code, therefore she will enforce it. If it means taking folks to court to enforce it, than that's going to happen until the County board tells her differently.

Greg McBroom asked, if somebody continuously violates that, is it a misdemeanor? Michele McPherson indicated yes, 90 days in jail or $1000.00 fine or both. John Roxbury, Jr. said to Eric Minks, that he thinks he'll find that the County board takes that pretty seriously. They watched and participated in the development of that and there were two of the County attorneys working and did the vast majority of the paperwork for this thing, so they're on board. He indicated that this isn't just a piece of paper that you have to have.

Michele McPherson indicated that given the changing demographics and with the changing of the population, there is going to be a certain level of expectation that the Ordinance will be enforced. That is her personal opinion, obviously there are those that are on the other side who have operations, who don't want to see it enforced. There were folks concerned about the impact for redevelopment of their sites. For people that are retiring, that want to be able to develop their properties, sell that for development purposes, so this Ordinance affects those folks. But on the flip side, people moving into the County, who know that the County has a Feedlot Ordinance, are going to have a certain level of expectation that it be enforced. Michele McPherson indicated that she doesn't anticipate that it is going to be easy.

Eric Minks called on Wayne Pike who was at the meeting. Wayne asked that if he wanted to run half a dozen animals in the summertime to keep the grass down, does he have to be registered. Michele McPherson said that, no, anyone under 50 animal units legally does not have to be registered. Wayne asked, at 50 animals, how many acres. Michele McPherson said you need at least one acre for each animal unit and then there is no special provisions in there that she could quote off the top of her head.

John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that a lot of work went into this and Michele McPherson said that is her understanding. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that it took 15 months of special public hearings, and several community hearings. Eric Minks said that from John Roxbury, Jr. it sounds like the County Board is really going to enforce this. John Roxbury, Jr. said he thinks so and they would not have spent this much time and effort on it. He said that their were a couple of County board members and numerous Planning Commission members that sat on the committee that put his whole thing together, and two of them were full time lawyers for the County.

Eric Minks said that his feeling is, that with all the work that went into it, and with the Town Board really wanting this enforced, the fact is that if we take this on, it's going to make Loren Kohnen a lot busier, which equals to more taxpayers money spent, so why not just let the County administer it, enforce it. Connie Heinks indicated that will not only add to Loren Kohnen's work but to the clerks as well, and Eric Minks agreed. Loren Kohnen indicated that if you get into enforcement action, it can be something that is quite expensive and it could turn into a long court battle.

Greg McBroom indicated that he thinks the Planning Commission should wait until they get information, they don't have to spend a lot of time on it, but just until they look and see, as to what could be the need and what could not be. Eric Minks indicated that this discussion has been on the Planning Commission's agenda for the last two years, year and a half, and he would like to see this, something happen with this tonight, and if the Town Board wants to send it back to us, to do that, than that's fine, they'll do it. He indicated that a lot of his questions got answered tonight.

Eric Minks went on to explain that on the face of this, you don't realize until Michele McPherson has explained it, but there is a whole lot more to this than just what you read as far as the enforcement and checking up on the Feedlots and checking up on complaints. He said he didn't understand why the Planning Commission would even entertain doing this.

Eric Minks indicated that the only reason he could see is that there is a greater concentration in this area than we think that there is, since Michele McPherson has already said that there is no way, shape of form that they can inspect every site that is in the County now. Michele McPherson indicated that they can not inspect them in just one year, but they will get to them over a series of years. Again they have a game plan to try and deal with the hierarchical manner, just because that's what the statutes say. Obviously we have property owners who are voluntarily coming forward and saying, I want to comply, and there are folks that say, hey, my neighbor's got a Feedlot and they are not operating properly. We deal with that, so our work plan may get shifted based on what we think our priorities are and than what comes up voluntarily or through complaints.

Michele McPherson could not indicate how many Feedlots there are in Princeton Township, but a good number of them are registered with the MPCA. That is always a good first sign. Steve Heinks indicated that with the residents we have in Princeton Township, if there's a problem lot, it's going to be brought to our attention fairly quickly and then we would send it on forward and then have you guys deal with it.

Michele McPherson indicated that the new Ordinance is not even four months old and they have had a number of landowner contacts already voluntarily who want to comply with the Ordinance. Michele McPherson suggested that the Planning Commission let the County work through the bugs of the new Ordinance, give them a year from now, and if it's not working out then re-evaluate it at that point. She said she will still forward to the Planning Commission the list of Feedlots that are in the register, and ones that they believe would qualify under the Feedlot definition. She also indicated that she has some summary information about 7020. She said that she thinks they can build a good relationship and see how it works.

Eric Minks inquired if there was a formal report of the findings when they do inspections. Michele McPherson said that they document everything and that those files are actually open to the public, that the only time they are not open to the public is if there is an enforcement action occurring. For example, if the County was responding to a complaint and they found a violation and they were in the court process, those files could not be seen, but if they were working with someone voluntarily and they've come up with a plan for them to deal with their issues, than a file like that would be open to the public.
Eric Minks asked if it would be a big deal to have copies of those findings when you do inspections forwarded to the Township. Michele McPherson indicated that that would not be a problem, that they could copy the information to the Planning Commission. Loren Kohnen indicated that that would be requested by the person they would be visiting, that he is going to want to see some documentation and so would the Township. Michele McPherson said that would not be a problem. She said that she could just make it a part of their policy, when they are done writing it up and documenting what needs to be done, they can just forward copy of that to the Town Board and Planning Commission.

Eric Minks asked Larry if had anything further. Larry indicated that he didn't see any reason to do anything because just last month we discussed the right to farm clause and now if we make this more restrictive, that'd be taking that away. He said to give it a chance and see if it works. Eric Minks then asked Dale Rothstein if he had anything. Dale Rothstein indicated that he didn't think the Planning Commission needed to adopt anything of their own at this point.
Eric Minks then asked Carl Sanford. Carl Sanford indicated that agreed with Eric Minks, it was like Michele McPherson said, if they want to review this in a year, give them a chance and see how it goes for a year. He indicated that this was a lot of work, and that the Planning Commission had a lot more important things to keep care of, as long as the County are keeping care of this issue. He thinks they put a lot of work into it and the Planning Commission should go with them.
John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he would just like to have the opinion of the Town Board and said if they are fine with it then he is too. He said that some of them expressed concerns to him, and if they want to make any of it more restrictive than they need to work with the County in doing it, not saying The Planning Commission should take on the whole thing. Eric Minks indicated that if you are in for a penny, you're in for a dollar. John Roxbury, Jr. said that is not true. Eric Minks wondered how it could not be. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that the Planning Commission could work with the County. Eric Minks said he did not foresee them changing their Ordinance, but John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that it can be enforced differently for Princeton Township, but that would have to be negotiated with the County.

John Roxbury, Jr. asked if the County was working on some of this with some of the Townships as far as zoning and lot sizes and all of that and it is all being negotiated under this new plan. He said that it can be done if it's necessary, not saying that it is, but before the Planning Commission cans it, he thinks they should ask the Township Board, and if it's fine with them, it's fine with him.

Eric Minks indicated that no one from the Town Board other than Steve Heinks showed up for this meeting.

Michele McPherson indicated that the Township could chose to have more restrictive setbacks and have a lower threshold than when conditional use permits are processed, and you could process those and then the County could be the field people and do all of the visual inspections to verify that the parts of 7020 are being met, the buffer requirements and those sorts of things. She also indicated that they have to negotiate that and come up with a memorandum of understanding as to who is doing what piece of the enforcement. She said that there is a lot of stuff out there besides just what's in the Ordinance, she just wanted to make the Planning Commission aware of that. She said that the Planning Commission has been pretty independent and doesn't want to step into that, only when she's asked to. She also said that that is an option but she thinks that they need to really figure out what the issues are from the Town Board, what are they trying to resolve. Eric Minks indicated that he knew exactly what they were trying to resolve.

Michele McPherson indicated that as far as she was concerned, she would like to have at least a year for the County to try and make this work, at least under the new Ordinance, but she understands that there are political things that are going on that might preclude that from happening. However that works, she doesn't know.
Eric Minks indicated that he would entertain a motion on something. John Roxbury, Jr. makes the motion that the Planning Commission ask Michele McPherson to provide us with the additional for the Planning Commission members and for the Town Board members, and at the earliest opportunity they address the situation with the Town Board and see if they have any issues with the County's Feedlot Ordinance that they think we need to work on as far as making it more restrictive, because we cannot make it more lenient.

Eric Minks asked if there was a second and Greg McBroom seconded the motion. Eric Minks asked if there was any more discussion. The Planning Commission suggested having Michele McPherson attend the Town Board meeting on February 21st and she indicated that she would be available to attend.

Eric Minks asked if there was any other discussion. Eric Minks indicated that the motion on table had been seconded.  Voted all agreed, no one opposed

Connie Heinks suggested sending an agenda to Michele McPherson and she said she would like to receive one, and that she will send the other information out ahead of time.

Next item is discussing a simple plat, Eric Minks asked for a motion to let Michele McPherson go before they first get into that discussion. A motion was made by Larry Ziebarth, and seconded by John Roxbury, Jr. Motion carried.

Michele McPherson had two pieces of information for the Planning Commission. She said that the County is updating the County Development Code which is the entire development code, subdivisions, zoning. They are not doing Feedlots, and they are probably not going to do gravel nines unless the issue just comes up that somebody wants to do gravel lines, but there has been a lot of work done on those. The County is doing this in house. They have a 12 member development code working group, she has got a list of those people for the Planning Commission, names, addresses, telephones, e-mails. They had their first meeting last Thursday night, the 2nd of February, it was just an organizational meeting. All they did was elect a chair and vice chair and figured out when they wanted to meet. They are going to meet monthly on the first Thursday of every month, 7:00, at the County Commissioner's room. Those meetings are public. They will have 20 minutes of time for the public to provide input, ask questions, express concerns, to be considered later on in the process. So it is not a dialogue, but the public will have an opportunity to weigh in. The minutes will also be published in the paper and they will set the agenda far enough in advance. She will also send notes to the clerk.
Michele McPherson indicated that she hopefully will be posting stuff to the website. They are rolling out a new website in March and the zoning departments' website is going to be highly enhanced and more user-friendly. The development code update will have its own page. Michele McPherson also indicated that on Thursday, February 16th, at 7:00 pm, at Trinity Lutheran Church there will be a County wide kick-off meeting. This will be an opportunity for those people who have an opinion about the development code at the County level, if they have issues they think are some good things, of some crappy things. They are going to do small facilitated groups for strengths, weaknesses kind of discussions. It is not going to be a public hearing free for all. It will be organized chaos.

Michele McPherson indicated that someone had called her today and asked how the development code update impact Princeton Township, and she responded that, frankly, it doesn't, but they are going to stay in the loop. Eric Minks then indicated that is does affect Princeton Township, because the Planning Commission would have to go through theirs and change everything. Michele McPherson indicated that yes, it does but hopefully any changes that the County makes will not have a great impact on what you guys have. She also indicated that there may be some things that may the Princeton Township's life easier.

Michele McPherson indicated that the first thing that they are working on is the subdivisions, so that will be the first focus of the group. On the March meeting, Dave Tellinghuisen was elected Chair. Michele McPherson is waiting for him to approve the draft agenda that she sent him, but they will be having a general conversation about sub dividing in the County, what's the difference between an exemption and a plat and what are the issues for building, things like that. She indicated there were twelve copies of that information. Each member of the Planning Commission was handed a copy.

Michele McPherson than had another item to discuss with the Planning Commission. She indicated that John Roxbury, Jr. already had a copy of the Large Memo on Township County zoning. John Roxbury, Jr. said it was in his packet that he has not opened yet and Michele McPherson than informed him that he got it last December. John Roxbury, Jr. said he had it somewhere but would like another copy. She indicated that she had twelve copies and than each Planning Commission member received a copy.

She said that back in December, by request, we starting looking at the relationship between the County and Township zoning, and the Assistant County Attorney out together a large memo about how the statutes work between 394 and 462, 394 being the County zoning, 462 being the Township zoning, and the whole issue of inconsistency and restrictive, less restrictive, and so this memo is for the Planning Commission's reference. The County board does not a formal policy declaration about how this is going to work in Mille Lacs County. They have asked Michele McPherson to meet with all the Townships to figure out what their process was in terms adopting their partial zoning or their full zoning, in Princeton Township's case. She indicated that Princeton Township has a comprehensive plan and official control, so procedurally Princeton Township is fine. That is the issue with a lot of other Townships, did they procedurally do it correctly under 462.
Michele McPherson indicated that she is under an investigative hunt with the other Townships in terms of that. The memo also includes an example of memorandum of understanding which the County got from Stearns County, and that is how they handle their Township County zoning relationship that alludes to the discussion about Feedlot enforcement, where Stearns County has entered into memorandums of understanding with some of their Townships in terms of zoning, who is doing what and how does the process work if the Township wants to update zoning, then what is their process and how does it get back to the County for enforcements. She indicated that at this point, this is just kind of hanging out there, but she has been passing it out to all of Townships that she has been meeting with, and she thought that she would share it with Princeton Township.

It has a lot of good case law references, if anyone is into that kind of stuff. She indicated that this will come into play as they update the development code.
Michele McPherson also indicated that at this point, the County Board hasn't landed on a policy declaration, but she thinks that they are probably going to once she gets a report put together after she meets with all of the town ships but she is now about a third of the way through the County. Michele McPherson indicated that she hopes Princeton Township will participate in their meetings and give them input. She might steal some stuff from the Township's Ordinance, to at least give to the working group. She said they will steal, beg and borrow form everybody else's Ordinances for comparison as they walk through this process. She said it will take a little bit of time, she thinks they will end up with a really good product.

John Roxbury, Jr. asked Michele McPherson if they have a roads committee or are they leaning that way, or is the County engineer going to design their future roads. Michele McPherson inquired if he was meaning as part of the sub division stuff, and John Roxbury, Jr. indicated yes. Michele McPherson indicated that she did not know because they have not gotten into that detail yet. She said that the standards that the County Engineer dug up from somewhere from 1970 something. The planning standards will probably get updated and they will probably enter the era of a planning manuals, similar to what Sherburne County and some of the other adjacent counties. She said Benton County is looking at a planning manual right now. She also said that Erosion control and storm water runoff quality control, might be some issues. She said that they are starting to see that now in some of their larger platted developments. so those will be on the table for discussion.
Michele McPherson indicated that she does not know where the development group is going to end up on, on a lot of issues. Essentially they are an advisory group to Planning Commission. They will make recommendations on Ordinance language, and then that will go through the normal adoption process of having a public hearing from the Planning Commission, and then getting with the County Board for adoption. She also indicated that there may be some recommendations that come out of that group that never see the light of day because it is not palatable to the County Board, but Michele McPherson assumes that they will find that out fairly soon in the process. She said the group they put together is pretty diverse. She thinks it will be a good opportunity to be evaluated from a different perspective.
Eric Minks indicated that he had one more question pertaining to the Feedlot Ordinance. He asked if an incorporated city have to abide by the County's Feedlot Ordinance. Michele McPherson indicated that no, they do not. Eric Minks then asked, so if we were to make it so restrictive that it forces annexation, than they do not have to abide by it. Michele McPherson indicated that that is correct. Because cities and Townships have the same guiding statutory requirement of 462, and cities are even different, they do not have to have to whole restrictive, less restrictive, inconsistent thing, it kind of goes completely out the window when you have incorporated areas.

Michele McPherson indicated as an example, when she worked at Elk River, they completely ignored the County's rules. They didn't even pay attention to what the County development code said because they had our own stuff.  

Eric Minks thanked Michele McPherson for coming to the meeting and Michele McPherson said that she would be happy to pop in whenever the Planning Commission needs her, and just let her know the subject they are dealing with so she can be a little bit more prepared. She indicated that she did not want to step on Loren Kohnen's territory, and Loren Kohnen said that she was not. She said that whenever the Planning Commission has any County issues, she would be happy to arrange her schedule to come visit. She also indicated that she is planning on keeping everybody in the loop, so the Planning Commission may be getting a lot of paper from her office. She said they are trying to make the process apparent as much as they can, so they figured more paperwork is probably best.

Eric Minks indicated that the next thing on the agenda was discussion of creating a simple plat procedure. Loren Kohnen had handed out two handouts. Eric Minks said he thinks it was kind of a guide, and Loren Kohnen agreed that yes, it's s guide for everyone to look at. He said that after tonight, listening to Michele McPherson, they might want to wait until the County is finished, or they're going to go through all this work to do it. He and Todd McLouth can get something ready for the Planning Commission, just a brief outline, but they might want to wait until they see what the County has or they arc going to have to redo it again, possibly. He said that they aren't restrictive enough. He also indicated that the one he likes is the one from Medina. There are exemptions to planning and the only real restriction he sees is subdivision 5, and that was the last one he handed out. It says that before subdivision shall not result in more than three lots, and maybe we should put in acreage for the size of that. When they get the small lots they don't want to start getting some easements around the small lots, drainage and utility easements. They might want to stick with 5 acres of more, or ten acres or more, then they can do a simple plat, a simple combination or subdivision. He indicated that the Planning Commission should take a look at them and apologized for getting them to everyone so late.

Greg McBroom said that if the Planning Commission puts a restriction on the size, he thought that part of the intent of the simple plat was to deal with those acre and quarter lots, or was he misunderstanding. Loren Kohnen indicated that those small lots are going to have to be subdivided properly because you have to look at a lot of things, easements especially wetlands. Remember all of those things are going to come into play. Greg McBroom asked, what if someone comes in and wants to split off an acre or quarter lot, or to subdivide it. Loren Kohnen indicated that the only difference is just the mylar at the end, you still have to have surveys. All a preliminary plat and a final plat are, are just surveys. It is the mylar that takes a little more time.

Loren Kohnen explained that when he has to describe something, then he gets some of those small lots, remember, they can be some odd shaped lots that we have, they will probably have two pages of describing that lot. if you subdivide it, it's all on a piece of paper. It'll be like reading the funny papers, you can get a laugh just looking at the pictures without reading it. That is sort of the way he looks at it, it's fairly easy for everyone to understand. Otherwise you are going to have to go to Todd. He didn't know how many of the members have read some of those things and know exactly what they're talking about. You almost have to go to a professional like Todd McLouth to read it.

John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he thought the Planning Commission was only looking at the simple plat only for the new residential mini lots the size up in the north end, not for everywhere. Greg McBroom indicated that the Planning Commission talked at the last meeting, which John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he missed, they originally started as an acre and a quarter lots, and it developed into not only any subdivision but any splits of any land, so it's more cut and dry. Loren Kohnen indicated that with some of the larger ones it's easy if they do them by leaps and bounds, especially a good twenty acres or more, that's agricultural land you can just split that property up into twenty acre parcels, but they have fallen into the thing where you can only have two buildable lots every quarter quarter section per forty, and just saying do it by leaps and bounds sometimes can be difficult, remember way up in the northeast part of the Township, they had that problem. They wound up with too many parcels on one piece of land and the other person was not going to give up their building rights.

Steve indicated that what the Planning Commission is looking at is any type of land split or whatever, you are going to need to do a simple plat, from day one. If someone came in and owned 300 acres and wanted to knock off an acre and a quarter, they'd have a simple plat on it. Eric Minks indicated that that was his understanding, to make it simple. Loren Kohnen indicated that the simple part is that you could do preliminary and final at the same time. Steve asked what kind of costs are involved if, for example, you have forty acres and you want to split it, you come in here and you show that you have forty acres and you want to split it right down the middle, and that's what you're looking for, if they come into us and do it, it's not going to cost anything other than just show us what they are doing. Now if we require a simple plat, are they going to have to hire a surveyor to go out there, Loren Kohnen indicated yes and John Roxbury, Jr. say it would be probably cost $5000 or $6000. Steve said that by requiring a simple plat, it would make it easier for the Township but would also slow down whoever wants to just split their land for future use, and have it all split up so they would be able to do what they want 10 years from now.

Greg McBroom indicated that he could see happen is that if someone has 300 acres , and they split off 5 acres, and they put a house on it 10 years from now, or they put an addition on it, everybody thinks the line is somewhere and it's not, and then pretty soon , we're not meeting the setbacks. Greg McBroom thinks that if they are going to split a minimum of 5 acres, they have to have it simple. Loren Kohnen asked, how do you record it, so they have a survey, or a description, do you just describe something? Todd McLouth indicated that they require a certificate of survey on anything, or a land split, anyways, they want the property surveyed so who's who and where's where. They've had splits in the past where they're gaps or overlaps that's created, that we're not aware of, and they have to do the survey and get it certified. If they Township approves it, it's just a matter of putting together a dedication sheet and a making a mylar of it, final class done, then record it, the we'd just sign it.

Greg McBroom asked, is what Todd McLouth was saying is that he'd rather have a simple plat procedure. Todd McLouth indicated that for a couple of reasons, one is that when you do a lot of splits, right away the Township has lost the ability to get road easements. He indicated that he has asked for road easements in the past and the developer or the developer's surveyor never follows through on that, and they can't keep track of all of these little splits and that, than try to keep up on the road easements and having them get filed with the County and things like that.

Todd McLouth indicated that if there are no new roads, then it can be through a simple plat process or you can do a preliminary final at the same time, cause it's just drawing lines on a piece of paper, really that's all it is. So that is basically what he would look at.

Loren Kohnen indicated that one thing nice about a preliminary plat is that it shows existing structures, and the neighbors if they get too close to the property lines and sometimes it should show drainage tiles and those things. Todd McLouth indicated that it should show wetlands, if they are delineated wetlands, that's another part of it. If they are going to split off, like Roger's split last year, he made 5 lots out of 70 acres. He thinks the Township should be requiring escrow money for all those future upgrades to town roads, now you have lost that.

Greg McBroom indicated that when you refer back to the piece that he was talking about. that piece is drain tiled, there's drain tiles that are in that County ditch that originates off that place. Loren Kohnen said that we should have easements on all of that. Greg McBroom agrees with that and says, now it's too late, to me, in writing I can see big problems with that piece of property, with the drain tiles buried in that field. Steve indicated that when they dig those fields up when they're putting in basements, Loren Kohnen indicated that then they will have to put them back again, and probably lose the house or put the drain tile all the way around the outside of the perimeter of the house. Steve indicated that if the developer comes in there and just builds it and is done with it, then for the guy that buys the house, his basement fills up with water cause the drain tiles are on the other end of it, worse things have happened. Loren Kohnen indicated that that had happened awhile ago, where he lived. There was a big lawsuit between the guy didn't develop the property and the guy that broke the tile and never put it back again. The guys' basement got flooded and the owner up the hill didn't want to pay for it.

Loren Kohnen indicated that sometimes it is really critical, like on those smaller lots especially remember they have to have a certain buildable area. If you have wetlands on it, you have to have more than an acre and a quarter lot, and we want to see that. Then if you have a wetlands you get an easement too don't you. Todd McLouth indicated that on a plat you would dedicate that as a drainage use. Steve asked if Loren Kohnen and Todd McLouth would just draw up a simple plat procedure. Loren Kohnen indicated yes, they would take the three copies of Ordinances from other cities that the Planning Commission has and will work something up and then the Planning Commission could massage it the way they would like to see it and they'll send it on to the Town Board. Loren Kohnen asked if they were to do it now before the County gets through with their subdivision Ordinance, in case they are more restrictive on it.

Eric Minks asked how long Loren Kohnen thought it would take, and John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that was going to he a year long process, and his understanding from the Town Board is that they are not going to approve R1 or R2 zoning until they have a simple plat procedure in affect. He said the Planning Commission could put that off but he would not recommend instituting RI or R2 until we have a simple plat procedure for all those tiny lots that are going to hit us on the north end.
Steve indicated that they would need to set up something for the next meeting. Carl Sanford indicated that if the Planning Commission was going to get this done a little bit faster than maybe they should limit it to those areas. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that that was his thought was, that they were going to do, was only for those small areas because he didn't think there was much of a problem in the rest of the Township. He said that maybe they do need some verbiage in a few places on what's a flag lot and so on and so forth. He thinks that where the potential for the biggest problems is going to be those lots, whichever we call it, R1 or R2, right up there on the north end. That is where we are going to see the use of this.

Greg McBroom indicated that to use his piece of property as example, through all the stuff that has been going on over there, it's been discovered that there is 81 rods in the half section or quarter section, so with that big deal. People with 40 acres and they move it to the line 12 '/2 feet, but has neighbor has a mound system that he put in, that's a big deal. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he is not saying that the Planning Commission shouldn't look at the rest of it, but he thinks it should be a pre-requisite for that small area on the north end. Or he suggested that they just put that off because there has only been one person in here that has been crying and moaning for how many years that they want to do this.

Connie Heinks indicated that she was a little confused as to what John Roxbury, Jr. was saying because that R1 and R2 has already been approved. It had been recorded and we've had public hearings. She asked for clarification. Steve indicated that if they adopt a simple plat for just that one area, that means that anybody that it's already approved, to go ahead and start, but after the date of adopting the simple plat, they would have to plat before they could split off into their lots.
Connie Heinks said she understood that but she thought that John Roxbury, Jr. just said that the Town Board would not approve the R1 or R2 zone. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he did not think that was their intention, and Connie and Steve Heinks indicated that it was already done. John Roxbury, Jr. said he knew they were but he did not think it was their intention to do that, that maybe it was a good topic to discuss with the Town Board, but he doesn't think that they understood that. Steve indicated that he did not know why they can't, if Todd McLouth and Loren Kohnen could put together a procedure for a simple plat, then look at the procedure and if it looks good, they adopt it, from that day forward they go on and make it for the whole Township. When the County gets done with theirs, they can bring it back and change it. He also indicated that the Planning Commission should make this as simple as possible, you get your land surveyed and bring it in and get signed off on it.

John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he'd would have to get an unlisted number if you require somebody to do a simple plat and it costs them $5000 for a survey and then the next week, we say, OK, we're going to go with the County and don't have to do that anymore, there is going to be people looking for you with a rope.
Greg McBroom asked John Roxbury, Jr. why would we back up? Eric Minks indicated that they would he more restrictive with the change. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that whatever the Planning Commission does, it shouldn't be a knee jerk reaction, so they get something filled up for R1 and R2 that is going to affect everyone else, without thinking about it. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that he agreed with Greg McBroom, the Planning Commission does need to do this, but he doesn't think they need to just come up with something spur of the moment, so that these people can subdivide this one lot up at R1 R2, and then maybe we didn't think it out well enough before we instituted it, cause it is going to apply to everyone else.

Steve suggested that they let Todd McLouth and Loren Kohnen out the procedures together and then decide where they want to apply it, what zones, at that point. They may come up with a real nice deal that will cover everything, where they can just say, lets stick it here then. They can decide that at that point then. John Roxbury, Jr. indicated that if they can come up with it quickly, they might even be able to run it by the Town Board for their input before it gets back to the Planning Commission. Loren Kohnen indicated that they will give it a shot.

Carl Sanford asked if Loren Kohnen liked the Ordinance for the City of Plymouth, and Loren Kohnen indicated that it would need to be modified, and he would try and pull all those together, working with all three of them. He then indicated that he talked to another planner and these were really the only ones that he could come with that would make sense.

Greg McBroom brought up some information about a court case listed in the Star Tribune on January 26, 2006. It was about a golf course in Mendota Heights that wanted to sell the land and divide it out and the people around it don't want them to. He indicated that the State Supreme Court decision basically said that comprehensive plan overrules the zoning Ordinance. He indicated that that puts pressure on the Planning Commission to make the two the same. He thinks that has to be a priority for the Planning Commission. Steve agreed they needed to start working on a comp plan.

After some discussion, Loren Kohnen indicated that it may be an expensive procedure. Eric Minks then indicated that he didn't think they could start working on the comp plan without first discussing it with the Town Board. It was indicated that Connie Heinks add that subject to the agenda for the Town Board to get some direction on it.

Eric Minks indicated that from the Town Board meeting from 9-20-05, the Township needed to discuss the issue of Parks & Trails to develop a plan for the future. He suggested putting that on the next Planning Commission meeting.

A motion was made by John Roxbury, Jr. and seconded by Larry Ziebarth to adjourn at 9:05 pm. Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted,
Connie Wubben
Deputy Clerk

Attendees:    Michele McPherson, Wayne Pike, Cathy McBroom, Todd McLouth, Loren Kohnen.