Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

6 Brookings County Planning and Zoning Commission. This meeting is being recorded, televised, and viewable on SWIFTEL channel 19, ITC channel 168, or the Brookings County YouTube channel.

And I'll call this meeting to order.

Approval in minutes. Is there a motion?

So moved.

Motion by VanderWaal. Is there a second? Paulson. Second by Paulson. All in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Items to be added to the agenda by commission members or staff.

I have none. Just our staff report.

Okay. Invitation for citizens to schedule a time on the commission agenda for an item not listed.

This would be your chance if you want to speak.

How many people want to speak? Okay. Whoever wants to go first, come up. Clearly state your name in the mic. You'll be limited to five minutes. And please don't repeat.

I can't guarantee I didn't repeat, but I'll do what I can. Sue Engelman, Brookings County resident. I'm asking for an immediate temporary ordinance moratorium or whatever it takes to halt all energy companies to include the 765 kilovolt transmission lines, industrial solar complex, and battery energy storage system from filing with the PUC to build in the Brookings County until safety factors have been researched and new ordinances have been established. By definition, a moratorium is a legally authorized period of delay in the performance of a legal obligation, a waiting period set by an authority, a suspension of activity. A moratorium is a type of ordinance that a municipal legislative body can enact that temporarily halts certain specified development to give the municipality time and opportunity to plan for accommodating or managing the development or banning it altogether. Respectfully, what can be done at this meeting to stop Power On Midwest from filing with the PUC to construct the 765 kilovolt transmission line? I have been asking to match the dual county 2000 foot setback since March, six months ago. As you know, there are readings that need to happen before an ordinance can take place and our deadline is September 2026, just a few weeks away. I testified at the county commission meeting this morning And they were making the decision to restructure the 765 kilovolt subcommittee. One of the county commissioner members had spoken with the PUC and he also was convinced that the county ordinance was to be set in place before The Power On Midwest files with the PUC. The PUC always takes into account the county's ordinances. The PUC knows that the county has its own best interests in mind. Therefore, the PUC will rule with the county ordinance. The commissioners used the pipeline ordinance as an example. The pipeline ordinance was put into place prior to the pipeline filing with a 765 kilovolt transmission line. We need to act today to have enough time to complete the timeline needed for the ordinance to be enacted. I am asking that we connect arms and utilize the 2,000 foot setback dual county ordinance. Dual county has done the legal research and that ordinance was put in place already to have the setback. The ordinance does not stop the company from making deals with landowners. It only gives a 2,000 foot space from a residence. The power on Midwest is suggesting a 250 foot setback so they can use whatever land that best suits them. By adopting this 2,000 foot setback tonight, there would no longer be a need for a moratorium. Also, I attended the Next Era Energy Resources LLC open house on July 21. I gathered the information sheets and found my residence on their proposed solar map. Next Era is connected with Power On Midwest, and they are proposing an industrial solar complex just north of Brookings. They are also proposing a battery energy storage system near Elkton. I spoke with a number of their experts, but none of them were able to answer the questions that I posed to them. The Next Era representative that... addressed the County Commission that same day, gave me her personal phone number and email address to send my question to her so that she could answer them. I emailed her over a week ago and still have not received any answer. In the email information that I sent you all, one of the articles states that Italy now bans the installation of ground-mounted solar arrays on active agricultural land. explicitly to protect soil health and food production. The question for any landowner or community is not whether a scientific paper calls the risk minimal. It's how soon, how much, and whether you are willing to roll the dice. These projects are not temporary. They are designed to sit on your landscape for decades. The metals, polymers, and chemicals inside the panels don't disappear. They weather, break, and move into the environment.

You have one minute.

For me personally, the decision is simple. the contamination is shown to be possible. When the acceptable probability is zero, anything above that is gambling with soil health, water quality, and the long-term viability of the land. And unlike a financial risk, you can't just sell out of contaminated soil or water. Your community and the next generation inherit whatever damage is done. Again, I'm asking for an immediate temporary ordinance, moratorium, or whatever it takes to halt all energy companies to include the 765 kilovolt transmission lines, industrial solar complex, these are not farms, and battery energy storage system. From filing to build in Brookings County until safety factors have been researched and new ordinances have been established. I'm going to pass out the dual county ordinance and the yellow paper that had some 765 kilovolt information. I have no idea who put these in the paper. Thanks.

I have the paper. Sir, I guess if you want to get started clearly state your name in the mic whenever she's handing stuff out.

Thank you so much. My name is Rick Bible. I'm not representing the city of Elkton, but I am one of the council members there. Our city has not been advised of the solar installation that's happening near our town, nor have we been advised of the battery installation near our town. This is important for two reasons. Number one, we're the primary firefighter department in the area. We don't know what we're getting into. Number two, we're the primary ambulance service for the area. We don't know what we're getting into. We have not had a sit down conversation with these assets that are potentially coming into our service area. That is not a good position for the county and for my city to be in. We need to get our act together and get on top of this and force them to come to the table so that we can understand what is gonna happen. Because even with high power voltage, that can have an impact. Right now, our 911 service, our radio services, don't work in the county completely. So now we're going to add another burial before we fix it. Not good. I'm imploring you slow this thing down so we can sit at a table and discuss this and make sure we do it the right way if we're going to move forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Whoever would like to go next clearly state your name into the mic.

My name is Rufus Dizale. My wife, Patty, and I live on a farm north of Elkton on Highway 14. In the past year, we've been approached by three different companies, InvenEnergy, Doral LLC, and Xcel, all wanting to do some form of energy project on our land. The easements they wanted us to agree to included a 30-year, 50-year, and with Xcel for the 765 kV transmission line virtually forever. Each promised large sums of money to try to entice us into allowing their project on our land. To each we said no thanks. We are unwilling to obligate ourselves and future generations to the risk and irreversible changes to our operation that each project would entail. In recent weeks, we've heard of more projects planned, plant, not farm, and a battery storage facility in Brookings County. It feels like we're turning eastern Brookings County into an industrialized energy complex, turning thousands of acres of productive farmland into something I believe wasn't intended for. Once this farmland is industrialized, it is highly unlikely it will ever be farmed again. This industrialization will have a life-changing effect on all residents, particularly those that live close to these projects, and will also affect businesses that sell inputs to farmers. Think about thousands of acres that no longer will need seed, fertilizer, chemical, etc. Some neighbors have indicated to me that they will move rather than having to live close to the power line or a substation or a solar complex or even a battery storage facility. One has to think that a data center will be next, and I think there would be many who would not like to live near it as well. Before decisions are made, before a conditional use permit is authorized, before you allow our county to go down a road there's no coming back from, I would ask all of you to pause and ask yourselves, is this really what we want Brookings County to turn into? Do we have the proper regulations in place that will protect all county residents? Are we willing to allow all of this to happen because of a true need for more energy in this area? Or is it only for perceived financial benefits? And that poses the question, who stands to benefit the most? Money matters, but it cannot be the only measure of a good decision. Once a county begins rezoning rural land for industrial use, it becomes harder to argue that the next property should remain protected. One approval becomes the justification for another, then another, until the rural lifestyle everyone claims to value is gone forever. Therefore, I ask you to pause granting any of these companies any approval until you thoroughly examine what all the effects will be on Brookings County. What my family what we want to pass on to the future generations is not an industrialized landscape. But rather one that preserves our rural heritage that we cherish and enjoy. Thank you.

Thank you. If this is whoever would like to speak next, please come forward and clearly state your name into the mic.

Bill Lansman, I'm a landowner east of town. I guess I've got a couple things that I'm looking at is why about 10 years ago my daughter wanted to build a house out on our farm and the only way we could build that house there is if we put 40 acres of that land up with that house to take and have it so she could get a permit to build that house. And I'm just wondering, they're coming in and they're taking up, like on our land, it's 7.2 or 7.3 acres on each strip they take. But they're coming in and they're put a 50 by 50 lot in each one of those. That's more than what that house was that we wanted to put in. And we had to have a permit. So why do these people not have to have a permit to do it? The other thing is, why the... The land, the electricity is built here in South Dakota and from what I read that it is all shipped out of state and what benefit as South Dakota as a landowner, what do we receive from this? Is it just all one sided? Thank you.

I would like to go next.

I'm Zeke Engleman, and I'm from Brookings County, and I don't really have a lot to say that others won't be able to say better than I can, but I do have two things that I want everyone to think about. First off, I do have nothing against progress, but this solar farm will be replacing ag land, and that damage can never be restored to what it once was. And once the damage has been done, it's done forever. The beautiful peace and quiet of the country that we know will never be the same again. And secondly, it's one thing if the power is going to go for Brookings, but if this is going to be, if we're going to get nothing out of it, if it's going to go elsewhere, then why does it have to be here of all places? Other than the fact that there are no ordinances that can tell these companies what they can and can't do here. And as such, I propose a moratorium to halt energy companies from filing with the PUC until more research has been done. That's all.

Thank you. Who would like to go next?

My name is Rachel Engelman, and I've lived in Brookings County my whole life, and I'm currently attending SDSU as a history and political science double major. I am asking for an immediate moratorium to halt all energy companies from filing with the PUC until more research has been done to ensure these power structures are safe for us and future generations. As I said, I have lived in Brookings County my whole life on a little acreage a few miles out of town. My parents bought it when they were freshly married and have owned it and lived there for the past 40 years where they raised me and all my siblings. For as long as I have been able to form conscious thoughts, I have dreamed about raising my own children on the land where they can grow up surrounded by trees and nature and can experience the quiet stillness of the prairie on a windless day. Knowing that, you can pretty easily see why I'm very concerned with the construction of these power structures in Brookings County. Ignoring the obvious health effects these structures have on the local natural habitats and the residents that live near them, I think we can all agree they are an eyesore. My room at my parents' house has a south-facing window, and I love to look out it because it overlooks our front yard, where my siblings and I used to ride our bikes in circles as we talked about our ideas for a book we wanted to write. Then beyond that is the pasture where my parents' cows graze, where my brothers and I spent hours helping our dad rebuild the fence for the animals. And after that is our hay field, where I've spent nearly every summer of my life putting up hay with my family for our animals to eat during the winter. And beyond that are our neighbors' homes, cornfields, and trees. I look out my window, and for as far as the eye can see, everything is green and full of life. After I heard about this industrial solar complex that's being proposed and how my parents' acreage, aka my future acreage, is in the proposed area for the solar complex, I've been looking out my window and imagining what it would be like if this solar complex is allowed to be built. Because if it is, when I look out my window, I won't be greeted by green plants and the warmth of life. All I will see is black. Black, lifeless solar panels. And as someone who has debilitating chronic migraines that are brought on by bright light, the last thing I need is sunlight reflecting into my eyes, incapacitating me when I'm in my own home. Once again, I'm asking for a moratorium to halt these energy companies because I know I'm not the only one with these feelings and concerns. And finally, these solar companies claim that they can restore the land to its former state after their lease is up. Whether or not that's true, they will never be able to restore to me the memories that I had on that land before they defiled it. Thank you.

Whoever would like to speak next, please. Anybody else would like to speak?

Hey somebody's got to be last might as well be right Well, my name is a little Wayne junkie. I live in Oak Lake Township Brookings County and Please say it into the mic again so we can get it.

What's that?

Say your name into the mic low Wayne junkie Wow I Don't have a written-out thing But what I've got to say to the zoning is wind is enough, enough. Solar, the wind towers, the transport lines, the electrical producing, it's enough. In my way of thinking, it's too much. What I have to say and now I have something that you maybe don't hear very often. I have a compliment for them At least one member of this commission Has came out and visually looked how that's going to affect us You all should have done that thank you Thank you is there anybody else

Seeing and hearing none, we'll move on. Agenda item number five, disclosure of conflicts of interest, relationships to the applicant, or ex parte communication.

Anything for this night's meeting?

Seeing and hearing none, moving on. Approval of the agenda. Is there a motion? Motion by Jensen. Is there a second? Second. Second by Troyan. All in favor? Aye. Motion. 2026 cu 008 james hay is made application 2026 cu 008 to the brookings county board of an adjustment board of adjustment for conditional use permit article 4 district requirements for chapter 4.03 lp lake park district section 4.03.02 conditional uses number six accessory building with a sidewall greater than 14 feet or more than 2 000 square feet Used accessory building greater than 120 square feet the property is described as block 2 of Hanson addition in the north half of the northwest 1 4th in Government Lots 1 2 & 3 and in Lots 9 a and 10 a Camaro Beach addition in section 50 whole site plan a lot being in t-shaped existing residents here The proposed structure will look like

This would be facing the south. This is the north elevation. This would be on either end of the building, of the structure. There's the foundation plan there. This is the beacon map of the property. Comes just out here and goes long and narrow on the back side. That's just looking from the east. There will be a 10-foot distance between the house and the proposed building. The wheel is at 10 feet between the structures. This is just looking from the east side, looking towards the west. The wheel is at 10 feet between the structures there. This is looking east from the west side of the property. The wheel is at the north property line. This is looking back to the east. This is all pictures are also be used for the variance on a setback distance But anyway, this is the wheel would be at five foot from the rear property line where his proposed building would be Just looking back Towards the west again here drainage area Wheel is at the five-foot line way down there. You can just barely see it This was on the east side of the building. They did some preliminary grading here. This berm will be the old railroad bed will be leveled off and written structure will be level with the existing house that is on there this is where the 48 by 64 building would go this is just looking at the west end of the lot from the north setback looking towards towards the south and this is just looking um Proposed location of where the building would go this grade would be graded out down to the same level as the house is right there So that's all that I have and the applicant is here this evening Thank You Richard with the applicants here.

Would you like to? Come forward and clearly state your name into the mic James hi Do you have anything to add to Richard's report? Not at this time. Okay. Is there any questions for him from members of the board at this time? You can go back to your seat. Seeing no questions from members of the board at this time, I'll move to the public hearing portion. 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? Seeing and hearing none, I will now close the public hearing portion. Move back to the board for additional comments or questions. Any comments or questions from members of the board?

I've got a question for him. You're planning on taking out the monster block rows and dropping the elevation to the level of your existing building right now?

Would you come up to the mic? Jim, I'll come back up to the end.

The monster blocks will stay in place and the elevation of the dirt would be where same as the existing building I Guess my question would be how are you gonna? build the building out to the five foot from the property line and maintain that elevation That's the back edge of the there's a waterway.

There's a berm there right now that you're correct digging in yep It's the berm there for a reason There is gonna be a drainage put in there a Drain tile will be put in the full length of that berm the drain tile under your building correct running the water to the west correct and

Somebody has their hand up back there.

It's only questions directed towards him. It should have been addressed during the public hearing portion.

Okay, I Guess my question is you know it's a conditional use permit and it's for a storage facility or you run out You know is that the purpose for your conditional use or is it your own storage or my own storage? Okay?

We don't receive any services from Brookings County. And we own the road, so we have to maintain the road. So I have a tractor with a loader and blower that I will use for our snow removal in the winter.

Are there any other comments or questions from members of the board?

Seeing and hearing none Richard would you call the findings read the findings effects you like And board just to keep in mind this is for the conditional use only not for the rear setback That will be addressed and on the variance portion of it This is only for the use and the size of the building. Brookings County Zoning Conditional Use Permit 2026, CU008, an application for a conditional use permit, have him to file with the Brookings County Zoning Commission, acting as a Board of Adjustment. Copy of the application being attached here, too. Such application be made by James Hay regarding the following real property. Block 2 of Hanson Addition. In the north half of the northwest 1 4th and then government lots one and two and three and then lots nine a of. Camaro Beach addition in Section 15112 North Range 47 West Lake Hendricks Township. After due notice, have a public hearing on this fourth day of August 2026. Number one, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment hereby finding that it is empowered to grant such conditional use under the following sections of the Brookings County zoning ordinance. Article four, district regulations, chapter 4.03, LP, Lake Park District, section 4.0302, conditional use permit number six. Further finding that the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest, Number two, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further finds and clarifies, certifies that the following specific rules governing the conditional use requests have been complied with, none stated. Number three, Brookings County Board of Adjustment further finds that satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been made Concerning the following were applicable a entrance and exit to the property proposed structure therein with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety convenience traffic flow control and access in case of fire catastrophe Will use the existing driveway awful at North Lake and it's drive B off street parking and loading areas were required with particular attention to Items in a above an economic noise glare or other effects of the condition to use on the adjoining properties and properties generally in the district No on-street parking is allowed. C, utilities and refuge and service areas with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility. None stated. D, screening and buffering with reference to type, dimensions, and character. None stated. F, signs, if any, proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony of the properties in the district. None stated. Required yards and other open spaces. This will address your drainage concern, Neil. Ensure post construction drainage does not exceed the amount of water leaving the lot before the construction. G general compatibility with adjacent properties in the district comprehensive plan met for the Lake Park district. H. Roads providing access to the property are adequate to meet the transportation demands of the proposed conditional use. The Board of Adjustment may require the applicant to enter in a written contract with any affected township or other governmental unit regarding the upgrading or continued maintenance of any roads used for the conditional use requested prior to the issuance of a conditional use. North Lake Kennedy's Drive meets the requirements of the conditional use request. Aye. Any required notifications to law enforcement or the fire department? None stated. J, any safety inspections required for a building permit? Number four, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further determines and conditions this conditional use upon the following conditional special conditions or safeguards. A, non-lakefront lot exceeds 20,000 square feet. be it's contingent on approval of 2026 variance 012 the building were used for personal lawnmower tractor and recreational vehicle storage the brookings county board of adjustment by lease the majority vote of its full membership hereby grants the above petitioner condition used above described real property as follows BUILD A 48-FOOT WIDE BY 64-FOOT LONG, WHICH IS 3,072 SQUARE FEET ACCESSORY BUILDING WITH 12-FOOT SIDE WALLS. THIS CONDITION USED FOR MINUTES SPECIFICALLY CONDITIONED UPON INITIAL AND CONTINUED COMPLIANCE WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS IN 3 AND 4 ABOVE AND UPON COMPLIANCE AND UPON Compliance with all applicable provisions of the Brookings County zoning ordinance ever proved the Brookings County zoning director is authorized to issue knee required building prints construction consistent with the requirements of this conditional use permit If this conditional use permit is not used within three years of the day granted It shall be in debt invalid dated this fourth day of August 2026 Are there any additions or corrections of the findings of facts?

Mr. Chair, I find that this application meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance as long as the findings of facts are followed, so I concur with the findings of facts.

Thank you, Mr. Jensen. That being said, Richard, would you call the vote? Doug Post.

Aye.

Tim Paulson.

Aye.

Cody Clark. Aye. Daryl Kleinjohn.

Aye.

Kyle VanderWaal.

Aye.

Mark Joinby.

Aye.

Neil Troian.

Aye.

Randy Jensen. Yes. And Chad Ford. Aye. Motion passes. Thank you. We'll send these to you in the mail, Jim, when we get done at the end of the meeting here, or we'll send them to you all at once.

Moving on, agenda item 2026, variance 012. James High has made an application, 2026, variance 012 to the Brookings County Board of Adjustment for variance article four district requirements, chapter 4.03, LP Lake Park District, section 4.03.03, density, area, and yard regulation. The property is described as Block 2 of Hanson Addition in the north half of the Northwest 1-4th in Government Lots 1, 2, and 3 and in Lots 9A and 10A, Camara Beach Addition in Section 15, Township 112, North Range 47W, Lake Hendricks Township.

Is there a motion?

So moved. Motion by Clark. Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Jensen. Richard, would you read the staff report? Yep.

Just slow down in reading. Sorry.

Uh, 12.

All right, 2026 variant 012. James Hay has applied for variants to build a 48 foot by 64 foot, which is 3,072 square foot with a 12 foot sidewall accessory building five feet from the rear lot line. A rear setback variance of 20 feet. The non-lakefront setbacks are 25 feet from the rear and he will meet the side yard setbacks. He has applied for conditional use 2026 CU008, which you just heard this evening and approved. for an accessory building greater than 2,000 square feet. The lot is T-shaped and is one acre in size. Hence, an addition was plotted on November 14th, 2000. Public notices were published in the Berkage Register on July 21st and 28th, 2026, and the White Tri-City Star on July 23rd and 30th, 2026. Letters were sent to the adjoining landowners and all the Lake Hendricks Township officials. There's his variance application. There's the site plan again. It'll be five feet back from this red line. There's the elevations of the proposed structure. Beacon map again. It's just the same photos we used as last time, but here's the wheel would be 10 feet from the proposed existing house that's there. The grade would be graded down so at the same level as the house. This is the wheels at the north property line. This is where the drainage tile would be installed. This is the wheels at the north edge of the building, five feet from the property line. This is looking towards the West there from the East side of the lot. This is looking South where the proposed site building would be this berm, which is the old railroad line. That's why the berm is there. The berm has never been removed until now, so that's why the existing berm is in place. There. And this is just looking at the West side of the lot looking South, and this is just looking from the East side looking West where the proposed building would go. That's all that I have, and the applicant is here this evening.

Thank you, Richard. If the applicant would like to step forward, clear to state your name into the mic. You might want to sit closer. It could be a long night. You might want to sit in front row here for a minute.

Jim, hi.

Do you have anything to add to Richard's report at this time? No. Any questions from members of the board at this time? So this is just a cold storage building?

Correct.

That drains from east to west down there and just water cannot get over that so that's where the natural waterway has been since the railroad bed has been there. But the developers of the lot across on the back side of that have said they're going to put a drain tile in there, and Mr. High has agreed to that, so they're going to work together. This development has just started within the last year and a half, so they're still in the construction phase and getting everything figured out out there. So that's why that was put in the findings of facts with the conditional use for the accessory building. This is for the setback to the rear property line. The variance is for five feet the setback on a non lakefront lot is 25 feet from the rear property line and 25 feet from the front property line And all the accessory buildings along that side of the road have been granted variances just due to the shape and the size of the lot That is the hardship yes

Any other questions from members of the board at this time? Seeing none you can go back to your seat for a minute here We'll move to the public hearing portion This is the time if you have something in the audience that you want to say you say it so if you are for this Seeing and hearing nobody for it, is there anybody opposed to this? Seeing and hearing nobody opposed, we'll now close the public hearing and move back to the board. Are there any additional comments or questions from members of the board?

Have you taken into consideration the lot owners on the back side? Have you talked to any of them or seen how they feel about building something that close to the property line?

Have not talked to them, but the developer has and the developer indicated back to me that there were no issues The landowner with the house directly across did contact the office he had some questions with it

and he is not opposed to the building at that location, just that his major concern is with the drainage issues. I advised him to get a hold of the developer and or visit with Mr. Hay about that, and that's what he was going to do.

Are there any other comments or questions from members of the board? Seeing and hearing none, Richard, would you read the findings of facts? Yes.

BRICKINGS COUNTY ZONING VARIANCE 2026-012, AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE HAVE BEEN FILED WITH THE BRICKINGS COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION, ACTING AS A BRICKINGS COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, A COPY OF THE APPLICATION BEING ATTACHED HERE, TOO. SUCH APPLICATION BEING MADE BY JAMES HAY REGARDING THE FALLING REAL PROPERTY. BLOCK 2 OF HANSON ADDITION, THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST 1-4TH, AND IN GOVERNMENT LOTS 1, 2, AND 3, AND IN LOTS 9A AND 10A. CAMBERA BEACH ADDITION IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 112 NORTH, RANGE 47 WEST. Lake Hendricks Township. After due notice, a public hearing hearing haven't been held on the application on this 4th day of August 2026. Number one, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment hereby findings that that the strict application Brookings County Zoning Ordinance would produce undue hardship that such hardship is not shared generally for other properties in the same district and at the same vicinity. That their authorization of such variance will not be substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district cannot be changed by the granting of the variance. And that the granting of such variance is based upon reasons of demonstrable and exceptional hardship as distinguished from the variations for the purpose of convenience, profit, and caprice. Number two, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further finds that the condition or the situation of the property concerned or the intended use of the property is not so general or reoccurring in nature as to make reasonable, practicable the formulation of a general regulation be adopted as an amendment to the zoning ordinance. 3. The Brookings County Board of Adjustment further finds that the written application of the petitioner demonstrates that special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or buildings in the same district, and that literal interpretations of the provisions of the Brookings County Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district. under the terms of this ordinance, that the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant, and that the granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. Number four, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further determines and findings that the reasons set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance, and that the variance is a minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure That granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and the intent of the Brookings County Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Number five, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further determines the conditions of variance upon the following special conditions or safeguards. A, shape and the size of lot. The Brookings County Board of Adjustment, by at least two-thirds vote of its full membership, hereby grants the petitioner variance for the above described or property as follows build a 48 foot by 64 foot which is 3072 square feet with a 12 foot sidewall accessory building five feet from the rear property line lot line this variance is specifically conditioned upon initial and continued compliance with all the conditions and safeguards and five above upon compliance with 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 this variance is not used within three years of the date granted. It shall be invalid Dated this fourth day of August 2026 Are there any additions or corrections to the findings of facts?

The only thing I maybe ever comment on is is it you know a This is just specifically cold storage, so can we have a line in there that says, you know, this can't be living quarters or anything like that?

No, this is a variance for the setback. It has nothing to do with the use of the building. There can be no living quarters in there because there's already a house on the lot.

Okay. So that's already in there?

Yep.

Okay.

Are there any other additional comments or corrections on the findings of facts?

Mr. Chair, I find that this application meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance as long as the findings of facts are followed, so I concur with the findings of facts.

Thank you, Mr. Jensen. That being said, Richard, would you call the vote? Tim Paulson.

Cody Clark now Darryl Klein John all right Kyle Vander wall all right Mark join be all right Neil Troian no Randy Jensen yes Doug post all right Chad Ford all right motion passes

Just write a little slower.

Be careful what you wish for, right? You can start.

Moving on. Agenda item 2026, variance 011. James High has made an application, 2026, variance 011, to the Brookings County Board of Adjustment for an after-the-fact variance.

Excuse me.

Article 4 district requirements, chapter 4.03, LP Lake Park District, section 4.03.03. density, area, and yard regulation. The property is described as Block 2 of Hanson Addition in the north half of the northwest one-fourth and in Government Lots 1, 2, and 3 and in Lots 9A and 10A, Camara Beach Addition in Section 15, Township 112, North Range 47W, Lake Hendricks Township. Is there a motion?

So moved.

Motion by Paulson. Is there a second? Second. Second by VanderWaal.

Richard, would you read the staff report? Yes. 2026, variance 011. James Hay has applied for an after-the-fact variance for a 42-foot by 52-foot residence built 19 feet from the road, a variance of 6 feet. The non-lakefront setbacks are 25 feet from the road. Building permit number 7071 was issued on May 22, 2023, for the residence. During the construction, the setback distance was measured from the center of the road instead of the edge of the road. The structure meets the side yard and rear yard setbacks, and the residence lines up with other structures along the road that were granted variance for the roadside setback. Hanson addition was planted on November 14th, 2000. Public notices were published in the Brookings Register on July 21st and 28th, 2026, and the White Tri-City Star on July 23rd and 30th, 2026. Letters were sent to the adjoining landowners and all the Lake Hendricks Township officials. Here's the variance application. Here's the site map or the beacon map again showing the existing. House. And let's see, this is the setback right here is what they're talking about. 19 feet from the line edge of the road to the edge of the. the garage. And my pictures didn't go on here. There's the looking towards the west. This is the down north Lake Hendricks Drive. This is the front of the house right here. This is looking north from his house on the south side of the road towards his house on the north side of the road. Looking towards the residence. This is looking towards the east. The wheel is at from the edge of the cement was where the edge of the road is. It's 19 feet from the edge of the road to the edge of the garage. This is just looking towards from the north from the road. Wheel is at 19 feet from the edge of the road to the edge of the garage. So that's all that I have and the applicant is here this evening.

Thank you Richard. If the applicant would come forward and clearly state your name into the mic. Do you have anything to add to Richard's report? Are there any questions for him at this time from members of the board? Seeing none, you can go back to your seat. I'll now move to the public hearing portion. 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? Seeing and hearing none, I'll now close the public hearing portion. Are there any additional comments or questions from members of the board?

What happens if we don't know?

Well, that would be up to the board and up to the court of law. It might probably have to be removed. But all the other accessory buildings and houses along that property were granted variances for less setback than what this were.

Is this your same contractor? Is it your same contractor that's doing your proposed project and this?

I had a sheet of paper here with all the variances that were listed on there. They varied from six feet, was a lot of them, nine feet, 12 feet, and 15 feet is the largest setback from the road for any structure along the roadside. Yes, here it is. Yeah, so one to the east is 19 feet. The other one down to the east is 16. I'll bring the beacon map up here. As you can see the structures, this is the road. All the structures along here, this one is 16 feet, this one is 16 feet, this one is, these were 19 feet, excuse me, this one's at 16 feet. The one to the east-west is 13 feet, this one is seven feet, six feet, eight feet. As you can see up and down the road, Due to the shape and the size of the lot, variances are granted for the same reason. They cannot meet the 25-foot setback.

What's the back lot setback on 111 there?

That's probably a 5-foot setback. This is not to scale. Yep. As you can see, all the other variance buildings and accessory buildings were granted variances along that side of the road, all the way up and down the property. The development, excuse me.

Are there any other questions or comments from members of the board? Seeing and hearing none, Richard, would you read the findings of facts? Yes.

Brookings County Zoning Variants 2026, Variant 011, an application for a variance have been filed with the Brookings County Zoning Commission, actually as the Brookings County Board of Adjustment, a copy of the application being attached here too. Such application being made by James High regarding the following real property. Block 2 of Hanson Addition in the north 1 1⁄2, the northwest 1⁄4, and in Government Lots 1, 2, and 3, and in Lots 9A and 10A, Camaro Beats Addition in Section 15, Township 112 North, Range 47 West, Lake Hendricks Township. After due notice of public hearing, have been held on the application on this 4th day of August 2026. I will just highlight the numbered areas as I've read this document previously to save time on here. Here is number one. Number 2. Number 3. number four number five the brookings county board of adjustment further determines and conditions this variance upon the following special conditions and safeguards a shape and size of the lot irregular b hansen addition was planted on november 14 2000 c During construction of the residence, building permit 7071 was issued on May 22, 2023. The roadside setback was measured from the center of the road instead of the edge of the road. D, lines up with other structures on the east and west of the lot. Brookings County Board of Adjustment, by at least two-thirds vote of its full membership, hereby grants the above petitioner a variance for the above described property as follows. After the fact, variance for a 40 by 50 residence, 19 feet from the road, a variance of six feet. This variance is specifically conditioned upon initial and continued compliance with all conditions and safeguards and five above, and upon compliance with all applicable provisions of the Brookings County Zoning Ordinance. If approved, the Brookings County zoning director is authorized to issue building permits required for construction consistent with the terms of this variance. This variance is not used in three years of the date granted. It shall be invalid. Dated this fourth day of August 2026.

Are there any additions or corrections to the findings of facts?

Mr. Chair, I find that this application meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance as long as the findings of facts are followed, so I concur with the findings of facts. Thank you, Mr. Jensen.

That being said, Richard, would you call the vote?

Cody Clark. Aye. Darrell Kleinjohn. Aye. Kyle VanderWaal. Aye. Mark Jornby. Aye. Neil Trojan.

Aye.

Randy Jensen. Yes. Doug Post. Aye. Tim Paulson Aye Chad Ford Aye Motion passes

Moving on agenda item 2026 variance 0 1 0 James high is made an application 2026 variance 0 1 0 the Brookings County Board of Adjustment for a variance article 4 district requirements 4.0 3 LP Lake Park District section 4.0 3.0 3 density area and yard regulation the property is described as lots 9 and 10 Camaro Beach Government Lots 1 2 & 3 of Section 25 Township 112 North Range 47 W Lake Hendricks Township Located at once 106 North Lake Hendricks Drive Hendricks, Minnesota 5 6 1 3 6 is there a motion? Motion by Jensen is your second second trying second my trying I

Richard, would you read the staff report? Yes, 2026, variance 010. James Hay has made an application for a variance to build a 45-foot-wide by 84-foot-long residence with an attached garage closer to the lake with a support post to the deck or the roof to be seven feet from the highest known water elevation, a variance of 68 feet. The lakeside lakefront setbacks are 75 feet from the highest known water elevation. The existing house will be removed and the proposed new residence will be built in the same location. A fill will be added to raise the elevation of the lot, as the lowest floor needs to be a minimum of 36 inches above the highest known water elevation for a walk-out basement. The proposed attached garage will be 35 feet from the road to keep the angle of the driveway lower from the added fill. The roadside setback is 25 feet. and they will meet the eight foot side setback. The proposed residents will be in line with other residents along the lakeside, and Camaro Beach subdivision was plotted on November 5th, 1970. Public notices were published in the Brookings Register on July 21st and 25th, 2026, and the White Tri-City Star on July 23rd and 30th, 2026. Letters were sent to the adjoining landowners and all the Lake Hendricks Township Board members. Here is his variance application. Here's the site plan. This is looking south. This is the road right here. Proposed residence would be 35 feet from the edge of the road to the edge of the garage. This would be the support post right here. To this mark right here is the highest known water elevation. So from that mark back seven feet is where the support post of the house is going to be. Granted, the edge of the water is right here. This little area jumps in. This is where the highest known elevation was in this little, I'm going to call it depressed or sunken in area, but the looks are deceiving on there. There is a retaining rock wall between here and here and a small opening right here where the dot goes. So the proposed area, this would be filled in with fill when they would get this lot raised up right here. They do need to get a shoreline modification permit from the South Dakota Game Fish and Parks to fill in this area. You'll see this in the pictures as I get to there. They will meet the eight-foot side setbacks, so basically it's going right back in the same areas where the old house was. This is just the floor plan showing the shape and the design of the house.

The garage is a... Was the old house...

Yep. Yep. What happened here? Yep. That's the shadow right here. I get this. This shadow right here is the old house.

Is there a concrete patio off the house now or what's

Right here there is. Yes, you'll see that in the picture when I get there. So the foundation plan, this is showing the elevations. This is the north side. This is looking towards the east, the west side of the house. This is on the east side looking towards the west, and this would be the lake side looking to the north. Why is this doing this here? Some reason why.

You made it mad, Richard.

I made it mad is right. Here is the existing house right here. As you can see, the green outlined area is the proposed house where that would sit. These little dots right here, these are the support posts for the roofing system and or the deck. So from this point out, seven feet, you can kind of see right in here, it's kind of a lower area. That's the highest known water elevation on this lot. There's the beacon map. Showing the existing house on the property. And the red area is the floodplain, so he is not in the floodplain. All right, this is looking east on North Lake Hendricks Drive towards the other houses that are there. This is looking south towards the lake from the Lint Road. This is looking towards the west. This is the west property line right here, going right here. Here's the sanitary infrastructure lift station and grinding station for the Lake Hendricks sanitary sewer system right here in the existing northwest corner of the house. there. This is on the east side of the house towards the east lot line looking towards the lake. Right here is the wheel at 35 feet from the edge of the road. You can see it matches up that way with the existing garage that is there. It wouldn't be out any farther than going to the west or to the east. This is the 35 foot here. If you notice the difference in the landscape between here where the wheel is and the wheel is here, this is at 25 feet. just to give you a reference there. This is 25 feet here looking towards the east. This is the back on the lake side of the house. The wheel is at the highest known water elevation right here. Right here there's a stake and that is seven feet right there and that is where the foundation or the pedestal for the support post for the roof support would be right there. This is looking back towards the north. This is the existing foundation of the little covered porch right here. This foundation wall is at 36 inches, so the amount of fill they would add would be a minimum of this height right here for fill to bring a basement floor up to be three feet from the highest known water elevation. This is on the east side of the property line. This is a property line stake. The wheel is at eight feet, so they would meet this The 8-foot setback. This is on the west side of the property. Same thing there. Property marking stake. Wheel is at 8 feet. This is just looking towards the northeast from the house, from the southwest corner of the property. Right there. Okay, this is looking from the dock back towards the house. This is the wheel at the 7-foot level. Right in this area is depressed. In this little circle where I showed you earlier on the site map, This in there is where the highest known water elevation is. They did apply for a shoreline modification permit and did receive that from the Game Fish and Parks to fill that in when they fill the rest of the area in. That's why this one's a little quirky with that highest known elevation way back in the lot. This is just looking towards the west along the shoreline. Big rock route wrap along there. This is just looking towards the east same way right there. So That's all that I have and the applicant is here this evening so Thank You Richard to the applicant.

Please step forward and clearly state your name into the mic James hi, do you have anything to add to Richards report at this time? Any comments or questions from members of the board? On your shoreline modification permit you're gonna fill in that divot is what Richard's saying? Correct. How far out towards the lake are you going to fill that in?

It'll be to the rocks.

To the rocks? Yep. So you got ballpark and feet? Because I would assume once the shoreline modification's done the highest known water mark is going to change out to where the shoreline modification is, right?

Right. That's why Game Fish and Parks approved that.

It'll go from 7 feet to 17 feet, you're thinking?

I believe it's about 40 feet. I can tell you in just a second here. Right now, from the edge of the rocks to the house is about 44 feet. So this area right here would be about take seven feet off of that. Maybe about 38 feet is what he would be adding in just to fill to give it a nice level landscape back towards the lake shore right here.

So in theory, it's a variance of 44 feet instead of 7 feet?

Nope, because the highest known watermark is right here. It is not down on the lake shore. On this particular property, the highest known water elevation zips in around here.

Yeah, so what I'm asking is when he fills that in, is that going to push it to the highest known watermark?

It would push it back towards the lake, but that would have to go back and get surveyor established. Yeah.

It is seven feet, but in theory it's going to change.

Right. On paper it's seven feet, but in reality it's like 37 feet from the edge of the water.

Yep.

Are there any other comments or questions at this time? You can go back to your seat for a minute and we'll open public hearing. When I open public hearing on this, is there anybody in the audience that is for this? Is there anybody in the audience that is seeing and hearing none? Is there anybody in the audience that is opposed to this? They did raise their hand, but if you want to be for it, you have to come forward and state your name into the mic, right? You want to do that? You can. If not, I got to say you weren't there.

Mark Timmerman.

You're for it? Okay. Thank you. Did you want to say it or not? It's up to you. It's a short walk.

Nolan Hanson. For it.

Thank you. Is there anybody else for it? Seeing and hearing none, is there anybody opposed to it? Seeing and hearing none, I'll now close the public hearing portion. move back to the board for additional comments or questions. Nothing from the board? Hearing nothing from the board, Richard, would you read the findings of facts?

Yes, Brookings County variants, zoning variants 2026-010, an application for a variance has been filed with the Brookings County Zoning Commission acting as the Brookings County Board of Adjustment. Copy of the application being attached here too. Such application being made by James Hay regarding the following real property. Lots 8, or lots 9 and 10, Camara Beach and Government Lots 1, 2 and 3 in Section 15, Range 47 West, Lake Hendricks Township, located on 106 North Lake Hendricks Drive, Hendricks, Minnesota, 56136. After due notice, a public hearing have been held on the application on this fourth day of August 2026. Number one. I will just highlight the numbers since we've read the document previously earlier, just like we did with the other variances. Number two. Number three. Number four. Number five, the Brookings County Board of Adjustment further determines and conditions this variance upon the following special conditions or safeguards. A, shape and size of lot. Excuse me, Camaro Beach subdivision was plotted on November 5th, 1970. Lines up with other structures on the east and west sides of the lot along the lakeside. The Brookings County Board of Adjustment, by at least two-thirds vote of its whole membership, hereby grants the above petitioner a variance for the above-describable property as follows. Build a 44-foot, 8-inch wide by 84-inch long residence with a support post for the roof 7 feet from the highest known water elevation. Fill to be added to the lot so the lowest level is a minimum of 36 inches above the highest known water elevation. Shoreline development permit from the South Dakota to game fish and parks for the addition of fill for the proposed residents and the lakeside retaining wall Or fill between the proposed residents and the lakeside retaining wall this variance is specifically conditioned upon initial and continued to compliance with all conditions and safeguards and five above and upon compliance with all applicable provisions of the Brookings County zoning ordinance and 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 this fourth day of August, 2026.

Thank you, Richard. Are there any additions or corrections to the findings of facts?

Mr. Chair, I agreed the hardships described during the testimony demonstrated unique and special conditions under literal enforcement, which causes unnecessary hardship. Ensuring that the granting of this variance will be consistent with the public interest, therefore I concur with the findings of the facts for this variance.

Thank you, Mr. Paulson.

That being said, Richard, would you call the vote? Daryl Kleinjohn. Aye. Kyle VanderWaal. Aye. Mark Jornby. Aye. Neil Troian. Aye. Randy Jensen. Yes. Doug Post. Aye. Tim Paulson. Aye. Cody Clark.

Aye.

Chad Ford. Aye. Motion passes.

Moving on, department reports.

One second. Just September meeting. We will have a joint meeting with Brookings City, Brookings Joint Jurisdiction Board, Joint Board of Adjustment for a conditional use. That's what we'll be hearing next month. Those of you on the joint board, we'll be meeting at 8 o'clock and our zoning meeting will follow immediately right after that. We've issued 16 building permits for the month of July to date. Otherwise that's all that I have and We'll see you next month.

Is there any need for an executive session?

Luke, do you have anything to add or comment? Nothing at once. All right, thank you.

No need for an executive session. Is there a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Motion by post. Second. Second by Paulson. All in favor?

All right.

Meeting adjourned.

Anybody want any cookies?