MINUTES OF THE MINNEHAHA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION September

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF THE MINNEHAHA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION September A meeting of the Planning Commission was held on September 24, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Commission Room of the Minnehaha County Administration Building. COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Bonnie Duffy, Mike Cypher, Wayne Steinhauer, Mark Rogan, Becky Randall and Susie O Hara. STAFF PRESENT: Scott Anderson, Pat Herman, Ryan Streff and Dustin Powers - County Planning Kersten Kappmeyer Office of the State s Attorney The meeting was chaired by Susie O Hara. ITEM 1. VARIANCE #12-03 to reduce the sideyard setback from 10 to 0 in the C Commercial Zoning District. Petitioner: Troy Novak Property Owner: Same Location: nd Avenue, Corson, SD 1 General Information Legal Description S25 Lots 1 & All Corson Fauskes Addition Lot 2 Block T102N-R48W Present Zoning C Commercial Existing Land Use Commercial Parcel Size 0.15 Acres Staff Report: Scott Anderson Staff Analysis The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum setback from the south property line from 10 feet to 0 feet. The subject property is located in the village of Corson. The applicant is requesting the variance in order to construct a protected smoking addition on the south side of the existing structure. On September 10, 2012, staff conducted a site visit. The subject property is located in a commercial area along S.D Highway 11. The community theater building is located directly to the south and would be most impacted. 1. That specific circumstances or conditions, such as exceptional narrowness, topography, or siting exists. The bar has been in operation prior to the Zoning Ordinance being adopted by the County. Furthermore, the existing lots were platted in such a fashion that they might be considered archaic in nature. The existing bar currently consumes nearly the entire lot.

2 2. That the Variance does not grant a use which is otherwise excluded from that particular district, or diminish or impair property values within the area. The requested Variance would not allow a use otherwise excluded from the district. 3. That due to the specific circumstance or existing conditions strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would be an unwarranted hardship. Strict adherence to the setback requirements would be a hardship. Allowing the reduced setback will give smokers a place to smoke and provide some minimal protection. 4. That the granting of a Variance is not contrary to the public interest and is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed addition and subsequent need for a reduced setback does not harm the public. Furthermore, staff finds that a reduced setback would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed addition will serve the needs of smokers frequenting the bar. 5. That because of circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property. Due to the archaic platting, the property can t be further developed while meeting the setbacks. Over the years, portions of the lots have been taken for highway right-of-way, further impacting the ability to expand on the two small lots. If approved, there are several issues that the property owner must address while constructing the addition. All of the issues deal with the building code and how the addition must be constructed. Staff has included them as conditions of approval. Recommendation Staff recommended approval of Variance #12-03 to reduce the side yard setback along the south property line from 10 feet to 0 feet with the following conditions. 1) If unit heaters are installed, they must be U.L. approved and made for exterior weather conditions. 2) The building wall located on the property line cannot have any openings {windowsdoors} and must be constructed of a minimum {2 hour} fire resistive material. The construction must meet the specific conditions of Chapter 7 of the 2009 IBC code. 3) The smoking room/building must have an accessible exit route to the public way. Public Testimony Commissioner Steinhauer asked if there would be driving between the two buildings. Scott Anderson indicated that there is no vehicular access between the buildings. Troy Novak, nd Avenue, stated that the building is in need of many repairs and this is 2

3 the first step for the process. Action A motion was made by Rogen and seconded by Randall to approve Variance #12-03 with the stated conditions. The motion passed unanimously. VARIANCE # APPROVED 3

4 CONSENT AGENDA A motion was made by Randall and seconded by Rogen to approve Items 2, 3, 5 & 7 of the consent agenda. Items 4 & 8 were moved to the regular agenda. Item 6 was deferred to the October Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. ITEM 2. Approval of August 27, 2012 A motion was made by Randall and seconded by Rogen to approve the minutes from August 27, The motion passed unanimously. ITEM 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #12-49 to transfer a one residential building eligibility from Tract 1 of Guischer Addition to the N of S of E960 in the SE ¼, all in Section 15-T103N-R49W. Petitioner: Arlie Brende Property Owner: Juanita Guischer Location: Two miles southeast of Baltic General Information Legal Description N of S of E960 in the SE ¼ Section 15-T103N- R49W Present Zoning A-1 Agricultural Existing Land Use - Residential Parcel Size 10 Acres Staff Report: Pat Herman Staff Analysis This conditional use permit is a request to transfer one residential building eligibility. The property is located in Section 15 of Sverdrup Township. The dominate land use of the surrounding area is agricultural with scattered acreages. The transfer will move the eligibility to an adjacent property. 1) The effect upon the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the uses already permitted, and upon property values in the immediate vicinity. The petitioner s request to transfer a building eligibility will not increase the number of dwellings allowed under density zoning. The transfer will move the eligibility from pasture to pasture. A residential house will a have impact of farm operations. 2) The effect upon the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. There should be no major effect upon the normal and orderly development of the area. The only house in the area is on the receiving property. 3) That utilities, access roads, drainage and/or other necessary facilities are provided. The construction of new dwelling unit is required to be in conformance with the County s zoning, septic and building code. Sverdrup Township does require driveway/culvert permits and the petitioner must receive approval from the Township before constructing any new driveway. 4

5 4) That the off-street parking and loading requirements are met. The minimum required lot size for a residential dwelling is 1 acre. This is sufficient space to meet any parking needs for a single family home. 5) That measures are taken to control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, and lighting (inclusive of lighted signs), so that none of these will constitute a nuisance. These should not be at a level as to constitute a nuisance. Recommendation Staff finds that the requested transfer is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and recommended approval of Conditional Use Permit #12-49 with the following condition: 1. A right to farm notice covenant shall be filed prior to the issuance of a building permit. Action A motion was made by Randall and seconded by Rogen to approve Conditional Use Permit #12-49 with the stated conditions. The motion passed unanimously. CUP # APPROVED 5

6 ITEM 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #12-48 to allow mini-storage units. Petitioner: Larry Haug Property Owner: same Location: Northwest of Crooks/Renner Exit General Information Legal Description Lot 2 Block 3 Haug s 2 nd Addition SE ¼ of Section 12-T102N- R50W Present Zoning I-l Light Industrial Existing Land Use - Vacant Parcel Size 1.2 Acres Staff Report: Ryan Streff Staff Analysis The applicant is requesting conditional use permit # to allow for a mini-storage unit facility on the property that is legally described as Lot 2 Block 3 Haug s 2 nd Addition SE1/ Benton Township. The property is located at Dawson Avenue and within the commercial/industrial subdivision that is located in the northwest section of the I-29 interchange at the Crooks/Renner exit. The petitioners property along with the properties to the north, south and east are zoned I-1 Industrial District. Many uses that are commonly found in a commercial/industrial subdivision can be found within this area. The property to the west is zoned A-1 Agricultural and is used for agricultural farming operations. The submitted site plan indicates two buildings that will be constructed and used for the ministorage unit facility. The two buildings as planned will contain a total of 32 units. Each building on the site plan is shown to be 70 x140. The applicant indicated he plans to build eight (8) 13 x30 units and eight (8) 13 x40 units in each building. At this time access will be proposed off of Dawson Avenue so no hard-surfacing is currently required. Dawson Avenue is a gravel roadway. If or when the applicant decides to access the property off of Cottonwood Avenue hard-surfacing shall be required. The petitioner is not requesting an outside storage area so no screening fence is required. 1) The effect upon the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the uses already permitted, and upon property values in the immediate vicinity. This is an industrial zoned property within a commercial and industrial subdivision that currently consists of many uses that are commonly found in this type of zoning district. The proposed use will blend in quite well and should not impact the use and enjoyment of the property in the area. This type of business will not impact property values. 2) The effect upon the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. The development of the property for commercial/industrial use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with the types of uses found in commercial and industrial zoning districts. The proposed use should not impede future or existing 6

7 development in the area. 3) That utilities, access roads, drainage and/or other necessary facilities are provided. Access off of both Dawson and Cottonwood Avenues provide access to the existing vacant lot. During the first phase (building #1) access will be provided off of Dawson Avenue as the applicant does not intend to pave the lot until the second phase (building #2) has been completed. When access is provided off of Cottonwood Avenue hard-surfacing shall be required. 4) That the off-street parking and loading requirements are met. The buildings are sufficiently spaced to allow for the required parking in front of each unit. 5) That measures are taken to control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, and lighting (inclusive of lighted signs), so that none of these will constitute a nuisance. All outside lighting shall be fully cut-off and fully-shielded with recessed lights that prohibit the spillage of light beyond the boundaries of the subject property. No commercial businesses will be allowed to operate in the units, reducing the chances of any nuisance being caused by this facility. Recommendation Staff recommended approval of Conditional Use Permit # to allow for a mini-storage unit facility with the following conditions: 1. That Conditional Use Permit # is for a mini-storage unit facility. 2. The property shall adhere to the submitted site plan dated 8/15/ That no outside storage shall be allowed on the premises. 4. That no offices, commercial storage or commercial uses will be allowed to occupy the premises. 5. That the outside of the storage buildings shall be constructed in an earth tone color. 6. That all driving and parking areas shall be hard-surfaced to the standards set in place by the Minnehaha County Zoning Ordinance. 7. That hard-surfacing shall be required when access off of Cottonwood Avenue is commenced or Dawson Avenue is hard-surfaced. 8. That all outside lighting shall be fully cut-off and fully-shielded with recessed lights that prohibit the spillage of light beyond the boundaries of the subject property. 9. That building permits are required for the storage units and for any signage. Action A motion was made by Randall and seconded by Rogen to approve Conditional Use Permit #12-48 with the stated conditions. The motion passed unanimously. CUP # APPROVED 7

8 ITEM 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #12-50 to exceed 1200 square feet of accessory building area 12,222 Requested. Petitioner: Duane Schreurs Property Owner: same Location: th Street; 1.5 miles east of Midway Corner 8 General Information Legal Description Tract A Schreurs Addition S ½ SE ¼ of Section 23-T103N- R49W Present Zoning A-1 Agricultural Existing Land Use - Residential Parcel Size Acres Staff Report: Scott Anderson Staff Analysis The property is located approximately 4 miles southeast Baltic. The subject property is located on a paved county highway (122). The parcel is located in an area of residential lots platted in Section 23 of Sverdrup Township. The petitioner would like to construct another accessory building on this site. In subdivisions or areas of residential developments which exceed four lots in size, accessory building area is limited to 1200 sq. ft. unless approval for a larger size is obtained through the conditional use permit process. The petitioner already has two (2) large accessory structures. One accessory building is located west of the residence and measures approximately 26 feet by 60 feet equaling 1,560 square feet. The other larger accessory building is located north of the residence and shelter belt and measures 54 feet by 105 feet equaling 5,670 square feet. Combined, the applicant currently has 7,230 square feet of accessory structures on the property. The applicant is requesting to construct a 48 foot by 104 foot accessory structure next to the larger accessory structure located north of the residence. The property owner s new structure would be located next to the shelter belt and would be screened from the highway by the extensive and mature shelterbelt. The proposed structure along with the existing accessory structures on the subject property exceeds the typical sizes of structures in the area. There are two (2) residences in the area that have accessory structures equaling 1,800 square feet at th Street and th Avenue. Another nearby residence has 1,620 square feet of accessory structure area located at th Avenue; and another residence only has 1,300 square feet of accessory structures at th Avenue. Much of this area is used for agriculture. The applicant has indicated that he requires more accessory building use for storage of his agricultural equipment and personal vehicles. The applicant conducts agricultural activities in other areas in the state and his parcel is nearly 22 acres in size. Given the nature of the applicant s agricultural activities, staff can support the applicant s request and believes that the effects on surrounding properties in the area are minimal. 1) The effect upon the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the uses already permitted, and upon property values in the immediate vicinity.

9 Given the existence of other larger accessory buildings in the area, the construction of this structure should not impede on the enjoyment or use of the surrounding properties or effect property values. 2) The effect upon the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. The building can only be used as an accessory structure to the established residential use and no commercial or business activities are allowed. 3) That utilities, access roads, drainage and/or other necessary facilities are provided. There is existing access from County Highway 122. As this is only an accessory structure, no other infrastructure is required. 4) That the off-street parking and loading requirements are met. There is existing access from County Highway 122. As this is only an accessory structure, no other infrastructure is required. The applicant has a large paved area that serves as additional parking and has an attached garage. 5) That measures are taken to control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, and lighting (inclusive of lighted signs), so that none of these will constitute a nuisance. There should be no offensive odors, fumes, dust, noise or vibration from the allowed residential uses on this property. Recommendation Due to notices not being sent to the neighboring properties staff recommended deferral of conditional use permit # Action A motion was made by Randall and seconded by Rogen to defer Conditional Use Permit #12-50 to the October Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. CUP # DEFERRED 9

10 ITEM 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #12-52 to allow mini-storage units. Petitioner: Timothy Tiahrt Property Owner: same Location: Northeast of Crooks/Renner Exit 10 General Information Legal Description Tract 3A (Except N. 150 ) France s Tracts S ½ SW ¼ of Section 7-T102N-R49W Present Zoning C Commercial Existing Land Use - Tree farm Parcel Size 7.03 Acres Staff Report: Pat Herman Staff Analysis The petitioner is requesting approval for a mini-storage facility on property which was zoned C Commercial by the County Commission on August 21, The property is located in the northeast corner of the I-29 and Hwy 130 interchange, commonly referred to as the Crooks/Renner exit. Properties to the north of the applicant s land are zoned A-1 Agricultural and there are a number of rural residences. There is one lot zoned for commercial use to the east. Commercially zoned property exists to the south; and across I-29 to the west there is commercial and industrial zoning. The submitted site plan indicates the facility size to be just under 5 acres. There will be 9 buildings containing 25 storage units. Access is from 472 nd Ave (Co. Hwy 133) and all driving surfaces are required to be hard surfaced. The petitioner has requested that the hard surfacing not be required while construction of the units is occurring, which the Planning Commission has allowed for other developments. The existing driveway entrance is somewhat steep and the petitioner plans to re-grade the entrance so there is less of a drop. The entire facility will be enclosed by a 8 high chain link fence. The petitioner is not requesting outside storage so a screening fence is not required. Recognizing that there are existing residences to the north, the petitioner will plant deciduous trees on the north property line. The same type of trees will also be planted along the west side of the property fronting 472 nd Avenue. 1) The effect upon the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the uses already permitted, and upon property values in the immediate vicinity. There will be a visual impact on neighboring residences as the property is changing from an agricultural to a commercial use. This change will not affect property values in the area. A mini-storage facility is a soft commercial use and will have less impact than some intensive agricultural uses. 2) The effect upon the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. The development of the property for commercial use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and mimics the commercial/industrial development at the other three corners of this intersection. 3) That utilities, access roads, drainage and/or other necessary facilities are provided.

11 All needed utilities are available for this facility. The submitted site plan shows the drainage plan including a holding pond to handle the increased runoff of the site due to rooftops and hard surfacing. The current access from 472 nd Avenue will be used and provides good site distance. 4) That the off-street parking and loading requirements are met. The buildings are sufficiently spaced to allow for the required parking in front of each unit. 5) That measures are taken to control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, and lighting (inclusive of lighted signs), so that none of these will constitute a nuisance. Lighting should be directed downward on to the property and not spill off of the site. No commercial businesses will be allowed to operate in the units, reducing the chances of any nuisance being caused by this facility. Recommendation Staff finds that the request for a mini-storage facility is an appropriate use on commercially zoned property and is a use which will not create a nuisance for the neighborhood. Staff recommended approval of CUP #12-52 with the following conditions: 1. CUP #12-52 is for a mini-storage facility. 2. The property shall adhere to the submitted site plan received on 8/31/ There shall be no outside storage. 4. There shall be no commercial businesses operating out of the storage units. 5. The storage buildings shall be white or earth tone in color. 6. All driving and parking areas shall be hard surfaced to the standards of the Minnehaha County Zoning Ordinance. The hard surfacing is required to be installed once 80% of the storage units are constructed. 7. All lights shall be of a shoe-box style, directing light directly downward onto the property. 8. All trees shall be kept in a live state. 9. The existing drainage pattern shall be maintained as shown of the site plan dated 8/31/ Building permits are required for the storage units and for signage. Action A motion was made by Randall and seconded by Rogen to approve Conditional Use Permit #12-52 with the stated conditions. The motion passed unanimously. CUP # APPROVED 11

12 ITEM 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #12-47 to transfer a one residential building eligibility from SW ¼ NE ¼ to the SE ¼ NE ¼, all in Section 12-T101N-R51W. Petitioner: Dean Meyer Property Owner: same Location: 2.5 miles northeast of Wall Lake 12 General Information Legal Description SE ¼ NE ¼ of Section 12-T101N-R51W Present Zoning A-1 Agricultural Existing Land Use - Agriculture Parcel Size 40 Acres Staff Report: Dustin Powers Staff Analysis This is a request to transfer a residential building eligibility. The petitioner owns both the SW ¼ NE ¼ and SE ¼ NE ¼ of Section 12 in Wall Lake Township. Approval of the transfer request would move the unused eligibility to the SE ¼ NE ¼ from the SW ¼ NE ¼. 1) The effect upon the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the uses already permitted, and upon property values in the immediate vicinity. The surrounding land use is predominately agricultural crop ground with rural residences to the northeast. The petitioner s request to transfer a building eligibility will not increase the number of dwellings allowed under density zoning. 2) The effect upon the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. There should be no major effect upon the normal and orderly development of the area. 3) That utilities, access roads, drainage and/or other necessary facilities are provided. The construction of new dwelling units is required to be in conformance with the County s zoning, septic and building code. The petitioner will need to obtain a driveway permit from Wall Lake Township before the County can issue a building permit. 4) That the off-street parking and loading requirements are met. The minimum required lot size for a residential dwelling is 1 acre. This is sufficient space to meet any parking needs for a single family home. 5) That measures are taken to control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise, vibration, and lighting (inclusive of lighted signs), so that none of these will constitute a nuisance. These should not be at a level as to constitute a nuisance. Recommendation Staff finds that the requested transfer is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and recommended approval of Conditional Use Permit #12-47 with the following conditions: 1) Each housing site shall be platted and a right-to-farm notice filed on the deed of each lot prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) That Wall Lake Township shall approve any new driveway access.

13 Public Testimony Dean Meyer, 1254 Hwy 9, Rock Rapids, IA, stated he would like to transfer the eligibility to have road access to the eligibility. Lance Wollmann, rd Street, stated he owns a residence at the north end of the property and runs a boarding and gun dog training facility there. He wanted the Commission to be aware of the facility and does not want to hear complaints about noise from his property if a new residence is built near his property. He did not have objections to the transfer. Action A motion was made by Steinhauer and seconded by Randall to approve Conditional Use Permit #12-47 with the stated conditions. The motion passed unanimously. CUP # APPROVED 13

14 ITEM 8. REZONING #12-07 to rezone from the A-1 Agricultural District & R/C Recreation Conservation District to the I-1 Light Industrial District. Petitioner: Carl Carlson Property Owner: John Harr Revocable Trust Location: Buffalo Ridge Exit General Information Legal Description PT NW1/4 SW1/4 LYING S OF HWY 38 & S1/2 SW1/4 & 100 ABAN RR ROW S OF H-1(EX JOHNSON'S ADDN & EX BRENKEVCO'S ADDN) in Section 30-T102N-R50W Existing Land Use - Agriculture Parcel Size Acres Staff Report: Pat Herman Staff Analysis This is a request to rezone property from the A-1 Agricultural District to the I-1 Light Commercial District. The site is located just south of the intersection of SD Highway 38 and 466 th Avenue, approximately a ¼ from the I-90 Buffalo Ridge exit. The adjoining property to the north is zoned C Commercial as is the Buffalo Ridge complex. The remaining land in the vicinity is zoned A-1 Agriculture and RC Recreation/Conservation. Land use to the west of the site is predominately agriculture with scattered housing. Southeast of the site is the Reynolds & Gustafson mining operation whose access haul road runs along the south edge of this property. To the north is the Buffalo Ridge commercial center and further north across I-90 are Goos RV and the Benson Farms mining business. There are single family dwellings located in close proximity to the property. The nearest residence is 175 feet to the east, sharing a property line with the land under consideration for rezoning. There are two dwellings to the north of Highway 38 located approximately 200 & 348 feet from the site and there is a residence 950 feet to the southwest. The applicant on this rezoning request would like to develop 20+ acres on the west side of the property, adjacent to 466 th Avenue. He is anticipating using the site as a contractor s shop and storage yard with some light manufacturing. He has requested that the product not be made public for business proprietary reasons. Staff can attest that the business will be no more intense in nature in than the adjacent mining operations and that the product is not a hazardous material. The applicant will need to apply for a conditional use permit to develop the 20 acres. At that time staff will review the details of the facility such as drainage, paving, building placement, fencing and buffering. There are no plans at this time for the remainder of the property and it will remain as tillable ground. When this portion of the property is developed the applicant will have address buffering for the nearby housing. The applicant will not be requesting access from the Highway 38 but will use township road 466 th Avenue. This portion of the road has been hard surfaced by Reynolds and Gustafson as required in their conditional use permit. 14

15 The Minnehaha County Comprehensive Plan encourages commercial uses at interstate highway interchanges and high traffic intersections. Such uses should be developed in a nodal pattern and geared to the support of highway users. The site property is located in close proximity to the access ramps for I-90 and has easy access to SD Highway 38, meeting the criterion of the Comprehensive Plan. Light Industrial zoning will meld with the existing commercially zoned business and the mining operations in the area. Recommendation: Staff finds that the request to rezone the property is consistent with the County s Comprehensive Plan and existing development. Staff recommended approval of Rezoning # Public Testimony Gary Meyer, th Ave., lives south of this site. Mr. Meyer stated that he is not opposed to the rezoning but he expressed concerns about the condition of 466 th Avenue. The Reynolds and Gustfason mining operation was required by the County Commission to hard surface 466 th Avenue from their haul road north to Hwy 38. This has been done in a very shoddy manner and the asphalt is consistently breaking up. Reynolds and Gustfason resurfaced just this fall and it is already in bad shape. Adding more trucks onto this road will only make it worse. Mr. Meyer stated that neither township has money to improve the blacktop. Ms. Herman explained that no paving standards were set in the conditional use permit but Planning Department does have this issue under enforcement action. She explained that she had just been out on the road and witnessed the crumbling asphalt and pot holes that are forming. The applicant will need to work with the Reynolds and Gustfason on any shared responsibility for hard surfacing. Commissioner Cypher suggested that the mining CUP could be called back for review and the paving standards addressed. Malcolm Melin, Hwy 38, has a house in the east boundary of the proposed rezoning area. He is not against the rezoning but concerned about how close structures could be located to him. Ms. Herman stated that at this time only the western 20 acres are slated to be developed. When there is a business which wishes to locate close to Mr. Melin s property that business will be required to install buffering measures. Action Stating that the request was in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, a motion was made by Steinhauer and seconded by Duffy to recommended approval of Rezoning #12-07 from the A-1 Agricultural and R/C Recreation Conservation Districts to the I-1 Light Industrial District. The motion passed unanimously. REZONING # APPROVAL RECOMMENDED 15

16 ITEM 9. REVIEW CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS #81-10 to allow a pistol & rifle range. Petitioner: Curt & Kellee Valnes Property Owner: Big Sioux Rifle & Piston Club Location: th Avenue; 2 miles Northeast of Brandon 16 General Information Legal Description N606 W840 N 2/5 SE 1/4 of Section 24-T102N-R48W Present Zoning A-1 Agricultural Existing Land Use - Pistol & Rifle Range Parcel Size Acres Staff Report: Ryan Streff Staff Analysis Minnehaha County Planning staff was contacted by neighboring property owners to review Conditional Use Permit #81-10 that allowed a rifle and pistol range (Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club). The property owners were advised by the States Attorney s Office to contact the Planning & Zoning Department in order to have this conditional use permit reviewed by the Planning Commission. The property owned by the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club is legally described as N606 W840 N2/5 SE1/ Brandon Township and has a physical address of th Avenue. Staff determined that a review of Conditional Use Permit #81-10 would be conducted at the September 24, 2012, Planning Commission Meeting to ensure that all approved conditions were being met by the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club. There are currently three (3) active conditional use permits associated with this use. A forth Conditional Use Permit #01-95 has been repealed as a change to condition #8 was made in The first conditional use permit #81-10 was approved by the County Commission to allow a rifle and pistol range on December 29, The second conditional use permit #81-10A was approved by the Planning Commission on July 26, 1982, to amend condition #5 to permit a bar across the firing bench instead of a baffle. The third Conditional Use Permit #11-19 was approved by the Planning Commission on March 28, 2011, to amend condition #8 to change the hours of operation. Current conditions of Conditional Use Permit # ) A new site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Office which takes into consideration all conditions placed on the rifle range. All construction shall be in accordance with this site plan. 2) A gate shall be erected at the east end of the driveway. 3) The driveway shall be widened to permit two vehicles to meet. 4) A 10-foot earth embankment shall enclose the firing line. 5) A bar shall be placed across the firing bench to restrict the angle of fire and ensure that bullets remain within the embankment. A baffle may be required later if problems develop. 6) Bury or remove all junk on the property. The junk shall not be moved to another location on the property. 7) Install some type of restroom facilities since the range will be open to the public.

17 8) The range shall not be open for more than four days per week and the hours shall be limited to 8 a.m. to sunset with the following exception: the range may be operated one additional day per week for a maximum of six weeks between September 15 th and December 1 st. 9) A compliance inspection must be performed prior to the range being opened for use. A complaint was made to the Planning Department on August 20, 2012, in regards to safety related issues and possible conditional use permit violations of Conditional Use Permit # Specifically, the complainants indicated that condition numbers 1, 5 and 8 are not in compliance with the conditional use permit. The complainants stated that the facility was not in compliance with the adopted site plan as an additional shooting range was added to the northwest section of the property. They continued to update staff on condition #5 making it clear that baffles are now needed as problems have developed. Staff was informed that several bullet holes have been found around their property. More specificity, the incident on May 16, 2012, that involved a 911 call that dispatched a Sheriff s Deputy to the Valnes property to assist their son that was in distress due to gunfire that was striking equipment that he was working on near the pond area on their property. It was also told to staff that condition #8 was not in compliance as shooting occurs more than 4 days per week. On September 10, 2012, staff met with two board members, Charles Heck and Larry Swensen, from the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club. Staff asked Mr. Heck and Mr. Swensen to discuss the safety concerns (i.e. May 16th incident) and the three particular conditions believed to be out of compliance. 1) A new site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Office which takes into consideration all conditions placed on the rifle range. All construction shall be in accordance with this site plan. In reference to condition #1 Mr. Swensen informed staff that he discussed the expansion of the range to the prior Planning Director about eight or nine years ago. The Planning Director at the time stated that the use was the similar to the approved use and that no additional permits were needed. Staff informed the board members that a new or amended conditional use permit would need to be obtained in order to add the addition range in the northwest section of the property. They stated that the club would comply with this request. 5) A bar shall be placed across the firing bench to restrict the angle of fire and ensure that bullets remain within the embankment. A baffle may be required later if problems develop. Mr. Heck address condition #5 stating to staff that new baffles have been constructed on two of the three ranges (50 yard and 200 yard) since the gunfire accident on May 16, He continued to inform staff that the third range (100 yard) is only used when a Range Officer is present at this particular range and that this requirement has been implemented at the facility since the incident that occurred on May 16, Both board members indicated that plans are being developed for a third baffle to be installed on the 100 yard range. 17

18 8) The range shall not be open for more than four days per week and the hours shall be limited to 8 a.m. to sunset with the following exception: the range may be operated one additional day per week for a maximum of six weeks between September 15 th and December 1 st. Mr. Heck and Mr. Swensen both informed staff that the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club and its facility does not operate beyond the hours stated in the conditional use permit. Mr. Swensen said that sign-in logs of the range officers would prove that this condition is not in violation. Mr. Heck agreed with Mr. Swensen s statement and that they would provide this documentation to staff. Please see attached photos and documents for more information regarding this review. Recommendation: At this time staff has concluded that the property s safety issues have been alleviated on the 50 yard and 200 yard range by the installation of the baffle system but recommend that the 100 yard range be closed until a baffle system is installed. Staff concludes that all other conditions, with the exception of condition #1, are within their limits. A public hearing in the future will be conducted by the Planning Commission to consider the additional range in order to satisfy condition #1. Public Testimony Commissioner Randall asked if the tactical ranges were still in operation. Ryan Streff answered that they are still is operation and the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club (BSRPC) will be coming into the Planning & Zoning Office to apply for a conditional use permit to permit those ranges. Commissioner O Hara asked how the tactical ranges are operating if they are not permitted. Ryan Streff indicated that the BSRPC had indicated that they were given verbal approval by a former staff member 8-10 years ago; therefore it is hard for staff to completely shut them down. If they apply for the conditional use permit and get denied then they will have to stop operation of those ranges, until that time the tactical range may still operate. Currently, staff is reviewing the 50, 100 and 200 yard ranges and how the BSRPC is not in conformance with the current conditions of approval for the existing conditional use permits. Commissioner O Hara asked if the shots that went astray from the BSRPC came from the tactical ranges or the other ranges. Ryan Streff indicated that the accounts that there are record of came from the permitted ranges and not the tactical ranges. Kelly Valnes, th Street, stated the reason that they were at the meeting was because their property was shot from the BSRPC. She stated that when they built the house a member of the gun club made them aware of the ranges and that they were taking precautions to make sure the shooting range were safe. However in June 2011 they found two holes in the side of their house; one still has the bullet in the wall. She indicated that their house is approximately 900 yards away from the range, so in order to hit the house from the BSRPC, a gun would have to be angled at a 30 to 40 degree angle to strike their house. 18

19 Mrs. Valnes called law enforcement officials to report the incident, at which time they were informed that it was a civil matter. The BSRPC Board members visited the Valnes property and stated that this had never occurred before and that they have range officers on duty for safety. The Board members indicated that they were going to have a NRA (National Rifle Association) Range Specialist come to the range and tell them what they needed to do to keep the public safe. Mrs. Valnes then described an incident from this summer when her son had to complete a 911 call because bullets were landing around him on the Valnes property. Law enforcement officials came to the property and discovered a bullet hole in the top of the Valnes ATV and a bullet on the ground. The law enforcement officials visited the BSRPC and were told that a father and son were sighting in the son s gun when the accident occurred. In further investigation during the summer they found holes in the WAPA (Western Area Power Association) power tower and lines, which is owned by the US Department of Energy, that are directly between the BSRPC and Valnes property. Mrs. Valnes stated that for a typical conditional use permit the applicant is required to notice every neighbor within 500 feet of the property. She described that a.22 caliber rifle can shoot 1.1 miles, so the only people in the past that got notified were the properties immediately adjacent to the BSRPC property. Mrs. Valnes further stated that the 1981 conditional use permit required baffles to be installed on the ranges, which was then changed to the cross bar 1982 with the understanding that when the baffles seemed needed they will be required. However the cross bar is only used when the shooter is seated at the shooting benches. Pictures from the gun clubs websites shows members shooting from various positions that make the cross bars obsolete. Mrs. Valnes indicated that they are opposed to the tactical range because there is no conditional use permit that allows for the tactical range and no safety standards in place for the tactical range. Mrs. Valnes showed a YouTube video for the commission to see. Mrs. Valnes indicated that she believes there needs to be some sort of oversight to the issues presented. They are not asking for revocation of the permit but revisions as provided by a NRA Certified Range Specialist, which the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club Board of Directors had indicated would happen after the first time the Valnes property was shot. They also asked that the tactical range be closed until the appropriate time when the Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club applies for and is granted a conditional use permit with safety provision for that particular activity. Should a permit for the tactical range be granted they asked that a range specialist also provide them with measures which would provide safety to the neighboring properties. Jan Aichele, th Avenue, stated he has been out there since the beginning of the gun club. He stated they have expanded way beyond what was envisioned back in He has worried about being shot off his mower when he has been maintaining his property. He stated that the berms on the south east side have settled and eroded over time and are not as high as they once were. 19

20 Sandra Aichele, th Avenue, stated she does not allow her grandkids out there to play anymore because she is afraid of them being shot. Mrs. Aichele stated that they are only supposed to be shooting 3 days a week, but they have been shooting 4 days. Keith Jones, rd Avenue, stated that a couple of weeks after the range was supposed to be closed he heard some shooting on the ranges. When he went up to the range to see why there was shooting he was asked if he was the range officer. Another time when there was shooting occurring on the tactical range, Mr. Jones indicated that he went to see what was going on and he was told he needed to leave because he might be struck with a ricochet. He stated that if it is that dangerous then maybe they should put up a berm between the two properties. Chuck Heck, 1608 S Glendale, President of Big Sioux Rifle & Pistol Club. He stated that Larry Swensen the former president of the club was given approval by Dave Queal the former Planning Director for the addition of the tactical range, and are now being accused of running the range without having the proper permit. Mr. Heck stated that the cross bars were only required on the 200 yard range and the other ranges were open to shooting from multiple positions. Mr. Heck stated that when the first incident occurred with the Valnes house, the entire BSRPC Board visited the Valnes property to see the incident. He stated it is possible that the one hole is a bullet hole, however the Valnes have never extracted a bullet to prove that it is a bullet hole. He stated that he believes that the other marking on the house that looks like a ricochet, is probably a mark from a rock ricochet from a mower. Mr. Heck and his wife searched the entire Valnes property with metal detectors but were unable to find any bullet that may have ricocheted off of the Valnes house. Mr. Heck stated that Mrs. Aichele s argument is invalid because their conditions allow them to shoot an additional day. All of their days allowed under the conditional use permit are floating and are not set to certain days. Mr. Heck stated that the incident when Mr. Jones came over and was asked if he was the range officer was an accident due to them having an apple seed shoot at the tactical ranges and none of the other ranges were open or had a range officer present. When the people who spoke with Mr. Jones asked him if he was the range officer it was because there wasn t a range officer on the rifle ranges because the ranges were closed. He was also asked because there is a sign on the office door that states no shooting should occur unless a range officer is present. Mr. Heck also stated that when Mr. Jones was told he needed to leave because he might be hit by a ricochet that was because Mr. Jones was standing up on top of the berm of the tactical range. In November 2011 the NRA technical range advisor came to the gun club range and did his technical assessment of the ranges. The technical range advisor never sent in the assessment of the ranges, so because the BSRPC already knew what changes they were going to make they have not pursued getting a copy of the range assessment. Commissioner Cypher asked if the drawing of the blue sky baffles was accurate. Mr. Heck indicated that drawing was of the 200 yard range and when you sit at the bench there is no possible way to shoot over the baffles and berm. Commissioner Cypher stated that is true but if 20

21 you are in a prone position on the ground you would be able to. Mr. Heck confirmed that it was possible but they do not allow shooting from a prone position on the 200 yard range, only on the 100 yard range. Commissioner O Hara asked about the pictures of the holes in the WAPA towers. Mr. Heck stated that there was a lot of rust in those holes. Donald Srstka, 4501 S. Ash Grove Avenue (Sioux Falls), stated that he was out there when the power company came to visit and he asked the power company if they could tell him when the tower was shot. The power company indicated that they could not but it must have been some time ago because the holes were rusted. The power company indicated that there are several towers around the area that have been shot not just the one adjacent to the BSRPC, so there is no way to know where the shots came from. Larry Swensen, 604 Lewis (Brandon), stated that for the size of Sioux Falls, Minnehaha County has very few places where you can shoot for target practice. Mr. Swensen also stated that they shoot metal targets during some of their shoots and that is the clanging noise that the neighbors are hearing not bullets hitting the towers. Fred Ledwell, 616 Lakota Avenue (Brandon), stated the tactical pistol bays are for competition and training. He explained that the YouTube video that was displayed earlier in the meeting does not show that there are two range officers right next to the person going thru the tactical range. Those range officers are responsible for timing the shooting and monitoring the shooter so that they are not violating any shooting rules, stopping it if any rules are not followed. Commissioner Rogen asked how many bays are on the tactical range area. Mr. Ledwell indicated there are 5 bays in that area. Commissioner Rogen asked how tall the berms were in the tactical range area. Mr. Ledwell stated that they range from 12 to 20 feet in height. Commissioner O Hara stated that she understands that maybe there was permission given for the tactical range area previously, however there is not a valid conditional use permit with conditions for that tactical range therefore that needs to be taken care of as soon as possible. Commissioner Steinhauer indicated that we need a safe place for people to shoot, train and practice for the use of guns. He emphasized the safety that must be present and his concern with the fact that bullets have strayed away from the BSRPC. He stated that he believes the tactical range needs to be shut down until proper conditions and safety measures are met that satisfy the public and the commission. He also believed that there should be no shooting from a prone position or any other position away from the benches until it is demonstrated that you can shoot from those positions without having any stray bullets leave the range. Commissioner Randall stated that she would echo Commissioner Steinhauer s concerns and maybe add that the baffles need to be installed on all the ranges. Also there needs to be an agreed upon criteria for the design of the safety measures because there seems to be conflict between the NRA and the US Range Design Criteria. 21

22 Commissioner Cypher stated that any one of the ranges that currently have a safety issue should not be used until those safety issues have been eliminated. Ryan Streff clarified that the 50 yard and 200 yard range are the ranges that have the baffles currently installed, the 100 yard range does not and that was staff s recommendation to discontinue use of the 100 yard range until the baffles are installed. Action After reviewing Conditional Use Permit #81-10 a motion was made by Steinhauer and seconded by Rogen to enact as follows: 1. Require discontinuation of the tactical range until a conditional use permit is obtained. 2. Require discontinuation of shooting from all other positions besides the bench until further safety precautions are approved and implemented. 3. Strongly encourage baffles be installed on the 100 yard range. 4. A safety plan be developed and provided to the neighbors prior to returning to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Cypher indicated he thought the baffles should be required on the 100 yard range. Commissioner Rogen asked the commission if they should address the berm height and asked staff if they had been out there and measured them. Ryan Streff indicated that Condition #4 on Conditional Use Permit #81-10 states they are required 10 foot berms and having walked the areas believes that they meet that. A motion was made to amend the original motion to require discontinuation of the 100 yard range until the baffles are installed by Randall and seconded by Cypher. The motion passed 4-2 (Steinhauer and Rogen voted No). Commission O Hara called for a vote on the original motion as amended. The motion passed unanimously with the following conditions: 1. Require discontinuation of the tactical range until a conditional use permit is obtained. 2. Require discontinuation of shooting from all other positions besides the bench until further safety precautions are approved and implemented. 3. Require discontinuation of the 100 yard range until baffles are installed. 4. A safety plan be developed and provided to the neighbors on what needs to be done prior to returning to the Planning Commission 22