ITEM 2

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 1

MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & SIOUX FALLS PLANNING COMMISSIONS

February 22, 2021

A joint meeting of the County and City Planning Commissions was held on February 22, 2021 at

7:00 p.m. in the Commission Room of the Minnehaha County Administration Building and in

the Zoom Personal Meeting Room ID 728 439 8039.

David Heinold, County Planning Department, read aloud the instructions for Zoom attendees on

how to raise their hands to speak on an agenda item.

Commissioner Bonnie Duffy chair the County Planning Commission, and called for roll call of

County Planning Commission members present to determine quorum.

COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Bonnie Duffy, Becky Randall,

Adam Mohrhauser, Doug Ode, Mike Ralston, Ryan VanDerVliet, and Jeff Barth.

Commissioner Erik Nyberg chaired the City of Sioux Falls Planning Commission, and called for

roll call of City of Sioux Falls Planning Commission members present to determine quorum.

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Sean Ervin, Kurt Johnson, Larry

Luetke, Bradyn Neises, Aaron Norman, John Paulson, and Erik Nyberg (Janet Kittams joined the

meeting at 7:05 p.m.).

STAFF PRESENT:

Scott Anderson, David Heinold, and Kevin Hoekman - County Planning

Eric Bogue – States Attorney’s Office

Jeff Eckhoff and Jason Bieber – City Planning

The County Planning Commission was presided over by Commissioner Bonnie Duffy. The City

Planning Commission was chaired by Erik Nyberg.

Chair Duffy called the joint City of Sioux Falls and Minnehaha County Planning Commission

meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENT.

Commissioner Duffy opened the floor for public comment and nobody moved to speak or no

hands were raised in the Zoom Personal Meeting Room.

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 2

ITEM 1. Approval of Minutes – January 25, 2021

Chair Duffy called for any comments or amendments to the minutes. Nobody raised any

comments or additions.

A motion was made for the County by Commissioner Barth and seconded by Commissioner

Mohrhauser to approve the meeting minutes from January 25, 2021. A roll call vote was taken,

and the motion passed unanimously with 6 votes in favor of the motion and 0 votes against the

motion.

The same motion was made for the City by Commissioner Luetke and seconded by

Commissioner Ervin to approve the meeting minutes from January 25, 2021. A roll call vote

was taken, and the motion passed unanimously with 6 votes in favor of the motion and 0 votes

against the motion.

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 3

ITEM 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #21-17 to allow Expansion of Current Private

Airport in the NW1/4 of Section 32 and Have It Open to the Public on the

properties legally described as Tract 2A Resurrection Addition, N1/2 and N1/2

(Ex. Tracts 8 & 9, Costello Addition & Ex. Resurrection Addition) and SW1/4

and SE1/4 (Ex. Hein Addition & Ex. Klein’s Tracts 1 & 2) and Klein’s Tract No.

1, SE1/4; all in Section 32-T101N-R50W.

Petitioner: Aeroprops, LLC (Tom Monnin & Todd Broin)

Property Owner: Aeroprops, LLC

Location: Approximately 1 mile west of Sioux Falls

Staff Report: Kevin Hoekman

General Information:

Legal Description – Tract 2A Resurrection Addition, N1/2 and N1/2 (Ex. Tracts 8 & 9, Costello

Addition & Ex. Resurrection Addition) and SW1/4 and SE1/4 (Ex. Hein Addition & Ex.

Klein’s Tracts 1 & 2) and Klein’s Tract No. 1, SE1/4; all in Section 32-T101N-R50W

Present Zoning – A1 Agriculture

Existing Land Use – Private airport and agricultural land.

Parcel Size – Approximately 592 acres

Staff Report: Kevin Hoekman

Staff Analysis:

The petitioner is requesting to expand an existing private air strip to include longer runways and

to expand onto several adjacent properties. The expansion will also allow aircraft other than the

petitioner’s to land and take off from the air strip and to allow the storage and refueling of these

aircraft. The original private air strip was allowed by Conditional Use Permit #13-04. If this

expansion request is denied, the existing airstrip allowed by Conditional Use Permit #13-04 will

be allowed to continue under current conditions.

The property is located approximately 1 mile west of Sioux Falls. The property is bordered by

County Highway 148 which is the extension of 41

Street in Sioux Falls. The south property

boarder is township gravel road 268

Street which is the extension of 57

Street in Sioux Falls,

and it also serves as the border between Minnehaha County and Lincoln County.

Some residential properties exist in the area. To the northeast of the property, there are newer

Sioux Falls subdivisions which are located closer than one mile. An exurban cluster of

residential properties are located in the adjacent section to the west of the site. A few residential

properties exist to the south of the property in Lincoln County. Other than expanding city

subdivisions, the rural residential properties were largely developed prior to the construction of

the existing air strip; however, the extension of the airport will bring the landing strip and

proposed airplane hangars closer to the dwellings to the south of the site.

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 4

The petitioner has submitted a site plan and supporting narrative with the application. The site

plan indicates that the primary runway will extend from the current runway in the northwest to

the southeast. The expanded runway will approximately double its length to 4,100 feet long. This

primary runway is planned to be paved and will be long enough to support small jets. The

petitioner has informed staff that some landing lights are intended to be included to allow

landings and takeoffs during non-daylight hours. Two smaller runways are also depicted on the

plan running east and west and northeast to southwest. These smaller runways are planned to

remain as grass strips.

Part of the expansion of use includes an area which includes air hangars, taxiways, and an area

for refueling aircraft. This will further require road access and parking for pilots and vehicle

deliveries. These areas are shown on the site plan to be located south of the proposed runways.

Road access will be off of 268

Street, an unpaved township road which is the extension of 57

Street in Sioux Falls. The access will likely increase traffic along the gravel road.

Staff Note: This proposal is only for the expansion of the existing use; however, the petitioner

has made it well known that this proposal is the first phase in a long term goal to create a

“residential airpark.” A residential airpark can be described in a similar manner as a country

club, but instead of residents having a golf cart on a fairway many residents will have an airplane

hangar with taxiway connected to the runway. Other residents will live nearby and have access to

the hangars clustered on the south side of the strip. The petitioner has met with planning staff

from the City and the County regarding the goal of developing a residential airpark on the

property. Future meetings and public hearings will be required prior to any residential portion for

the residential airpark. These may include, but not limited to, transferring building eligibilities,

rezoning, preliminary subdivision plan, and final development plan.

Conditional Use Permit Criteria:

(a) The impact of the proposed use on adjacent properties shall be a major

consideration. The proposed use should be generally compatible with adjacent properties

and other properties in the district.

The immediate area around the proposed airport has not significantly changed since the private

air strip was approved in 2013. Land in the area is largely agricultural based with residential

properties to the west of the site and a few to the south and east. Much of the remaining land is

agricultural use cropland. Residential development within City of Sioux Falls has expanded

closer to the northeast corner of the airstrip and further.

Future impacts to the surrounding area will primarily surround safety zones near the ends of each

runway. Planning staff has been approached with concerns that each runway will pose height

restrictions on nearby future development among other concerns. It is possible that runways may

affect some future developments more than others. The Planning Commission may consider

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 5

options such as approval of all or portions of the proposed airport. In addition the Planning

Commission may request additional information prior to a decision.

(b) Measures shall be taken to ensure that the proposed use does not alter the general

character of the area or neighborhood.

The general character of the neighborhood is agricultural uses mixed with low density rural

residential. The proposed expansion will create a visible runway with lights, and an area for

hangars, parking, and airplane refueling. Traffic will likely increase along 268

Street. The

Planning Commissions may consider a road agreement between the petitioner and the township

in order to prevent undue ware on the gravel roads from 57

Street to the driveway. It is likely

that the existing dwellings across 268

Street will be most affected by the proposed expansion.

shall be eliminated or controlled through the use of screening, setbacks and orientation.

An airport has the potential to produce negative factors including noise, light, and traffic.

Mitigation of nuisances is difficult because of the nature of the use and the scale of the airport.

The petitioner has suggested that as his goal is to have residential dwellings along the airport.

The residents who live with their planes would not like to have nuisances any more than other

residential properties in the area.

Below is a list of a few potential nuisances with some considerations about each nuisance. The

petitioner has not submitted any plans to reduce nuisances from the property. The Planning

Commission may consider additional conditions or have the petitioner present additional plans

for potential screening of nuisances such as walls, fences, or screens. It is likely that the

neighboring public will add to concerns regarding potential nuisances, and it is possible that the

planning commission would find more information helpful prior to approval of the conditional

use permit request. The Planning Commission may defer action to a later meeting in order to

obtain further information, plans, or studies.

Noise – Airplanes by their nature create noise, and some planes create more noise than

others in a similar way that cars and motorcycles create different noises. The primary planes that

will be used at the airport will be small airplanes which create less noise than commercial planes

common to the regional airport. The primary runway is planned to be 4,100 feet long and will be

able to support small jets. The proposed airport is on a large parcel. Distances will allow some of

the potential noises do dissipate before reaching property boundaries, but there are no mitigation

techniques which will eliminate noise.

Lighting – The petitioner plans to install runway lighting to allow for expanded use of

the airport into non-daylight hours. The lighting may be considered an annoyance by neighboring

property owners and residents. The scale of the proposed airport would make it difficult to screen

all lighting from all neighbors by using conventional methods such as trees. The scale of the

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 6

property may also be beneficial by allowing long distances between many of the residences and

the runway; although distances do vary from one property to another.

Traffic – It is likely that the proposed expansion of the airport will increase street traffic

as use of the airport increases. The primary direction of increase traffic will likely come from

Street in Sioux Falls along 268

Street to the entrance of airport. If future residential

development is approved to be a part of the airpark, then traffic could increase even further. Staff

suggest that a road maintenance agreement be made between the petitioner and the township.

The agreement should cover the distance from the street entrance of the airport along 268

Street

east to 57

Street in Sioux Falls.

(d) The proposed use shall not adversely affect the public.

The proposed airport will be used for private aviation of individuals and companies. Others may

be able to utilize the airport at the discretion of the owners. The airport will not support

commercial passenger flights such as what can be found at the Sioux Falls Regional Airport.

It is likely that some height restrictions will occur at the ends of the runways. Height restrictions

are generally higher than typical low density zoning districts, but may affect future urban

development.

As stated earlier, the proposed use will likely increase traffic volumes along 268

Street. A road

agreement should be part of the approval process to avoid added cost on the township during

construction of the airport and ongoing maintenance.

No public money will be spent on the construction or maintenance of the proposed airport

expansion.

As a private airport, the operator will be in charge of security of the airport. The applicant noted

that security cameras will be used immediately, but fencing will not be part until further

residential properties are developed. The Planning Commission may consider additional plans or

conditions regarding airport security.

Health, safety, general welfare of the public and the Comprehensive Plan should be

considered as part of the request.

The proposed airport is located within a transition area of the Envision 2035 Comprehensive

Plan for Minnehaha County. The transition area is primarily used to preserve land uses near a

municipality for preparation of future annexation. The joint zoning jurisdiction between the

County and City of Sioux Falls is a way to jointly determine land uses that are compatible with

both the current conditions and for future land uses of the City of Sioux Falls. The proposed

airport, and surrounding properties are located outside of the Future Land Use Map of the Shape

Sioux Falls 2040 comprehensive plan. An airport requires minimal municipal services in terms

of water, sewer, and additional roads. These services can be obtained through rural water and

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 7

onsite wastewater treatment until city services become available. The current roads will support

the additional traffic with perhaps some additional maintenance through a road agreement.

This proposed request is to expand a private airport. A neighboring property owner raised

concern about an airport near his future development land. He pointed out that an airport is one

of the least compatible land uses to be placed next to residential land uses. The petitioner has

made it well known that his intent is to create a “residential airpark.” This concept is new to the

area and provides a sort of hybrid of uses which may someday be more compatible than a

traditional airport. A residential airpark is not guaranteed to be approved (there are additional

permits and hearings required) or to be a successful development style as there may not be

buyers into the concept. In short, if the airport is approved, it may end as only an airport and not

become the full residential airpark as the petitioner desires. County planning staff finds that the

proposed airport expansion is an expansion of an existing use and is compatible over the large

area as proposed.

The Planning Commission may consider conditions to limit the size and scope of the airport.

One consideration would be to limit the number of hangars which are allowed as part of the

airport. Limiting the hangers would be a way to prevent the industrialization or the appearance

of industrialization of the airport. Other conditions could consider runway locations, distances, or

surface conditions. Again, the Planning Commission may consider deferral of action if more

information is wanted or further planned is desired.

Recommendation:

County planning staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 21-17 with the

following conditions:

1. The conditional use permit will allow a private airport with no commercial

passenger fights allowed.

2. The operator of the airport must obtain an ongoing road maintenance agreement

with the township which maintains 268

Street. The road maintenance agreement

must cover all township maintained roads east of the street entrance located on the

south side of the airport.

3. The airport shall meet all FAA requirements.

4. The airport must obtain all required state approvals prior to construction.

Public Testimony:

Kevin Hoekman, County Planning Department, presented a brief summary of the staff report and

recommendation for the conditional use permit request.

Commission Paulson asked why a conditional use permit is required if it is only an expansion of

an existing use. Kevin Hoekman explained that the current use only allows the property owner’s

personal use and no night flying. The conditions of CUP13-04 were read by request.

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 8

Commissioner Paulson then asked about the difference between public and private airport. Kevin

Hoekman explained that the applicant may be better to ask but for the purpose of the application

the zoning ordinance lists an airport as an allowed through conditional use in the A-1

Agricultural District.

Greg Jamison, 6300 S. Grand Prairie Drive, Sioux Falls, identified himself as a representative for

the applicant. Mr. Jamison introduced the applicants, Tom Monnin and Todd Broin. He also

identified Mark Weiderech who is the airport design expert. Mr. Jamison explained that the

long-term goal for the subject property is to create a “first class residential airpark.” An analogy

of a golf course with a golf cart was made for the intent of the development. He showed some

video and photo examples of other residential airparks around the country. The goal of the

development will be to attract aviators with small personal airplanes or self built airplanes. Mr.

Jamison stated that in addition to the conditions required, the petitioner is ready to sign a pre-

annexation agreement with the City of Sioux Falls. The purpose of requesting the CUP now is to

get ahead of city growth.

David Dangel, 26723 468

Avenue, identified himself as the landowner in the northeast corner

of the section. He noted that he will have a landing strip zone on two sides of his property. Mr.

Dangel explained that the proposed development will bring in upscale properties and raise

property values. He stated that there is already much noise in the area due to dump trucks and

motorcycles. He added that this is better than the solar panels which were proposed on the

property a few years ago.

Wayne Larson, 26865 468

Avenue, began that he agreed with the previous speaker, and

reiterated the potential for upscale housing. He added that airplanes already fly all over the place.

Kristi Staton, 26793 467

Avenue, identified herself as living directly west of the site. She stated

that she is in support of the proposal and thinks it is a good idea.

Sam Goodhope stated that he owned property ½ mile north of the site. He shared that he owns an

airplane and thinks that an airpark is a good idea except where it is proposed. He explained that

residential housing is not compatible with an airport and especially with the runway protection

zones. He explained three ways to obtain runway protection zones. There will be six directions

affected by the runway protection zones and this will affect what can be built, property values,

and mortgages. He asked the Planning Commission to deny the request.

Commissioner Luetke asked the petitioner how far the protection zone reaches for the runways.

Mark Wiederrich, KLJ Engineering spoke to answer Commissioner Luetke’s question and other

topics. He explained that the runway protection zone is a trapezoid at the end of each runway

starting 200 feet from the runway, by 200 feet wide at the start, to 400 feet wide at the end which

is 1,000 feet long. All the runway protection zones for the proposed airport will be on the

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 9

petitioner’s property or right of way. Mr. Wiederrich further explained that the approach zones,

which affect height restrictions, go up from the runway protection zone at a 5% slope.

Commission Lutke asked if the height restriction will put other properties at a disadvantage. Mr.

Wiederrich explained that the most restricted height limit in the approach zone on the

surrounding property is 73 feet. Then the purple area of the provided map indicates 150 feet

height restriction above the runway elevation. He explained that there is an online application o

build something within the approach zone regardless if the airport is public or private owned.

Commissioner Nyberg asked how FAA approval happens with residential structures located

close to the runway. Mr. Wiederrich responded that structure locations are based on runway size.

In addition, as a private owned airport, the rules for structure setbacks don’t need to be followed

to the same standard as a public owned airport. He added that the petitioner will allow setbacks

only to the FAA standard of 125 feet of the center of the runway.

Commissioner Lutke asked what the difference is between public and private airports. Mr.

Wiederrich responded that a private airport is owned individually who has control over who uses

the airport. A public airport receives public funding from FAA and standards increase to

maintain public status.

Rick Dunlap, 46810 267

Street, noted that he lives to the northwest of the airport and has

accumulated about 600 acres of land to develop. He stated that FHA and HUD would not finance

a mortgage for 2500 feet from the runway. A disclosure would be required for any home sale in

the 2,500 foot area. The west side of Sioux Falls is a growth area and will continue to grow.

The proposed airport is a use issue that will affect his property. Mr. Dunlap added that if the

proposal is approved it only needs the one runway.

John Brook with equity homes stated that he has development properties that will be affected by

the airport. The planes will fly over all future homes and the airport will be in the middle of the

city. People who live at an airpark have to pay cash because government financing will not

finance it. Two of the runways fly directly over his land. Mr. Brook added that this should not

be considered as rural property as the city is coming soon. This type of development will benefit

the city 5 to 10 miles away.

Craig Staten, 26793 467

Avenue, noted that developers don’t dictate where growth happens,

but rather the Planning Commission.

Monty Miller, 1306 Honeysuckle Trail, introduced himself as a retired engineer for Sayer

Associates. He noted that Tom Monnin has worked on several other development projects. He

noted that this proposed project will be high quality and enhance the quality of life for Sioux

Falls.

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 10

Commissioner Barth raised questions regarding fire protection, drainage and security with the

airport. Greg Jamison responded to the questions beginning with drainage will follow state and

county requirements. Fire protection should be included with security and that will be addressed

later as the project is completed. Commissioner Barth questioned if Hartford Fire Department

would cover the area.

Doug Sittig, 26785, noted that the fire department is under Wayne Township which is contracted

with the City of Sioux Falls.

Tom Monnin showed an example of an airpark with residents off the ends of the runways and he

added that it is not necessary to have an airpark 10 miles away from the city. He corrected a few

comments made by others that there are about 630 residential airparks in the country, there will

be no commercial or industrial use of the airport, and that the runway will be 4,100 feet long. Mr.

Monnin noted that most people in the area know the Sioux Falls Regional Airport which is rather

large. He noted the FAA doesn’t do noise studies for general aviation airports because the

highways are generally louder than the airports. He showed an example overhead photo of an

airpark with residences at the ends of the runways.

Commissioner Ode asked what is the largest jet which could land on the runway. Mark

Wiederrich, responded that the size of jet is based on the length of the runway. In this case light

jets could land which could carry 5 to 8 passengers. Commissioner Ode further questioned how

planes control air traffic with other planes. Mr. Wiederrich responded that Sioux Falls has a

tower with air traffic control but this airport will have pilots broadcast their actions to anyone

listening to that radio signal.

Commissioner Nyberg asked if there is a need to expand the airport from one runway to three.

Mr. Wiederrich responded that the additional runways are there to allow additional times when a

small aircraft can take off and land during high winds. He showed that the main runway will be

used 97 percent of the time. The intent is to accommodate all experimental and hobby aircraft.

Rick Dunlap noted that his development will be greatly affected by a runway used for three

percent of the time. He asked the Planning Commission to consider that that grass air strip is not

considered for approval at the least. He added that younger people rely on VA and FHA loans

that will be affected by the airport. He added that airpark residents give up their rights regarding

the airport requirements.

Chairperson Duffy closed the floor from public comments.

Commissioner Barth noted that this is an interesting proposal that may need more research for

things like fire and security. He asked staff about drainage if the project is approved. Kevin

Hoekman responded first that there are changes happening in the floodplain which will affect the

property in the future. He stated that drainage can be addressed with the CUP request such as

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 11

requiring 100 year retention. Scott Anderson added that the project is within the City’s platting

jurisdiction, and the drainage will have to meet the City review for drainage at that time too.

Commissioner Lutke asked how far out notification go for an airport request. Kevin Hoekman

stated that everyone within 500 feet of the property gets notified. Commissioner Lutke raised

concern that residents further out will be affected by the use but have not received notice of the

hearing. Kevin Hoekman noted that the Planning Commission could request further notice

requirement for specific proposals. Commissioner Lutke noted that there are many questions to

ask and many unknowns about the project and how it will impact other people.

Commissioner Barth stated that it would not be unreasonable to defer action for this type of

request. He stated that that many uses are getting tougher to approve uses that may cause

nuisance within the county. He added that there may be some issues with the project such as the

affect on financing. Commissioner Barth finished that the petitioner started his project first

before other residential development started in the area.

Commissioner Johnson asked Commissioner Barth what additional information should be

needed. Commissioner Barth noted that he would like to see more information on the affect on

financing and possible issues with drainage and security. He noted that the item will likely be

appealed if it is approved or denied at this meeting.

Commissioner Ralston commented that this is not a new concept to have an airport with

residential development. Other parts of the county may be more accustom to airports in higher

density areas than here.

City Discussion:

After a motion was made by the City Planning Commission there was the following discussion:

Commissioner Lutke commented that he will be voting no as there were a lot of people in the

neighborhood who did not receive notice and that puts them at a disadvantage.

Commissioner Johnson commented that there are other funding options for loans than the FHA,

and there is likely replacement financing available. He added that there is not much residential

development which exceed 72 feet or more that would affect the height of construction.

Commissioner Ervin commented that he had concerns about notice requirements for property

owner outside of 500 feet, and will be opposed to the motion at this time.

Commissioner Paulson asked City staff about the final comment on the City comment letter.

Jason Bieber noted that the comments made were mostly regarding what will happen to the

property when future growth leads to annexation of the development. he noted that County staff

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 12

requirements are adequate for the airport. Industrial and commercial uses will be discourage

until City services are available to the property.

Actions:

Commissioner Ralston made a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit #21-17 with

recommended conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Barth. A roll call vote

was taken and the motion passed unanimously with 6 votes in favor of the motion and 0 votes

against the motion.

Commissioner Johnson made the same motion for the city planning commission to approve

Conditional Use Permit #21-17 with recommended conditions. The motion was seconded by

Commissioner Norman. A roll call vote was taken and the motion failed with 2 votes in favor of

the motion and 5 votes against the motion.

Conditional Use Permit #21-17 – Split Decision

MINNEHAHA COUNTY & CITY OF SIOUX FALLS

PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2021

MEETING MINUTES

Page | 13

Old Business

None.

New Business

None.

Adjourn

A motion was made for the County to adjourn by Commissioner Ode and seconded by

Commissioner Mohrhauser. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously with

6 votes in favor of the motion and 0 votes against the motion. The same motion was made for

the City to adjourn by Commissioner Luetke and seconded by Commissioner Johnson.

Commissioner Norman adjourned the meeting. A role call vote was taken, and the motion

passed unanimously with 7 votes in favor of the motion and 0 votes against the motion.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:38 pm.