Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

2nd 2025 Brookings County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. This meeting is being recorded, televised, and viewable on Swift Channel 19 ITC Channel 168 or the Brookings County YouTube channel. I'll call this meeting to order. Approval of minutes. Is there a motion? How about that? Motion by Jensen. Second. Pollson second. Second with Pollson. All in favor? I. Motion passes. Items to add be added to the agenda by commission members or staff. I don't have anything. I don't have anything.

Thank you. Invitation for citizens to schedule a time on the commission agenda for an item not listed. Nothing. Disclosure of conflicts of interest, relationships to applicant or exparte communication. Good approval of agenda. Is there a motion? So moved. Motion by Kyle Vanderol. Second. Second. Second by Klein John. All in favor? I. I. Motion passes.

We will now convene as the Brookings County Planning and Zoning Commission. The Brookings County Planning Commission is a nine-member commission whose function is to recommend approval or disapproval of land use plans, zoning ordinances, subdivision planted plats, and amendments thereof the Brookings County Commission. The commission makes its recommendation based on adopted comprehensive plan for the physical development of the unincorporated areas of Brookings County. As a matter of policy, all motions are made in the positive. After a motion is moved and seconded, it is open for debate. Those supporting the motion shall in turn give their reasons. Those opposing the motion shall then offer their reasons. After everyone has been given a chance to be heard, the commission shall recommend approval or disapproval based on a testimony and information presented. A simple majority vote of a quorum of members of the planning and zoning board in attendance is required to forward a recommendation. Agenda item 2025 plat 020 plat of lot 12 of the Turtle Bay edition located in the south 1/2 of government lot one in the northeast 1/4 of section 29 township 109 north range 50W of the fifth primary and in a portion of the northeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of section 29 township 109 north range 50W of the fifth primary and a portion of government lot two and a southwest 1/4 of the section 28 township 109 range 50W of the fifth primary all in Brookings County, South Dakota. Is there a motion?

So moved. Motion by Troyan. Second. Second. Second by Jensen. All in f Richard. Would you read the staff report?

Yes. 2025 plat 020. Uh Tim Hogan has submitted a plat for lot 12 in the Turtle Bay edition on the west side of Lake Campbell. The preliminary plat was approved on June 6, 2024 and the plat meets the requirements of the Brookkins County subdivision Lake Park zoning zoning ordinance in the 2016 comprehensive plan for the unincorporated rural land use areas for develop lakes on page 11. This is the plat's lot 12 with noted there's a drainage easement on the north side of it up there. It does contain 29,000 square ft. This is the Beacon map, the yellow, kind of hard to see the yellow outline on the yellow background, but this is the Turtle Bay edition. This is coming up 469th Avenue from 219th. And lat 12 is right in this area. And very, this is the new flood plane map. There is a little um the little red area, little inlet right there is in the flood plane. So they are aware of that and um and that's all that I have and the applicant is not here this evening. Thank you Richard. If the applicant is not here I'll move to the public hearing portion. There's anybody in the audience that is for this seeing and hearing none. Is there anybody in the audience that opposed to this? Seeing and hearing none, I'll now close the public hearing portion. Is there any additional comments or questions from members of the board? Seeing and hearing none, Richard, would you call a vote? Kelly Vanderwal.

Hi. Pollson. Hi, Clark. Hi, Klein. John. Hi, Kyle Vanderwal. Hi, Mark Joinby. Hi, Neil Troyan. Hi, Randy Jensen. Yes, and Chad Ford. Hi. Motion passes. Okay, moving on. Agenda item 2025, Plat 021. Plat of block six Birkeland edition located in a portion of government lot 2 in the southwest 1/4 of section 28 township 109 range 50W of fifth all of the fifth primary all in Brookings County South Dakota is there a motion

motion Jensen is there a second Paulson second second Paulson Richard staff report

2025 plat 017 a mark Berkeland has submitted a plat of block six of Brooklyn edition on the west side of lake Campbell located in the Lake Park zoning district. Block 6 is 1.36 acres and exceeding the 20,000 square foot requirements and meets the non-lakefront setback requirements of 25 ft for the front yard, 25 ft for the rear yard, and the 8ft sideyard. The preliminary plat was approved on December 3rd, 2024 and meets the requirements of the Brookings County subdivision ordinance, the Lake Park zoning ordinance, and the 2016 comprehensive plan for the unincorporated rural areas for developed lakes. On page 11, here is a proposed plat block six coming up 468th Avenue. Here's the beacon map on the the plat on the beacon of map overlay. Here's the beacon map showing the plat right here coming up 468th Avenue. Just shows a Lake Park zoning district underneath that and it is not in the flood plane. That's all that I have and the applicant is here this evening if you have any questions.

Anybody have any questions for the applicant? You good? That being said, we'll move to the public hearing portion. Anybody in the audiences for this? Seeing and hearing none, is there anybody in the audiences opposed to this? Seeing and hearing none, I'll now close the public hearing portion. Move back to the board for additional comments or questions. Seeing none, Richard, would you call a vote? Yes. Tim Pollson. Hi. Cody Clark. Hi. Daryl Klein John. Hi. Kyle Vanderwal. Hi. Mark Joinby. Hi. Neil Troyan.

Hi. Randy Jensen. Yes. Kelly Vanderwal. Hi. And Chad Ford. Hi. Motion passes. Moving on. Public hearing of proposed changes to the Brookings County Zoning Ordinance number 2024-01, Article One, General Provisions and Article 4, Administration. Is there a motion? Motion by Troy. Is there a second? Second. Second by Clark. Richard, would you read the staff report?

Yes. This is updating the current zoning ordinance. Uh updates will meet in article one under the general provisions. Uh chapter 1.02 ordinance provision and article 6 in the administration chapter 6.05 procedures for conditional uses variance and zoning amendments. Um this is an update to add a portions that were um not moved forward from the exist old ordinance to the new ordinance. um it was and it was moved from a different section from one section to a new section. It was missed in the final look over that the uh these items were were missed at that time. So in the update of this zoning zoning zoning ordinance article one under the general provisions we're going to add the words that are underlined and are inalics um under chapter 1.02 ordinance provisions section 1.0203 203 violation and penalty for adding the words that are underlined in italics. We are adding in addition to penalties in 6.0505 and the rest of the wording is existing on there. Violations of the ordinance shall be treated within the manners specified below. Then it goes on in um article one to say what those are. Then updating the ordinance in article 6 and the administration section chapter 6.05. 05 under the procedures for conditional uses, variance and zoning amendments. We are adding a section uh 6.0505 violation and penalties and these words are underlined in italics. Also um so in in adding 6.0505 0505 violation of penalties. It shall read number one, it is declared unlawful for any person to violate any terms and the provisions of these regulations or any official control adopted by the board of county

commissioners pursuant thereof. Any person who violates, disobey, omits, neglects, or refuses to comply with or resists the enforcements of any of these provisions of this zoning ordinance may be subject to a civil or criminal penalty. The maximum penalty for this violation of this zoning ordinance shall be $500 or 30 days in the county jail or both. In addition, the violator shall pay all costs and the expenses involved in the case each and every day that such violation continues after notification shall constitute a separate offense. All fines of violation shall be paid to the finance office and shall be credited to the general fund of the county. the owner or tenant of any building, structure, premises, or part or part thereof, any architect, builder, contractor, agent, or other person who commits, participates, or assists in or maintains such violation may each be found guilty of a separate offense and suffer the penalties herein provided. Nothing therein contained shall prevent the county from taking such other lawful action as necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. Number two, in the event any building or structure is erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, repaired, converted, or maintained, or any building, structure, or land is used in violation of these regulations. The appropriate authorities of Brookings County and other addition to other remedies may institute injunction, mandibus, or other appropriate actions or proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate any such violations of these regulations. It is the duty of the state's attorney to institate institute each action. So what I just read is what will be added to article five, article six, excuse me, of the zoning ordinance. Is there any questions or anything on that?

Was it your intention to have it dated 2024 on the top? No. what you call a fat finger or skinny finger. I don't know. I don't have a problem with the $500 fine, but the 30 days in jail seems a little bit extreme, doesn't it?

Well, there's always the first time. In my 20 years, there has not been a violation of the zoning ordinance or we have taken anybody to court. But this wording needs to be in there to be able to enforce the ordinance. And that is from recommations from state's attorney's office and for verbatim through state law statutes and to make that a legal document. Anything else from the board or open the public hearing? Anything else from the board?

Seeing nothing on the open the public hearing portion of this. Is there anybody in the audience that is for this? Seeing and hearing none, is there anybody in the audience that is opposed to this? I'll now close the public hearing portion. Move back to the board for any additional comments or questions. Anything call vote on this one? Seeing none, Richard, would you call a vote? Cody Clark. Hi. Daryl Klein John. Hi. Kyle Vanderwal. Hi.

Mark Drawby. Hi. Neil Troyan. Hi. Randy Jensen. Yes. Kelly Vanderwal. Hi. Tim Pollson. No. Chad Ford. I.

Motion passes. Moving on. We will now convene as the Brookings County Board of Adjustment. The board of adjustment is a nine-member board which has the power to hear requests for variances, conditional uses, appeals, and amaterial decisions of the zoning officer. The concurring vote of twothirds of the full board membership, six votes is necessary for approval of a variance or an appeal of the zoning officer. The concurring vote of a simple majority of those board members present in voting is necessary for approval of a conditional use permit. In accordance with Robert's rules of order, we require a motion to approve a request before the request can be debated. As a matter of policy, all motions are made in a positive. The board under specific powers granted to it by the state shall authorize variances from the zoning requirements or special conditions existing on the land will result in an unnecessary hardship for the applicant. Financial disadvantage to the property owner shall not constitute proof of an unnecessary hardship. Moving on, agenda item 2025, variance 0001. Heather Leup has made an application 2025 varian VR 001 to the Brookings County Board of Adjustment for a variance article 4 district requirements chapter 4.03 LP Lake Park District section 4.03.03 density area and yard regulation minimum lake front and minimum front yard. The property is described as lot one of Debor's Lake to Tom Kaha west subdivision in the southeast 1/4 of section 7 township 111 north range 51W Oakwood Township located at 14 Oak Shoreline Drive Bruce South Dakota 5722. Is there a motion?

So move Pollson. Motion by Pollson. Is there a second? Second.

Second by Kyle Vanderol. Richard, would you read the staff report? Yes. 2025001 Heather Le, excuse me, has applied for variance in the Lake Park zoning districts to build a new resident 33 foot 1.5 in from the highest known watermark. Variance of 41 ft 10 1/2 in. The lake setback is 75 ft from the highest known watermark. They will meet the side setback of 8 ft and the roadside setback of 25 ft. The proposed new house will be farther away from the lake than the current home. And the current home, according to the assessor's equalation records, uh was built in 1930. Um prior to the lake parks owning regulations in Brookings County, a small portion of the northeast corner of the shoreline is in the flood plane, but the balance of the parcel is not. Things to consider are the shape and the size of the lot. and Dbor's Lake Titankah West subdivision was originally platted on October 30th, 1984 and replplatted on June 24th, 2003. Public notices were published in the Vulgage Tribune on August 21st and 28th. Letters were sent to the joining land owners of Brookings County Highway Department and the Oakwood Township Chairman and Clerk. Here's the variance application. This is their site plan showing their current lot and this is where their existing house is right now. This is their site proposal site plan.

This is 33 foot one and a half inches to the This is a deck right here. So, they're supporting post from a deck to the upper story would be the closest point for that. Um, meet the 8ft setback on the east. They exceed the 25- ft setback on the south. They're at 27 ft. And they also meet the 8ft setback on the west side. This would be the proposed footprint of the property of the proposed house. Elevation proposed elevation looking at it from the south. The front door right there. This would be the garage. This would be looking at it from the east side of the house. Garage door right there. This would be the looking at it from the west. This would be the lakeside. This post right here would be that closest point to that 33 feet. One and a half inches. There's the foundation plan, floor plan, second story, and just the elevations of the the roof lines. This is the beacon map showing the lot. And this little area right here is what I was talking about was in the flood plane. Just comes up follows the highest known water mark of the um shoreline across there is not on the parcel itself. So there will be far enough back and um not in the flood plane. This is a plat of um 2003 when it was replatted. Showing the lot right here. This is a drainage easement on the east side of the lot on the adjacent lot. There's a drainage easement noted on the plat for that.

This is just looking the southwest corner looking north towards the existing buildings. This is just looking more towards the northeast here. This is the side looking at it from the side property line. The wheel is just kind of there holding holding the garage up. I guess this is looking from the um lakeside in from the dock into the property. So highest known water mark is right in this area right here according to the line on the cement. This is just looking towards the west along the shoreline. This is looking towards the east. Will not be out any farther. In fact, it'll be farther away from the lakeside um than the current house is. This is just looking along the west property line. And this is where and it's actually a little closer than that right now. This is 8 foot from the property line where the house would new house would be proposed house would be. This is just looking 8 foot from the east property line looking back towards the lake. This is looking at 8t from the property line looking towards the souths southwest towards the the front of the lot. That's all that I have. The applicant is here this evening. So

thank you Richard. If the applicant's here, I would you want to come forward and clearly state your name into the mic for any questions from the board?

Hi, I'm Heather Leup. You can have a seat if you want. Do you have anything to add to Richard's report? No. Any questions for members of the board at this time? Yeah, the overhangs go to the roof line. Over overhangs are not included in that. So, it goes to the sidewalls where it goes to.

Any other questions from board at this time? You can go back to your seat for a bit if you want. Thank you. Seeing no questions board at this time, I'll move to the public hearing portion. Is there anybody in the audience that is for this? You for it or against it? Okay. Well, come up and speak then. Speed.

Clearly state your name into the mic when you sit down. name Dennis Dbor. I live on Lake Okit. I have just some concerns as all. I guess my main concern is the spring runoff that which has been known to flow right up to and around and to the current residency. If the landscaping will be built higher for the new house, I don't want the current drainage system restricted or or the flow of the water in a different direction or have it back up on our property. I want this put on the record that if this should happen anytime in the future that there will be some form of accountability to correct the situation. If the county is going to give variances, they should also consider how the rights of others might be affected by the details involved in that variance. I also might uh take up the to if it's built if it's built up higher the uh ground uh what the effects will have on the flow of the water. If there's a concrete wall or a driveway might be also restrict the water flow. Also, concrete driveway should be on a person's own property and not have it on the end up on any part of the common area or the road. I should also be noted that the contractor and owner should be responsible for the following. The EPA regulations and demolishing and the disposal of the current house. if it's not being moved for continued use as a residential someplace else. That's all I have.

Thank you. Is there anybody else that is for this? Seeing and hearing none, is there anybody that is opposed to this? Seeing and hearing none, I'll close the public hearing portion and move to back to the board for additional comments or questions. Are there any comments or questions for members of the board?

Hearing nothing. Richard, would you call it redefining facts? I think I have just a question on there on the if they know how far they would elevate that south end of the property just so it maintain the water so it would direct around that. You can come up to the mic if you'd like. back to the steel there where it shows it moving toward

Kevin Leup. Um, visiting with the contractor, I don't know that we would raise that up really much more than the current the way that it is. So, basically all visions are going to stay the same there. Yes. Nothing going to impede the drainage easement on the south side of it. Correct. Southeast side of it, maybe. Okay. Uh Richard, if you go back to your pictures, the one with the fence in the neighbor's

Yeah. Where the Culbert was at. right there. Yeah, it it's slopes just going to naturally slope down there anyway. There shouldn't be anything impeding any runoff with what they're doing. Do you see anything that's going to impede runoff? No, just that previously it had come across their property and through the just so that

so if it's going to until they get their final elevations done you really it's hard to tell where that's going to be. So correct.

Well, that was all that I had. That's okay. Are there any additional comments or questions for members of the board? Then you good. Seeing and hearing none, you can go back to your seat if you want. Thank you. Close the public hearing already. We've already closed the public hearing portion of it though. We've already closed the public hearing portion. So really, you can't. It's in regards to this.

The public hearing part's been closed, though. That been no additional comments or questions for members of the board. Richard, would you read the findings of facts? Workings County Zoning Ordinance Variance 2025001. An application for invariance have been filed with the Brookings County Zoning Commission acting as a Brookings County Board of Adjustment. A copy of the application being attached here too. Such application being made by Heather Leup regarding the following real property. Lot one of Dbor's Lake Titankah West subdivision in the southeast 1/4 of section 7 township 111 North Range 51 West Oakwood Township located at 14 Oakwood Shoreline Drive, Bruce, South Dakota 57220. After due notice of public hearing have been held in the application on the second day of September, 2025. Number one, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment, hereby finding that it is that the strict application of the Brookings County Zoning Ordinance would produce undue hardship that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district in the same vicinity and the authorization of such variance will not be substant be substantial detriment to the adjoining property and the character of the district cannot be changed by the granting of the variance and that granting of the variance is based upon reasons demonstrable and exceptional hardship as distinguished from variations. for the purpose of convenience, profit, and caprice. Number two, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further finding the condition or situation of the property concerned or the intended use of the property is not so general or reoccurring of nature as to make reasonable practic practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Number three, the Brookings

County Board of Adjustment further finding that the written application of the petitioner demonstrates that special conditions and circumstances exist which are precur structure or buildings in the same district. That in literal interpretation of the provisions of the Brookings County's owning ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. that the granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the ordinance or other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Number four, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further finds that the reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure, that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and the intent of the Brookings County zoning ordinance will not be injurous or to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Number five, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further determines and conditions this variance upon the following special conditions or safeguards. A, the shape and the size of the lot. B, D'Vor's Lake Titankah West subdivision was originally platted on October 30th, 1984 and replatted on June 24th, 2003, prior to the current zoning ordinance requirements. The Brookings County Board of Adjustment by at least two-thirds vote of its full membership hereby grants the above petitioner variance for the above described property as follows. Build a new residence 33 feet 1 and 1 and 12 inch from the highest known watermark on Lake Titankah otherwise known as Lake Oakwood. A variance of 41 ft 10 1/2 in. This variance is specifically conditioned upon initial and continued compliance with conditions and safeguards and five above and upon compliance of all applicable provisions of the Brookings County Zoning Ordinance. If approved, the Brookings County Zoning Director is authorized to

issue any required building permits for construction consistent with the terms of this variance. If this variance is not used within three years of the date granted, it shall be invalid dated the second day of September, 2025. Are there any additions or corrections to the findings of facts?

Mr.

Thank you, Mr. Clark. That being said, Richard, would you call a vote? Yes. Daryl Klein John. Hi, Kyle Vanderwal. Hi, Mark Jordan. Hi, Neil Troyan. Hi, Randy Jensen. Yes, Kelly Vanderwal. Hi, Tim Pollson. I Cody Clark, I. And Chad Ford, I. Motion passes. Moving on. Agenda item number 12, department reports. I don't have anything. Richard, do you?

Nope. I do not. Just that the zoning ordinance will be coming up. Next step will be the county commission. Um they'll have a first reading and then second reading um will be coming up and we'll probably go live uh first part of November I believe or middle of November. So, and we'll have additions for your book when you So, we'll give you those updates to those sections. Okay. Any need for an executive session? No. No, sir. Sounds good. Is there a motion to adjurnn? So, move. Motion by Kyle Vander.

Second that Olson. All in favor? I. Meeting adjourned.