MINUTES OF THE MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2014
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING - 7:00 PM
The Kandiyohi County Planning Commission met on Monday, December 8, 2014 at 7:00 PM in the
Commissioners Room at the Kandiyohi County Health & Human Services Building located at 2200 –
23rd St NE, Willmar Minnesota. Members present were Jeff Johnson, Jane Youngkrantz, Ronald
Peterson, John Hauge, and Doug Hanson. Also present was Zoning Administrator Gary Geer and
Assistant Zoning Administrator, Eric Van Dyken.
Vice Chair Hanson opened the meeting at 7:00 PM
Minutes from the previous meeting were approved as mailed.
A hearing was held on the application of Michael Brouwer, Part of SE ¼ of SE ¼, Section 25,
Township 119, Range 35, Willmar Twp. (45th Ave SE) Applicant proposes mining and stockpiling of
black dirt in an A-2 General Agricultural District. Mike Brouwer was present and explained his
proposal. Peterson asked if the applicant is proposing a one-time event or whether mining will be
recurring. Brouwer responded that he would like to find the right time with the right soil conditions to
harvest 5,000-7,000 yards of dirt. Once that harvested dirt has been used up, Brouwer noted that he may
propose to remove more dirt if more is available on the site. Johnson asked where the dirt is proposed to
be stockpiled. Brouwer responded by explaining that he proposes a location along the windbreak.
Hauge asked how the site will be accessed. Brouwer responded that there is an approach built and as the
time for removal comes, he will construct a gravel access drive on the property to avoid tracking mud
offsite. Hauge stated that he is concerned about the location of the stockpile for neighbor’s visibility.
Brouwer stated that he has spoken to the adjacent landowner, who is not concerned about the stockpile
location. Peterson asked if there is a required setback for the stockpile from the property line. Geer
responded that there is no setback requirement for the stockpile. Brouwer stated that he will set the
stockpile back as far as is needed to not damage the neighbor’s property. Hauge asked if there is a
proposed condition for the stockpile site. Geer noted that staff has not proposed a condition for the
stockpile location, but that the Planning Commission may choose to add a condition. Geer made note of
the staff-proposed conditions and added that a possible condition for the stockpile location could be to
state that the stockpile may not be closer than 400 feet from the road. Johnson asked if the approval
would authorize unlimited removal for 10 years. Geer answered yes. Hauge asked Brouwer about his
intentions for reclamation. Brouwer responded that he would like to plant the area in a native grass mix
and allow nature to take its course. Motion by Johnson, second by Hauge to recommend approval of the
request with the following conditions and findings:
Conditions
1. Hours of operation shall be limited to 6:00AM through 8:00PM Mon-Sat.
2. The applicant shall provide a bond or irrevocable letter of credit to Kandiyohi County in the
amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per acre to assure proper reclamation of the site after
completion of the project.
3. The applicant shall observe all setback regulations as contained in Chapter 32, section 32-5-6 of
the Kandiyohi County Zoning Regulations.
4. This conditional use permit shall be valid for 10 years from the date of issuance.
1
5. Kandiyohi County Environmental Services staff shall be granted access upon reasonable
notification for reasons of determining compliance will all conditions of this permit and Zoning
Ordinance Performance Standards.
6. Prior to commencement of mining activities, a sign shall be posted at the entrance to the site that
clearly states the date of the permit issuance, hours of operation, duration of the permit, the
operator’s phone number, and the Zoning Office phone number. The sign and lettering shall be
of sufficient size and shall be located such that it can reasonably be read without trespassing on
the property. The sign shall not exceed thirty two (32) square feet in surface area.
7. This conditional use permit shall authorize the extraction, processing, and storage of black dirt.
8. The owner and/or operator shall be responsible for maintenance and restoration of all county
roads used as haul roads for the operation. In the event that haul roads are damaged or suffer
more than ordinary wear or deterioration due to the applicant’s use, the applicant, upon written
notification by the Zoning Administrator, shall immediately suspend operations under the CUP
until all required maintenance is completed, at the applicant’s expense, to the satisfaction of the
County Engineer.
9. The operator shall be responsible to maintain dust control measures on site at levels adequate to
insure normal rural dust conditions are not exceeded. Such dust control may include required
application of chloride treatment at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator.
10. The topsoil stockpile shall not be located at any point south of the adjacent conifer windbreak
and shall maintain a setback of 25 feet from the east property line.
Findings
1. The Planning Commission finds that the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity.
2. The Planning Commission finds that the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses
predominant in the area. The Commission notes that the surrounding area is predominantly
agricultural land.
3. The Planning Commission finds that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, off-street parking,
and other necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The Commission notes that the site
will not require facilities or infrastructure above normal levels for the area.
4. The Planning Commission finds that adequate measures have been or will be taken to minimize
or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, and vibrations, so that none of these will constitute
a nuisance, and to control lighted signs, and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to
neighboring properties will result.
5. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed use is allowed with a conditional use permit in
the A-2 district under Zoning Ordinance Chapter 7, Section 7-3 entitled “conditional uses”.
6. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed use is in harmony with the goals and
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission notes that the Comprehensive Plan
2
identifies in Chapter 7 Goal 4 that the County should make land use decisions that help protect
aggregate resources and mining activities with an emphasis on minimizing or avoiding potential
residential and environmental conflicts.
7. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed use has the ability to meet the standards of the
Zoning Ordinance. The Commission notes that zoning staff review of the proposal found no
violations of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission notes that the proposed site can
adequately serve the needs of the proposed use.
8. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed use will not have significant negative impacts
on groundwater, surface water, or air quality if operated according to all applicable Federal,
State, and County regulations, including the conditions placed on the permit.
The Planning Commission unanimously recommends the County Board approve the application with the
conditions as stated herein. Motion Carried.
A hearing was held on the application of Marlyn Marquardt, Part of NW ¼ of the NE 1/4; Section 3,
Township 122, Range 35, Colfax Township. (Colfax Road NW) Applicant requests a private Veterans
cemetery in an A-2 General Agricultural District. Marlyn Marquardt was present and explained his
proposal. Marquardt talked about the history of his proposal, including past applications. Marquardt
commented that a prior approval required $50,000 for a perpetual care fund. Marquardt noted his efforts
to meet items that he felt were required of him and illustrated the proposed layout of the facility, stating
that he has a 5-year plan to build the columbarium walls. Johnson asked if the site for full body
gravesites is to the west of the trees on the property. Marquardt answered yes. Peterson asked what the
total size of the proposed cemetery is. Marquardt stated that the total size is about 10 acres with the
columbaria. Hauge asked how much interest Marquardt has had in burial at the site. Marquardt
responded hardly any at all. Hauge noted that most other land use proposals can go away, but that
cemeteries do not. Hauge noted that he doesn’t see any evidence for support for this proposal from
Marquardt’s family or any veteran’s organization. Peterson asked how will this cemetery will be
governed and managed and whether there will be a governing board. Marquardt responded by stating
that there is not a governing board and it’s only himself who is proposing the cemetery. Peterson stated
that he is also concerned about long term care because of the perpetuity of a cemetery. Peterson noted
that he has had extensive experience with cemeteries and is on a cemetery board. Peterson stated that he
believes this project needs oversight. Larry Urban was present from the Colfax Town Board. Urban
noted that the proposal looks like there are 3 cemeteries and he believes they would be best to be
combined into one. Urban noted that state statute requires a township to take over abandoned
cemeteries and that he does not want a burden to the township, so he is concerned about the need for
adequate perpetual care funds. Peterson stated that a future town board may not want to take it over.
Urban replied that he believes the law does not give them a choice. Peterson reiterated that funding for
perpetual care is a big issue. Youngkrantz asked Urban how the neighborhood and township feel about
the concept that is being proposed. Urban stated that they have not heard from neighbors concerning the
proposal. Urban further noted that the town board realizes that there are lots of rules for cemeteries, but
that they are not really excited about the proposal. Youngkrantz stated that she understands concern
about no evidence of outside support for the proposal and the need for shared responsibility. Marquardt
3
asked if perhaps he can have a cemetery just for the vets that are charter members. Johnson asked if
Marquardt has formed a 501c3 nonprofit organization. Marquardt replied no. Johnson asked Marquardt
if there are 50 charter members. Marquardt replied yes. Johnson asked if all the charter members have
donated. Marquardt replied yes. Johnson asked Marquardt if he has formed an LLC or has a charter?
Marquardt replied no. Johnson asked if Marquardt intends to sell burial plots. Marquardt answered yes,
noting that he can then use that money to offer benefits to the family of the person buried on site.
Johnson stated that it is concerning to him that there are no controls over how the money from sale of
plots would be used. Johnson asked if there is a transition plan for after Marquardt dies. Marquardt
replied that he needs to get his permit first. Johnson asked Geer if the county has an ordinance for
columbarium walls. Geer replied no, noting that he would consider columbarium walls to fall under a
cemetery, and would treat them as such under the ordinance. Peterson asked who would be allowed to
be buried on the site. Marquardt stated veterans and their families. Peterson asked if the charter
members are vets. Marquardt replied that half of the charter members are vets. Peterson stated that he is
concerned about the use of money from plot sales and concerned about the amount of $50,000 for
perpetual care, noting that he doesn’t believe it will provide enough yield for perpetual care. Marquardt
stated that he cannot speak about how to get funding or assurance for perpetual care. Marquardt stated
that he would at least like a cemetery for charter members. Hauge asked what makes this a private
cemetery. Geer stated that the fact that Marquardt has applied as a single individual makes this a private
cemetery. Peterson noted that they could condition any approval with a requirement for a governing
board. Hauge stated that he is concerned about the general public being buried here, reminding the
others that this is not just burial for Marquardt and his family. Hauge noted that the families of those
buried will have expectations. Hauge stated that he really needs to see more people behind this
endeavor in order to support it. Hanson stated that perpetual care is the big issue here. Johnson asked
what is the statute concerning the maximum requirement for perpetual care. Peterson stated that it
cannot exceed $25,000 per acre. Peterson asked how many acres are in the proposal. Geer stated that
currently the legal description provided for the request contains 25 acres. Geer further noted that the
minimum lot size for this district is 2.5 acres. Peterson asked if they would be approving the request for
25 acres. Geer answered yes, while noted that the Planning Commission could condition an approval to
limit the extent of the cemetery to 5 acres or some other number. Marquardt stated that the roads and
full body cemetery portion is 2.5 acres. Geer introduced the staff report. Geer commented concerning
other veterans cemeteries that he has researched. Fort Snelling has about 40 years-worth of space left
and would expand when that area has been filled. A State Veteran’s Administration cemetery opened in
Little Falls in 1994 and received a $3.5 million grant for improvements in 2002. Little Falls has 50
years of space available. In 2015 a new State VA Cemetery is scheduled to open in Preston (a $10.1
million dollar project). The State VA has a purchase agreement on another site planned in Redwood
County with an estimated cost of $8 million and also plans one more site near Duluth. Geer further
noted that the County Auditor has informed him that the rate of return he can expect currently on a
perpetual care fund is about one quarter of one percent, resulting in very little return on a $50,000 fund.
Youngkrantz asked how organizations were awarded grant dollars. Geer stated that he is not sure of the
qualifications. Geer commented that all of the state veteran’s cemeteries he researched had free burial
for veterans. Hauge stated that a meaningful perpetual care fund amount would be too much for an
individual and it would be prohibitive. Johnson stated that the cemetery must be maintained whether
there are 10 or 100 buried there. Johnson further noted that columbaria are not cheap. Marquardt asked
if he can start with a small cemetery for the charter members. Johnson asked where the small area
proposed for charter members is. Marquardt illustrates the proposed location. Peterson commented that
there are many cemeteries in the county that honor veterans and that he expects high standards for
4
veterans. Johnson noted that the applicant has provided only oral testimony with no transition plan and
no written charter or organizational structure. Johnson stated that there needs to be specifics written
down. Motion by Youngkrantz, second by Peterson, to table the matter until the January 12, 2015
meeting, giving the applicant time to come up with more information concerning these areas of concern
expressed by the Planning Commission. Youngkrantz stated that she believes there are too many loose
ends. Hanson stated that he believes the applicant needs a business plan. Johnson stated that the
applicant should not think that it will necessarily be approved if he comes back with more information.
Peterson noted that the applicant can provide for some perpetual care needs through areas other than a
perpetual care fund. Johnson agreed, noting that the applicant could have in-kind contributions such as
mowing. Hauge reiterated his concern that the applicant has shown no additional or outside support for
his proposal. Peterson asked Marquardt if he will be able to gather this requested information.
Marquardt answered no. Youngkrantz asked if the concerns change with a smaller cemetery. Hauge
stated that the Planning Commission still needs to worry about care of the site if anyone is buried there.
Peterson stated that tabling consideration until the next meeting will allow the applicant the opportunity
to gather additional information. The Planning Commission unanimously recommends tabling this
request until the January 12, 2015 hearing date. Motion carried.
There being no further business, meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM.
5