Main factors were compatibility and environmental impact

By Robert Williams

Editor

A conditional use permit application for a 25-unit commercial RV campground with 15 boat slips on Grove Lake in rural Pelican Rapids was denied unanimously by the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday, Oct. 22.

After conferring with the County Attorney Michelle Eldien, District 2 Commissioner Wayne D. Johnson immediately made a motion to deny that was quickly seconded by District 1 Commissioner Dan Bucholz. The motion was made first to allow for discussion that Johnson initiated.

“In knowing the area, I have real concern about some of the 16 criteria and whether they were appropriately addressed, namely, this is a commercial development on a natural environment lake, which we do have some of, but my understanding of the proposal is this would be transient camping, in other words, you’d be able to pull a camper in there on a Friday and leave on Sunday and the next week someone else could do that,” said Johnson. “That’s potentially a tremendous amount of traffic on a natural environment lake. The compatibility is part of it; environmentally, I’m concerned, as well. There is a lot of close shore vegetation. It’s relatively shallow, in my understanding. The reality is this. Thirty years ago that lake was four feet lower because of the high water and rain it has risen considerably. If it goes back to its state from the 80’s, where this is at, it is my understanding there would be three feet of water where they’re putting boat slips. I think that is a real concern.”

Johnson continued on the history of the area citing the Buffalo-Red River Watershed District came in and installed an outlet and a control structures to get the water down.

Johnson also brought up unsubstantiated reports of eagle nests on the property and federal law regarding development within 300-600 feet of nests.

“Those are probably my two biggest concerns—the compatibility—normally, there’s 400-some feet, I’ll call it 500 of shoreland on this 12-acre development,” said Johnson. “On a natural environment lake, that would mean 2.5 dwellings—200-foot width lots—so, there’s a boat slip for a residence. Well, you took that same area now and you put 15 boat slips on there and 25 people. That’s a huge impact from my perspective, environmentally, to that water.”

Johnson continued citing the difference between seasonal and transient camping, allowing that there is a need for more camping in the county, but not of this particular nature from what he heard at the planning commission meeting.

The Planning Commission Board members considered 16 factors when considering the permit request and after consideration and discussion recommended approval with two no votes from David Wass and Judd Fischer with the following conditions:

1. Provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to Land & Resource Management.

2. Boat Access to be built to DNR specifications.

3. Camping units within the proposed development (12.34 Acres) as identified on the survey submitted with the Application are only allowed to use the Boat Access.

4. Any lighting will need to be downward lighting

5. Sign no larger than 4’ x 8’

6. Quiet time hours are from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m.

Of the 16 factors, Johnson highlighted compatibility, environmental impact, suitability of the area and near shore water depth as something he could not get past, even if the other 10 factors were approved.

“I don’t feel they were appropriately addressed,” said Johnson. “This one is messy, I’ll be honest.”

Bucholz brought up a daycare in the area, along with some of the same concerns as Johnson, as his reasons for seconding the denial.

A letter from Marc and Janell Hartjen was submitted in opposition to the request indicating concerns for the safety of her licensed daycare facility and talked about doing background checks.

District 4 Commissioner Robert Lahman stated he would not approve without a proper environment study being completed.

District 5 Commissioner Lee Rogness echoed the sentiments of his fellow board members adding concerns about the denial of the original application and second application coming in after that denial.

“I thought the process got hijacked, if you will,” Rogness said. “Some of the information was assumed from the first application. I think what I hear from Commissioner Johnson is the reality that this very likely would really not be compatible and that’s one of the strong points of the 16.”

At the Planning Commission, nobody spoke in favor of the development, other than the applicants, according to Eldien.

“The public hearing officially occurred at the planning commission meetings,” said Eldien. “After that, it was told to the public clearly then that the comment period ended. There were a few things received obviously after that and although received and they will be part of the file they are not necessarily to be considered because there weren’t other people that had an opportunity to respond and that gets messy. People think they can continue with it but for this record as you consider those factors with the vote I would make it clear the factors you considered are from the public record of those hearings and I think you’ve all reviewed the tape and so that the factors come from that specifically.”

The proposal is located at 16446 470th St., Pelican Rapids and owned by Joseph and Iliana Clauson.

A roll vote was held of the commissioners who voted unanimously to deny recommendations of the planning commission and the application.