Games Lake Development - 34 lots

[chucker34]

The county zoning commission is holding a hearing tonight to decide whether or not to allow developers from the Twin Cities to have Games Lake lakeshore property they purchased at the corner of county roads 5 and 9 rezoned from agricultrual to residential and then to see if they can divide the land up into 34 building lots. There will also be some sort of large marina for these new home owners to park their boats. My thoguhts are that this could pass easily if they have all of their ducks in a row with the DNR and other governmental agencies. I'm sure the county is drooling over the additional tax base. We'll see if anyone raises a stink tonight to at least get some questions answered.

[BLACKJACK]

I saw all the survey markers, I was wondering what was going on! What happened at the meeting?

It goes back to the old saying, it takes money to make money.

[chucker34]

After many hours of heated discussion and testimony from dozens of homeowners (probably more than 100 showed up), the county planning commission approved the application (4 votes to 3) for the plats. There will be 34 plats, 5 of them directly on the lake to build homes on, 3 of them on the lake for a community beach and marina that will moor 21+ boats, and the rest building lots for homes behind these plats. The commission essentially said the developers seemed responsible enough, that it was withing ordinances, and that this could be a real asset to the community and an improvemetn to the lake. I'm sure they weren't thinking about all those taxes that will start pouring in from it or the taxes that will be raised for all the surrounding homeowners. In any case, they present it to the county board next. I have to think it will pass there too. It doesn't seem to matter what the people want. If it did, it never would have had a chance of passing the planning committee. Its disheartening that so few can call the shots for so many in our community. This not only affects the homeowners on the lake, it affects everyone who enjoys fishing or water skiing on it, etc. If you think that lake is nuts in the Summer now, just give it a few years.

[chucker34]

Oh, one more thing. One of the committee members (who voted for the development) said that people had been calling him asking him how this could be stopped. He then very snidely said, "I've told them. You can open up your checkbook and buy it yourself." What an arrogant, elitist, crappy thing to say. Not everyone can afford to spend $750,000 on a 50+ acre property with 1,200 feet of lakeshore. That's what someone told me that parcel of land went for. I can't confirm that for sure. In any case, what a ridiculous arguement to make. If you want to keep your community and one of its precious assets nice, you need to buy it. Finally, I should mention that the DNR is in full support of this project, saying that the developers will be responsible about it.

[Guest]

Oh Man.....

Add 15 ski boats, probably 20+ jet skis, half a dozen pontoons, a dozen fishing boats all to a already crowded lake and I'll tell ya one body of water I will be avoiding like the plague!!

The only good thing that could potentially come from this is maybe they will improve the channel to Norway, but that would be bad too since then the entire chain would become the "Minnetonka of the West"...lol.

This is really going to change the area.....

[Norsk Fisker]

Do you have any idea when the county board will hear the proposal? I found out about this Monday night, a bit too late to comment, but I would appreciate the opportunity to comment to the board. Not that it will make a difference, but I will feel better.

Were ther any concerns about the springs and wetlands in the old pit? What are they doing with that area?

I thought the channel was a great way to access Games lake, but now I'm not so sure...

[chucker34]

The zoning office told me that the board would hear the first recommendation to rezone the property near the road that is ag to residential this coming Tuesday at 11 am. They said the plats wouldn't be voted on but rather approved when it came time for the plan to be finalize. It was fairly confusing. But the office said the time for public comment is over. That was suppose to take place Monday night. I wouldn't worry too much about speaking your mind. Plenty of people covered about every sort of environmental concern, etc. over a few hours. Also, they are planning on putting the beach right where the spring that feeds into the lake is. As far as the wetlands, they are keeping most of them and said they will improve the drainage and stop the amount of the sediment that is currently going into the lake. They also brought up rain gardens they are creating several times. The DNR official said their plan looked good but didn't really comment much on the impact to the lake.

One more thing. Don't feel bad about not being notified. They only sent you a letter if you lived within 1/2 mile of the development. Therefore, many people on the lake didn't and probably no one on Norway get a letter.

[Norsk Fisker]

A few points should be noted from this event.

As one official noted, the Northern half of the county is "ripe for development" because it does not have the restrictions that the Southern portion of the county has. The intent for the South was to slow the conversion of farm land into residential. The Norther portion, without the restrictions, will be more prone to development. Also, the beauty of the rolling hills and lakes make it prime development property.

The development on Games fit within the rules governing development. There is nothing that would prohibit the development so, with all the ducks lined up, it will likely proceed. PCA, Health Dept, DNR, nor Zoning had any tools to prohibit the development.

This property was reported to have had at least two previous developers propose projects which did not make it through the scrutiny of these agencies. The one approved Monday was the "least damaging" proposal.

The DNR is not in a position to "fully support" a project of this nature, but neither are they in a position to oppose it without grounds to do so. I haven't spoken to anyone in the DNR that is pro-development. Their role in this process is to guide the project in a way that it does the least harm.

The only solution to prevent similar developments is to gain more restrictive zoning. This is viewed by some as evil.

Where do we go from here? Is there enough popular opinion to restrict such development in the future?

[jigginjim]

My parents live on west norway and had no idea this was going on. Some the people who live on norway have wished they would fill-in the channel from west norway to the main lake. I wonder what thier going to do now when the people on games demand a new large channel?

[chucker34]

Norsk - All good points.

A few points should be noted from this event.

The development on Games does fit within the rules governing development. But that raises the question is what's legal always ethical. And were the commission's hands tied to vote to approve the development. I don't think so otherwise three of the seven would not have voted against it.

Perhaps "fully support" were not the correct words to describe the DNR's involvement but the hydrologist, a very nice and well-spoken guy, didn't offer many details about why their proposal passed DNR scrutiny. No environmental impact study was done because the number of houses didn't require it. I didn't get the feeling with such missing details that we know one way or the other how this will affect the water quality of the lake, but most of the governmental officials were saying it would have no impact.

More restrictive zoning requirements are one answer, but I'd rather government officials listen to the voice of the people - within reason of course. The people opposing this development in its current state mentioned several times at the meeting that they had no problem with the land being developed, just that they wanted it done responsibly. Possibilities mentioned included making the building lots slightly larger and removing the marina option from the lake. The developers would still rake in plenty of money from that route, just not as much as they will now.

I don't think any amount of popular opinion will sway the County at this point. I think the answer is to vote some people out the next time around and start paying very close attention to vacant tracts of land and meet with developers before they start such ambitious planning.

I think what really burns most people around the lakes involved is that this development "snuck" up on them. The developers didn't have the common courtesy to introduce themselves and their plans via a townhall style meeting with the lakes association. Believe me, I'm a business man and concerned about making a buck, but if I was in charge of this project, that's one of the first things I would have done. Meeting the new neighbors and getting them involved from the start will surely start you off with a better reputation and make it easier for you to win the support of everyone by making a few compromises early on.

That said. The lake association is meeting with Commissioner Dean Shuck and the DNR hydrologist tonight at County Park 7 to see where it can go from here to minimize the impact to the lake.

[PikeTipper]

Playing Devil's Advocatea here I would not have held a meeting if I was that developer and done the same thing the he/she did. I can't think of many reasons that would make the current residents consider this a good thing so most would be against it. That being said if they don't know it's happening then they don't have time to prepare to fight against it.

It's too bad that this is going to happen because I'm sure it won't be the last development in the area. It was really nice to have an area like that which was largely undeveloped compared to most lakes.

[Guest]

Yea Pike,

There are quite a few lakes in the area that I can see this happening to within the next 5-10 years. They did the same thing on Dead lake up by Ottertail- Land lots and a marina. But in the Willmar area, there is tons of shoreline just waiting for the right person/s to come along. Hopefully it will be later than sooner.

[chucker34]

Pike, I can see your point with the way they want to develop it now and that's exactly why they did things the way they did so no one had time to properly prepare to fight this. I guess I'm thinking my plans would have been less ambitious, developing all of the available lakeshore lots with one house each and then breaking the land up behind it into parcels at least twice as large. But then again that's probably because I live in the area and will be impacted by the development. In any case, I agree with Tom that more developments will come as long as they're legal. I guess I just like to think that we all live here because its not overcrowded and because the land's not full of "upscale, city-style" homes the developers referred to at the meeting. But things change and not always for the better.

[Norsk Fisker]

Chucker,

Good point about the elected officials. I imagine that there were a room full of citizens expecting their officials to do the right thing. I guess the reason three voted no was due to the citizen turn out. Hopefully the county board room will see the same citizen turn out.

One parting thought, if you want an up-scale city lot, move to an upscale neighborhood in the city.

[chucker34]

Here is an article from the newspaper on the meeting last night:

NEW LONDON -- Residents from two northern Kandiyohi County lakes intend to pool their money, hire an attorney and try to slow down a proposed housing development on Games Lake.

The group, called “Save the Lakes,” was quickly formed following an informal meeting Thursday with county officials at the Games Lake County Park.

The group laid out concerns and questions about the residential housing project and may to seek a moratorium on county lake development. They also took action to request an environmental study on the Games Lake housing proposal.

The community action is in response to a 3-4 vote taken Monday when the county’s planning and zoning commission approved a preliminary plat that includes construction of 31 homes on a 50-acre parcel of property on the northeast side of Games Lake.

Called Heritage Springs, most of the houses won’t have lake access. The proposal includes three controlled-access lake lots. Houses wouldn’t be built on those lots, but up to 21 boat slips could be installed there and used by residents of the subdivision.

The planning and zoning commission also recommended approval for rezoning a segment of the property from agriculture to a community development district. The County Board is expected to vote on the zoning recommendation at their meeting Tuesday.

There are no more required hearings before the County Board will be asked to sign the final plat for the project, said Gary Geer, planning and zoning administrator. With the approval given so far, developers can begin dirt work on road construction today.

Geer and County Commissioner Dean Shuck, met with the group Thursday. Residents expressed concerns about traffic, overstressing the lake, harming area wetlands with water run-off and septic systems. The consequences of bringing a “mini city” to the country was also brought up, as well as objections to the having the additional boat slips on the lake.

Putting 30 more boats on Games Lake is “criminal,” said Donald Skimland. “It’s unconscionable.”

Ed Huseby, a member of the planning commission who voted against the proposal Monday, said Thursday that he questioned whether having a high-density residential area so far from town met the goals of the county’s comprehensive land use plan. He said, however, the county’s ordinances are very specific in what is and isn’t allowed.

Larry Urban, from the Colfax Township board, said the project was approved at that level because it met the necessary requirements.

Geer said the proposal meets the county’s ordinances and the planning commission is “pretty well bound” to approve projects that meet the requirements.

Perhaps, then, the county’s ordinances are too lenient, said one man, who fears this type of high-density project will pave the way for other developers to do the same thing on other lakes in the county.

Tim Pieh asked if the County Board could establish a task force to study development on area lakes and make recommendations for changes in ordinances. Similar action was taken to address community concerns about gravel mining in the county.

The group may ask the Kandiyohi County Board to impose a moratorium on lake development in the county until a study is completed.

Signatures were already being collected Thursday to request that an environmental assessment worksheet be done to slow down, or perhaps change plans for the Heritage Springs development.

Shuck said he didn’t know if he’d support a moratorium but said an EAW might be appropriate.

Mary Wierschem said people didn’t want to stop the project, but would like to see the number of houses reduced.

She said there probably wouldn’t be objections to 12 to 15 homes. But, armed with a week’s worth of research and documents, Wierschem was ready to take action to slow down or alter the proposal as it stands now.

Residents said their efforts wouldn’t be just directed to benefit Games Lake, but to help all lakes in the county by asking the County Board to take time to study the ordinances and the long-term environmental effects of high density housing around lakes.

[Norsk Fisker]

C34,

Thanks for the great update. It is frustrating to be out of the loop, we don't live in the area yet, so our information is hit and miss. I think a moratorium sounds like an excellent route to go until something longer term is in place.