On the agenda: Center City meeting — Data Center (Feb 5)

Meeting Agenda
February 5, 2026 | 7:00 pm
Chisago County Government Center | 313 N. Main Street | Board Room 160A | Center City, MN 55012

The Planning Commission’s Wednesday, February 4, 2026 tour has
been CANCELED due to the nature of the public hearing(s).
1.

Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance

2. Roll Call and Determination of a Quorum
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. January 8, 2026 Regular Meeting
5. Receive all Materials and Submittals into Record
a. Complete meeting packet including attachments for agenda items 4a, 6a, 10b and 11a.
6. Public Hearings
a. Zachary Gabiou & Kelly Sederstrom – Property owners Zachary Gabiou & Kelly Sederstrom
are requesting an Interim Use Permit (IUP) allowing for a singular accessory structure
without the presence of a principal use structure, such as a dwelling, on a 35.18± acre parcel
in the Agricultural (AG) District. The subject site is generally located approximately onetenth of a mile east of Quinlan Avenue on the north side of 310 th Street / CSAH 37 in Shafer
Township, S30, T34, R19 (PID 08.00299.20).
7. Public Hearings – Continued Hearings
None
8. Old Business
None
9. New Business
a. Presentation from Lower St. Croix Watershed Partnership and Consultants
10. Communications and Reports
a. County Board Liaison Reports – Commissioners Greene and Dahlberg
b. Staff memo pertaining to Temporary Storage and Shipping Containers
11. Miscellaneous
a. Ordinance Issue Identification Tracking Matrix
12. Adjourn Meeting
•

The next special work session is scheduled for Thursday, February 19, 2026 at 6:00 pm.

•

The next regular meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 5, 2026 at 7:00 pm.

Chisago County Planning Commission Tour
Wednesday, February 4, 2026 at 9:00 am
Departing from Chisago County Highway Department
31325 Oasis Road, Center City, MN 55012

THIS TOUR HAS BEEN CANCELED ~ THE MAP IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY

Zachary Gabiou & Kelly Sederstrom
16xxx 310th Street / CSAH 37
Shafer Township
PID 08.00299.20
FOR REFERENCE ONLY

CHISAGO COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
January 8, 2026
The Chisago County Planning Commission met in regular session at 7:05 p.m. on Thursday, January 8, 2026 at
the Chisago County Government Center.
Staff Present: Beth Gervais, Land Services Coordinator; Kurt Schneider, Director of Environmental Services; and
Sarah Scheunemann, Office Support Specialist – Land Services.
Director Schneider called the meeting to order and led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance. A roll call of
Commission members was taken. Commission members present: Dave Whitney, Jim McCarthy, Eric Leivian,
Chip Yeager, Chris DuBose, John Sutcliffe, and Jolene Wille. Absent: None. A quorum was established. Also
present: Ex Officio County Commissioners Rick Greene and Dan Dahlberg.
Approval of Agenda – Motion by Sutcliffe to approve the agenda as presented; second by Wille. The motion
passed 7-0.
Election of Officers – Schneider called for nominations for 2026 Chair. Sutcliffe nominated Wille for Chair. Upon
multiple calls, no other nominations were made. All present voted and the nomination for Wille was affirmed
7-0.
Chair Wille called for nominations for Vice Chair for 2026. Sutcliffe nominated DuBose, and Whitney nominated
McCarthy. Upon multiple calls, no other nominations were made. A vote was taken, with Wille, Sutcliffe, DuBose,
Yeager, and Leivian voting in favor of DuBose, and Whitney and McCarthy voting in favor of McCarthy. All
members present voted, and the nomination for DuBose was affirmed 5–2.
Approval of Minutes – Motion by DuBose to approve the December 4, 2025 regular meeting minutes as
presented; second by Yeager. The motion passed 7-0.
Receive all Materials and Submittals into Record – Motion by Sutcliffe to accept all materials and
submittals into the record; second by Whitney. The motion passed 7-0. Materials distributed to the Planning
Commission in advance of the meeting for their review included the full meeting packet with staff reports
and attachments. Copies of all meeting materials were made available for the public.
Public Hearings – New Applications
Joseph Knutson – Property owner Joseph Knutson petitioned for the Rezoning of one 5.24± acre parcel from
Agriculture (AG) District to Rural Residential (RR) District. The subject property was located at 52153 Rush Lake
Trail / CSAH 1 in Nessel Township, S11, T37, R22 (PID 06.00248.00).
Gervais presented the staff report and explained that the primary purpose of the proposed rezoning was to
reduce structural setback requirements in order to allow for further development of the property. She
reviewed details of the subject site, noting that it was located approximately one-third of a mile south of
Belle Isle Drive on the east side of Rush Lake Trail / CSAH 1. She stated that the subject site was bordered by
the AG District to the north, east, and south, while all properties to the west were zoned RR District. Gervais
noted that, although the subject property met the minimum lot area and minimum width/frontage
requirements of the AG District, it was considered nonconforming or substandard within that district due to
its depth of approximately 200 feet, which was less than the required minimum depth of 300 feet. She
explained that the minimum structural setback requirements accounted for approximately 185 feet of the lot
depth, leaving no reasonable area for additional development. Gervais stated that the property was
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

01/08/2026

Page 1 of 3

currently developed with a dwelling and that, according to the application materials, the property owner
proposed to construct a 32-foot by 60-foot (1,920 square foot) storage building. She noted that the
proposed structure would comply with all structural setback requirements of the RR District.
Gervais reviewed the minimum lot area and dimensional requirements for both the AG and RR Districts. She
stated that while the property owner could pursue a Variance from the Agricultural District setback
requirements, Variances were considered a “last resort,” were not guaranteed approval, and would only
provide a short-term solution, as additional Variances would be required for any future construction. Staff
further noted that the substandard, nonconforming status of the subject site did not apply to other
surrounding properties located within the AG District.
The Technical / Plat Review Committee met with property owner Joseph Knutson on December 10, 2025.
Knutson acknowledged that he had reviewed AG and RR District regulations and the regulations pertaining
to Accessory Structures and uses prior to the meeting and was aware of the differences between the two
districts. The committee did not identify any concerns with the proposed Rezoning. The Nessel Town Board
considered the proposed Rezoning at their December 9, 2025 meeting and recommended approval with no
comments or recommended conditions. The petition was submitted on November 11, 2025 and, being that
Amendments to the County’s official controls were not subject to the State mandated 60-Day rule, there was
no required timeframe for decision.
Gervais provided a recommendation of approval with draft findings of fact for the Commission’s
consideration. In addition, she also referenced the “Pyramid of Discretion”, explaining that the County had
the greatest amount of discretion when creating local laws and the least amount of discretion when
administering those laws. In regard to the petitioned Rezoning, Gervais noted that the Planning Commission
had the broadest discretion to consider how the request moved forward. Gervais concluded by reviewing
the options available to the Planning Commission.
Chair Wille invited property owner Knutson to address the Commission. Property owner Knutson was present
but had no additional information to provide.
McCarthy noted that the submitted site plan, showing the proposed shed, was not drawn to scale and
expressed concerns with the setbacks. Knutson shared that he had worked with Environmental Services staff
member Cahill on the setbacks and was confident that the proposed structure would meet all required
setbacks.
Chair Wille opened the public hearing and sought comment. With no members of the audience wishing to
speak, motion by Yeager to close the public hearing; second by Sutcliffe. The motion passed 7-0.
Whitney expressed concern that the subject site was located across the road from the adjacent RR District
and was not directly adjacent to Rush Lake. Gervais stated that there were numerous examples throughout
the County of properties zoned RR District which were not immediately adjacent to a body of water, noting that
this was not an isolated case. Gervais further explained that, while the RR District was generally located
adjacent to water, this was not always the case. Whitney suggested that the Zoning Ordinance should identify
how far back from bodies of water the RR District was permitted to extend. Gervais responded that the Zoning
Ordinance’s stated purpose for the RR District did not specify proximity to water and that the purpose of the
district was to provide a transition area between lower-density rural areas and areas that were more urban in
nature. Gervais added that, if properties farther east in the AG District sought to Rezone to RR District in order to
develop subdivisions with smaller lots, such requests might be considered by the Planning Commission and
County Board on a case-by-case basis.
McCarthy stated that he believed the proposed Rezoning was appropriate. Yeager inquired whether the
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

01/08/2026

Page 2 of 3

proposal would be considered spot zoning. Gervais responded that she did not believe it constituted spot
zoning, as the subject site was immediately adjacent to an existing RR District.
Motion by Sutcliffe to adopt Resolution No. PC2026-0101, a resolution of the Planning Commission of Chisago
County, Minnesota, recommending approval of the Rezoning of 52153 Rush Lake Trail / CSAH 1 from Agricultural
(AG) District to Rural Residential (RR) District, with Findings of Fact as presented; second by DuBose. The
motion passed 7-0.
Public Hearings – Continued Hearings – None
Old Business
Lower St. Croix Watershed Partnership – Schneider shared that staff was in the process of arranging for Lower
St. Croix Watershed Partnership consultants to be present at the February 5, 2026 Planning Commission
Meeting to present an introduction to how they may be able to assist with improvements to the Shoreland
Management Ordinance.
New Business
Annual Review of Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment and Appeals Policy on Commission /
Board Structure, Meeting Order and General Procedure – Gervais explained that the Planning Commission
would be completing its annual review of the Policy and that any suggested changes, along with suggested
changes from the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, would be presented to the County Board for
consideration.
Motion by Whitney to recommend that the 2025 policy be established as “rules of order and operating
policies” for 2026 as-is; second by McCarthy. The motion passed 7-0.
Communications and Reports
County Board Liaison Reports – Commissioners Greene and Dahlberg shared that the County Board
approved an increase on the per diem reimbursement rate for Volunteer/Citizen Committees. Director
Schneider added that the mileage reimbursement rate had also increased. Commissioners briefly discussed
the 2026 budget and Highway Department salt purchases. Commissioner Greene also shared that he was
elected Chair of the County Board and Commissioner Montzka was elected Vice Chair.
Miscellaneous
Ordinance Issue Identification Tracking Matrix – Gervais shared there were no new updates to the matrix
since the December 4, 2025 meeting, however reiterated that staff was actively working on item no. 8
(Shoreland Management Ordinance 2024/1218-3) by arranging for Lower St. Croix Watershed District
consultants to be present at the February 5, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting.
Motion by DuBose to cancel the special work session scheduled for Thursday, January 15, 2026; second by
Yeager. The motion passed 7-0.
Adjourn Meeting – Motion by Sutcliffe to adjourn the meeting; second by Leivian. The motion passed 7-0. The
meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

____________________________________________

ATTEST:

Jolene Wille
Chair

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

_____________________________________________
Beth Gervais
Land Services Coordinator

01/08/2026

Page 3 of 3

Item No. 6a

Staff Report
TO:

Planning Commission

SUBJECT:

Interim Use Permit for an Accessory Structure Without the Presence of a

FROM:

Beth Gervais, Land Services Coordinator
Principal Use Structure

16xxx 310th Street / CSAH 37, Shafer Township

DATE:

February 5, 2026

ACTION TO CONSIDER

The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider a request for an Interim Use

Permit (IUP) allowing a singular accessory structure for personal use and storage without the
presence of a principal use structure, such as a dwelling.
SITE & APPLICATION INFORMATION
Property Owner(s):

Applicant(s):

General Location:

Zachary Gabiou & Kelly Sederstrom

Zachary Gabiou

Quinlan Avenue & 310th Street / CSAH 37

Shafer Township

Section 30, Township 34, Range 19

PID:

08.00299.20

Current Zoning:

Agricultural (AG) District

Property Area:

Adjacent Zoning:
North:

South:

East:

West:

Date Application Received:

35.18± Acres

Agricultural (AG) District

Agricultural (AG) District

Agricultural (AG) District

Agricultural (AG) District
December 31, 2025

Date Application Complete: December 31, 2025
60-Day Review Period:

Case Number:

March 1, 2026

2025-1011-LU

BACKGROUND

Property owners Zachary Gabiou & Kelly Sederstrom have applied for an
Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow a singular accessory structure (pole

barn) on their 35.18± acre property without the presence of a principal
use structure, such as a dwelling.

REVIEW PROCESS
The Technical / Plat Review Committee met with Zachary Gabiou on January 14, 2026. Gabiou

shared that he wished to further develop the subject site with a dwelling at some point in the future,
which led to a group discussion about septic systems and the need to verify soils to determine and

protect suitable future locations for primary and alternate septic system sites. Given that these

locations are currently unknown, Department staff explained that the proposed accessory structure
location could be adjusted slightly to accommodate a septic system, but would need to meet all
required structural setback requirements. The group discussed that there’s an existing driveway

access in the southwest corner of the subject site; however, Department staff encouraged Gabiou
to contact the Chisago County Highway Department about the possible need for a new Access
Permit to change the use of the existing access (i.e., field entrance to residential access).

The Shafer Town Board considered the request at its January 8, 2026 meeting and recommended
approval with no comments or recommended conditions.

The application was submitted on December 31, 2025 (after business hours on December 30, 2025)
and deemed complete on December 31, 2025. The State mandated 60-day review period is

scheduled to expire on March 1, 2026.
WRITTEN TESTIMONY

No written testimony was received upon completion of the staff report.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Zoning Ordinance Section 8.05 (Interim Use Permits), C. states that the Planning Commission shall
consider possible effects of the proposed interim use based upon, but not limited to, the general

factors listed below. Staff has provided draft findings, shown in italics below, for the Commission’s
consideration.
Factor #1

The use is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and development policies of the

Finding #1

The Chisago County Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address the

County;

proposed use as it relates to personal storage; however, the Comprehensive Plan
strongly supports agricultural uses, including hobby farming. Additionally, the

Comprehensive Plan has identified specific goals for the orderly and efficient growth

of residential, commercial, and industrial development while preserving the

County’s rural character, as well as promoting the compatibility of present and

future land uses. Upon review of the request, the County finds that the proposed use

demonstrates orderly and efficient growth of residential land while preserving the
County’s rural character, and that it’s compatible in appearance and nature with
present and future allowable land uses.
Factor #2

The use shall not create an excessive demand on existing parks, schools, streets and
other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area;

3

Finding #2

Being that the proposed use is intended solely for personal storage and private

hobby farming purposes, the County finds that the proposed use will not create any
demand on existing parks, schools, streets, or other public facilities or utilities which
serve the subject site. Further, the Chisago County Highway Department, serving as

Road Authority, did not express any concern regarding impact to 310th Street / CSAH
37 in conjunction with the January 14, 2026 Technical / Plat Review Committee
meeting.

Factor #3

Finding #3

The use shall be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from
adjacent development or land so that existing development does not suffer undue

negative impact and there will be no significant deterrence to future development;

Given the size of the subject site (35.18± acres), the low-density residential nature of

the surrounding area, compatibility with existing structures in the immediate vicinity,

and the fact that the structure is proposed to meet and exceed all required

structural setbacks of the Agricultural (AG) District, the County finds that the

proposed use will neither cause undue negative impact to adjacent development or
land nor deter future development.
Factor #4

The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect

Finding #4

The Chisago County Zoning Ordinance does not identify any aesthetic requirements

upon adjacent properties;

for accessory structures within the Agricultural (AG) District; therefore, the County
finds that there is no evidence to suggest that the structure will have an
appearance which will cause adverse effects upon adjacent properties.

Factor #5

The use, in the opinion of the County, is reasonably related to the overall land use

goals of the County and to the existing land use; and, is consistent with the purposes
of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the

Finding #5

applicant intends to locate the proposed use;

The Chisago County Zoning Ordinance allows a singular accessory structure without
the presence of a principal use structure in the Agricultural (AG) District with

issuance of an Interim Use Permit; therefore, the County finds that the proposed use
is in compliance with land use goals and regulations established by the County’s
official land use controls.
Factor #6

Finding #6

The use shall not cause traffic hazard or congestion; and

The application materials indicate that the proposed accessory structure is

intended for personal storage and private hobby farming purposes. Based on this

information, the County finds that neither the accessory structure nor its intended

uses will create excessive traffic or cause traffic hazard or congestion. Further, the

Chisago County Highway Department, serving as Road Authority, did not express
any concern regarding impact to 310th Street / CSAH 37 in conjunction with the
January 14, 2026 Technical / Plat Review Committee meeting.

4

Factor #7

Existing nearby properties shall not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare

Finding #7

The County finds that the proposed fully-enclosed accessory structure will not

or general unsightliness.

adversely impact nearby properties by intrusion of noise, glare or general

unsightliness based on proposed construction materials which include wood posts,
metal siding, and metal roof, and proposed structural setbacks which meet and

exceed all required structural setbacks of the Agricultural (AG) District. Further, given
that the structure is intended for storage of personal and hobby farming items, the

County finds that the structure will in fact be more aesthetically pleasing to nearby
properties than if these items were not stored within an enclosed structure.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Staff believes that the proposed Interim Use Permit (IUP) complies with and is consistent with the
intent of the County’s Zoning Ordinance. Barring any new or unknown evidence of compliance
discovered after the completion of this report or during the course of the public hearing, staff

recommends approval of the IUP with draft Findings of Fact and conditions and has prepared a
resolution for the Commission’s consideration.
Recommended Conditions:
1.

This approval allows for a singular accessory structure up to 4,320-sf in size for personal use

and storage without the presence of a principal use structure, subject to the conditions below.
The accessory structure shall be constructed in general conformance with the application

materials dated received December 31, 2025, in terms of size and location, and kept on file with
the Chisago County Department of Environmental Services. Any significant deviation from the
approved request, as determined by the Department of Environmental Services, shall require

further consideration by the Planning Commission and determination by the County Board of
Commissioners.
2.

Prior to submitting application for building permit, the permit holder shall be responsible for

contacting the Chisago County Highway Department to verify if the current access is sufficient
or if a new Access Permit will be required for change of use.

3.

No sanitary facilities shall be allowed within the accessory structure until and unless the
property is further developed with a principal use structure such as a dwelling.

4. The structure shall not be used for overnight accommodations or include residential living
quarters, until and unless the structure complies with all building and architectural

requirements of the Chisago County Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances /

codes. Further, the structure shall not be used for commercial purposes, until and unless the

commercial use is allowed by or pursuant to the Chisago County Zoning Ordinance and the
structure complies with all requirements of applicable ordinances / codes.

5. Any change to the approved accessory structure involving enlargements, intensification or

expansion of use, or change not specifically permitted by this Interim Use Permit, shall require
an Amendment to this Interim Use Permit.

6. Annual certification of the Interim Use Permit is required. The permit holder shall notify the
County annually that the activity permitted by the Interim Use Permit is ongoing and the

5

activities being conducted continue to adhere to the conditions of approval. Failure to maintain
certification may be a basis to revoke the Interim Use Permit. The property shall be made open
and available for regular inspection at any time during reasonable hours by the Chisago

County Department of Environmental Services and/or any duly authorized law enforcement
agency.
7.

This Interim Use Permit shall expire at such time that the current or future property owner(s)
construct(s) a principal use structure.

8. Violations of the conditions contained herein shall be cause for the revocation of the Interim
Use Permit upon action of the County Board.

OPTIONS
1.
2.

Recommend that the County Board approve the Interim Use Permit with Findings of Fact and

conditions presented or amended.

Should the Planning Commission determine that the proposed Interim Use Permit does not

comply with and/or is not consistent with the intent of County’s Zoning Ordinance upon

completion of the public hearing and/or upon discovery of any new or unknown evidence,

recommend that the County Board deny the Interim Use Permit based on factors deemed

appropriate. (Note: If the Commission considers this option, specific factor(s) for denial should

be included in the motion.)
3.

Continue the public hearing to a specific date in order to receive additional public testimony

prior to making a recommendation on the proposed CUP. If continuing the public hearing, the
Commission should also include in its motion a 60-day extension of the review period given
that the initial 60-day review period will expire prior to completion of all requisite meetings.

4. Table the request to allow for submission of additional supporting documentation and/or

further review and consideration. If tabling the request, the Commission should also include in
its motion a 60-day extension of the review period given that the initial 60-day review period
will expire prior to completion of all requisite meetings.

ACTION REQUESTED

Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC2026-0201, a resolution recommending approval of an Interim

Use Permit allowing a singular accessory structure without the presence of a principal use structure
on property identified as PID 08.00299.20 in Shafer Township, with Findings of Fact and conditions

as presented or amended.
ATTACHMENTS
1.

2.

3.

Application summary

Written narrative
Site plan

4. Township Presentation Form

5. Aerial photo (1) – subject site

6. Aerial photo (2) – vicinity map

7.

Draft Resolution No. PC2026-0201

6

1. Project Description
The applicant is requesting approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for Parcel No.
08.00299.20 to allow for the construction and use of a pole barn in support of
establishing a hobby farm. The proposed pole barn will have dimensions of 80 feet by
54 feet, resulting in an approximate footprint of 4,320 square feet.
The structure is intended to support hobby farming activities and related accessory
uses. While the primary use will be associated with hobby farming, the Interim Use
Permit is requested to allow flexibility for additional accessory uses commonly
associated with rural properties, such as storage of equipment, vehicles, and
recreational items, including a boat, as allowed by permit conditions.
The applicant is seeking an IUP following a recommendation from planning staff, who
advised that an Interim Use Permit would be appropriate to ensure clarity of allowed
uses and compliance with zoning and tax regulations.

2. Property and Zoning Information
The subject property is identified as Parcel 08.00299.20 and is currently under private
ownership. The property is intended to be developed incrementally as a hobby farm.
Existing and surrounding land uses are consistent with rural and low -intensity accessory
structures.
Previously prepared site plans have been submitted, showing the proposed location
of the pole barn in compliance with applicable setbacks, access, and lot requirements.
Copies of the property deeds will be submitted once located.

3. Description of the Pole Barn
The proposed pole barn will measure 80 feet by 54 feet and will be constructed using
standard pole-building methods, including wood posts, metal siding, and a metal
roof. The structure will be built by Custom Pole Buildings LLC and will comply with all
applicable building codes, zoning ordinances, and inspection requirements.
The pole barn will not be used for residential occupancy.

4. Intended Use and Operations

The primary use of the pole barn will be to support hobby farming activities, including
storage of farming equipment, tools, supplies, and materials associated with maintaining
the property. In addition, the structure may be used for general accessory storage,
such as vehicles or recreational equipment, in a manner consistent with permit
conditions.

5. Parking, Traffic, and Access
The proposed pole barn will not generate increased traffic beyond typical rural property
use. Existing access points will be used, and all parking will occur on -site. No on-street
parking impacts are anticipated.
Construction traffic will be temporary and limited to the duration of the building process.

6. Compatibility With Surrounding Properties
The proposed pole barn is compatible with surrounding land uses and reflects
structures commonly found in rural and hobby farm settings. The size, placement, and
design of the building will minimize visual and operational impacts on neighboring
properties.

7. Public Health, Safety, and Welfare
The pole barn will be constructed and maintained in compliance with all
applicable building, fire, and safety codes. Emergency access to the property will be
maintained at all times.

8. Environmental Considerations
Construction of the pole barn will be limited to the approved footprint shown on the
submitted site plan. Drainage and stormwater impacts will be managed on -site.

9. Interim Nature and Compliance
The applicant understands that approval is requested under an Interim Use Permit and
agrees to comply with all conditions imposed by the governing body. The IUP will

provide regulatory clarity and flexibility for accessory uses while maintaining compliance
with zoning and tax requirements.

10. Comprehensive Plan Consistency
The proposed interim use aligns with the Comprehensive Plan by supporting lowintensity rural development, hobby farming, and responsible use of private property
while preserving compatibility with surrounding land uses.

RESOLUTION NO. PC2026-0201

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHISAGO COUNTY, MINNESOTA,

RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN INTERIM USE PERMIT ALLOWING A SINGULAR ACCESSORY

STRUCTURE WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF A PRINCIPAL USE STRUCTURE ON PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS
PID 08.00299.20 IN SHAFER TOWNSHIP

WHEREAS, property owners Zachary Gabiou & Kelly Sederstrom submitted an application dated

received and considered complete December 31, 2025 for an Interim Use Permit allowing a singular
accessory structure without the presence of a principal use structure on property located at 16xxx
310th Street / CSAH 37 in Shafer Township; and

WHEREAS, the subject site is located in the Agricultural (AG) District; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is 35.18± acres in size and legally described as:
PID 08.00299.20

WHEREAS, notice was provided and on February 5, 2026 the Planning Commission conducted a

public hearing regarding this application, at which it heard from the Land Services Coordinator, the
property owner(s), and invited members of the public to comment; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered several factors for granting Interim Use Permits
and made the following findings per Zoning Ordinance Section 8.05, C.:
Factor #1

The use is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and development policies of the

Finding #1

The Chisago County Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address the

County;

proposed use as it relates to personal storage; however, the Comprehensive Plan
strongly supports agricultural uses, including hobby farming. Additionally, the

Comprehensive Plan has identified specific goals for the orderly and efficient growth
of residential, commercial, and industrial development while preserving the

Page 1 of 4

County’s rural character, as well as promoting the compatibility of present and

future land uses. Upon review of the request, the County finds that the proposed use
demonstrates orderly and efficient growth of residential land while preserving the
County’s rural character, and that it’s compatible in appearance and nature with

present and future allowable land uses.
Factor #2

The use shall not create an excessive demand on existing parks, schools, streets and

Finding #2

Being that the proposed use is intended solely for personal storage and private

other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area;

hobby farming purposes, the County finds that the proposed use will not create any
demand on existing parks, schools, streets, or other public facilities or utilities which
serve the subject site. Further, the Chisago County Highway Department, serving as

Road Authority, did not express any concern regarding impact to 310th Street / CSAH
37 in conjunction with the January 14, 2026 Technical / Plat Review Committee
meeting.
Factor #3

Finding #3

The use shall be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from
adjacent development or land so that existing development does not suffer undue

negative impact and there will be no significant deterrence to future development;

Given the size of the subject site (35.18± acres), the low-density residential nature of

the surrounding area, compatibility with existing structures in the immediate vicinity,
and the fact that the structure is proposed to meet and exceed all required

structural setbacks of the Agricultural (AG) District, the County finds that the

proposed use will neither cause undue negative impact to adjacent development or
land nor deter future development.
Factor #4

The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect

Finding #4

The Chisago County Zoning Ordinance does not identify any aesthetic requirements

upon adjacent properties;

for accessory structures within the Agricultural (AG) District; therefore, the County
finds that there is no evidence to suggest that the structure will have an
appearance which will cause adverse effects upon adjacent properties.

Factor #5

The use, in the opinion of the County, is reasonably related to the overall land use

goals of the County and to the existing land use; and, is consistent with the purposes
of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the

Finding #5

applicant intends to locate the proposed use;

The Chisago County Zoning Ordinance allows a singular accessory structure without
the presence of a principal use structure in the Agricultural (AG) District with

issuance of an Interim Use Permit; therefore, the County finds that the proposed use
is in compliance with land use goals and regulations established by the County’s
official land use controls.
Factor #6

The use shall not cause traffic hazard or congestion; and

Page 2 of 4

Finding #6

The application materials indicate that the proposed accessory structure is

intended for personal storage and private hobby farming purposes. Based on this
information, the County finds that neither the accessory structure nor its intended

uses will create excessive traffic or cause traffic hazard or congestion. Further, the
Chisago County Highway Department, serving as Road Authority, did not express
any concern regarding impact to 310th Street / CSAH 37 in conjunction with the

January 14, 2026 Technical / Plat Review Committee meeting.
Factor #7

Existing nearby properties shall not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare

Finding #7

The County finds that the proposed fully-enclosed accessory structure will not

or general unsightliness.

adversely impact nearby properties by intrusion of noise, glare or general

unsightliness based on proposed construction materials which include wood posts,
metal siding, and metal roof, and proposed structural setbacks which meet and

exceed all required structural setbacks of the Agricultural (AG) District. Further, given
that the structure is intended for storage of personal and hobby farming items, the

County finds that the structure will in fact be more aesthetically pleasing to nearby
properties than if these items were not stored within an enclosed structure.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of Chisago County, Minnesota
hereby recommends approval of the request for Interim Use Permit, subject to the following

conditions:
1.

This approval allows for a singular accessory structure up to 4,320-sf in size for personal use

and storage without the presence of a principal use structure, subject to the conditions below.
The accessory structure shall be constructed in general conformance with the application

materials dated received December 31, 2025, in terms of size and location, and kept on file with
the Chisago County Department of Environmental Services. Any significant deviation from the
approved request, as determined by the Department of Environmental Services, shall require

further consideration by the Planning Commission and determination by the County Board of
Commissioners.
2.

Prior to submitting application for building permit, the permit holder shall be responsible for

contacting the Chisago County Highway Department to verify if the current access is sufficient
or if a new Access Permit will be required for change of use.

3.

No sanitary facilities shall be allowed within the accessory structure until and unless the
property is further developed with a principal use structure such as a dwelling.

4. The structure shall not be used for overnight accommodations or include residential living
quarters, until and unless the structure complies with all building and architectural

requirements of the Chisago County Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances /

codes. Further, the structure shall not be used for commercial purposes, until and unless the
commercial use is allowed by or pursuant to the Chisago County Zoning Ordinance and the
structure complies with all requirements of applicable ordinances / codes.

5. Any change to the approved accessory structure involving enlargements, intensification or
Page 3 of 4

expansion of use, or change not specifically permitted by this Interim Use Permit, shall require
an Amendment to this Interim Use Permit.

6. Annual certification of the Interim Use Permit is required. The permit holder shall notify the
County annually that the activity permitted by the Interim Use Permit is ongoing and the

activities being conducted continue to adhere to the conditions of approval. Failure to maintain
certification may be a basis to revoke the Interim Use Permit. The property shall be made open
and available for regular inspection at any time during reasonable hours by the Chisago

County Department of Environmental Services and/or any duly authorized law enforcement
agency.
7.

This Interim Use Permit shall expire at such time that the current or future property owner(s)
construct(s) a principal use structure.

8. Violations of the conditions contained herein shall be cause for the revocation of the Interim
Use Permit upon action of the County Board.

Adopted by the Planning Commission of Chisago County, Minnesota,
this 5th day of February, 2026.

Chris DuBose

Eric Leivian

Jim McCarthy

John Sutcliffe

____________
____________
____________
____________

____________________________________
Jolene Wille
Chair

Dave Whitney

____________

Chip Yeager

____________

Jolene Wille

____________

ATTEST: ___________________________________
Beth Gervais

Land Services Coordinator

Page 4 of 4

Item No. 10b

Kurt Schneider

Environmental Services Director
Office (651) 213-8374

[email protected]

Memo
To:

Planning Commission Members

From: Kurt Schneider, Environmental Services Director
Beth Gervais, Land Services Coordinator

Date: February 5, 2026
RE:

Zoning Ordinance Section 4.19 “Storage Containers, Temporary or Shipping Containers,
Temporary”

Background:

Prior to the wholesale update of the Chisago County Zoning Ordinance on December 18, 2024, a

mechanism to permit the placement and use of storage containers/shipping containers on private

AG/Residential property did not exist. Their placement and use were not legal. The now adopted Zoning

Ordinance Section 4.19 outlines several parameters for the treatment and allowance of temporary
storage/shipping containers and temporary storage/semi-trailer/commercial on-road trailers.

In abbreviated fashion, here are the current ordinance outlined criteria concerning storage/shipping
containers:
•

An application process is established for the placement of temporary storage/shipping containers
and storage/semi-trailer/commercial on-road trailers.

•

An administrative permit opportunity now exists for the temporary (maximum of 12-month term)

placement of a single (1) temporary storage/shipping container.
•

Requests for multiple temporary storage/shipping containers require an Interim Use Permit.

•

Requests for placement of storage/shipping containers for more than one (1) year in duration

require an Interim Use Permit.
•

The use and placement of a temporary storage/shipping container accessory to a permitted

construction project is allowed without permit. The container must be removed within one (1) month
of receiving final construction project inspections or certificate of occupancy. (Construction
Exemption)
•

The use and placement of a temporary storage/shipping container for loading/unloading for a

period of seven (7) days is allowed without a permit. (Moving Exemption)
•

Temporary storage containers cannot be serviced with permanent utilities or stacked.

CHISAGO COUNTY 313 N. MAIN ST., #240, CENTER CITY, MN 55012

chisagocountymn.gov

•

Temporary storage containers not affiliated with an active construction project are permitted in
non-residential Districts and the UFR District only.

•

Temporary storage/shipping containers can be converted into permanent structures if they adhere

to Section 4.07 Building Requirements and receive a Conditional Use Permit.

The County Board has expressed interest and provided consensus direction for the Planning

Commission to monitor the effectiveness and review the storage/shipping container provisions of the

Zoning Ordinance over the course of the coming year and to consider adjusting appropriate allowances
and approval processes. (Ref. Item 9 – Chisago County Ordinances: Issues Identification Tracking

Matrix)

Monitoring Metrics:

Summary of 2025/26 year to date storage/shipping container permits:
Administrative Permit Applications / Permits Issued:

3 (2 withdrawn) / 1

IUP Applications / Permits Issued:

1 (deemed incomplete) / 0

CUP Applications / Permits:

1/1

Enforcement / Violation Proceedings:

7 complaints received

Thought Provoking Ordinance Adjustment Considerations/Brainstorm Ideas:

There has been minimal temporary storage/shipping container inquiry and permitting activity to date,
however, several thought-provoking ideas or adjustments could be considered by the Commission,
including but not limited to:
1.

Expand the number of temporary storage/shipping containers allowed by administrative permit on
all properties.

2.

Expand the number of temporary storage/shipping containers allowed by administrative permit on
all properties based on sliding acreage scale: (the table below is conceptual only)
Property Size

Maximum # of

Maximum # of

Permitted

Storage

Administratively
Storage

5 acres or less
5.1 to 10

10.1 to 20

20.1 to 30
30+
3.

Containers

IUP Permitted
Containers

1

2

4

6

2

6
8

4

8

10

Exempt storage/shipping containers that are 200 sq. ft. or smaller. This same square footage is used
by the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code to exempt the need for building permits.

CHISAGO COUNT Y 313 N. MAIN ST., #240, CENTER CIT Y, MN 55012

chisagocountymn.gov

4. Remove all Interim Use Permit criteria for the use of storage/shipping containers and allow without
public hearing oversight.
5. Expand/adjust the seven (7) day loading/unloading “moving exemption” to a broader timeline.
6. Expand/adjust the “construction exemption” to a broader construction completion timeline.
7.

“Super Setback” Exemption. Exempt the IUP permitting process for the placement of
storage/shipping containers on a subject property if a “super setback” (500+ ft or 1,000+ ft) from
adjoining property and right-of-way boundaries is provided.

8. “Screening Affidavit” Exemption. Institute an IUP exemption administrative permitting process for the
placement of storage/shipping containers if written affidavits of permission for a screening &
placement plan are provided from all adjoining property owners.
9. “Agricultural Use” Exemption. Outline an Agricultural Use exemption by exempting specific AG
property use of storage containers from IUP or CUP permitting on qualifying AG lands for qualifying
AG use. Allow pursuant to current Administrative Site Permit for qualifying AG structures. Ref. MN
Statute 326B.103 Subd. 3 and State Building Code 326B.121 Subdivision 1 (c).
10. Other...
11. Other...
12. Other...
Attachment:
1.

Zoning Ordinance Section 4.19

CHISAGO COUNT Y 313 N. MAIN ST., #240, CENTER CIT Y, MN 55012

chisagocountymn.gov

Chisago County
Zoning Ordinance
Section 4.19 Storage Containers, Temporary or Shipping Containers, Temporary

4.19

Storage Containers, Temporary or Shipping Containers, Temporary
Applications for temporary storage containers and temporary storage trailers will be
submitted to the Zoning Administrator. Administrative Permits for temporary storage
containers may be issued by the Zoning Administrator for personal use only. Denial of a
request may be appealed in accordance with Section 8.08.
A.

Temporary Storage Containers
1.

Placement of a singular temporary storage container shall require the
issuance of an Administrative Permit by the Zoning Administrator. The term of
the temporary placement shall not exceed one (1) year. The fee for said
permit shall be as prescribed in the County fee schedule.

2.

Temporary storage containers accessory to a construction or remodeling
project are permitted in any zoning district. Containers are permitted on-site
for a period not to exceed the duration of the construction or remodeling
project and must be removed within one (1) month of receiving approval of
final inspections and/or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Such
temporary storage containers present for loading or unloading do not require
a temporary use permit.

3.

Temporary storage containers are permitted in any zoning district when used
for loading or unloading. Temporary storage containers are permitted on site
for this purpose for a period not to exceed seven (7) days. Such temporary
storage containers present for loading or unloading do not require a
temporary use permit.

4.

Temporary storage containers shall not be used for permanent storage,
unless the container adheres to the regulations detailed in Section 4.07.
Temporary storage containers shall not be permanently attached to the
ground, serviced with permanent utilities or stacked on the site.

5.

Request for multiple temporary storage containers and/or placement of
temporary storage containers exceeding one (1) year in duration shall require
the issuance of an Interim Use Permit. Interim Use Permits shall be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis and may require conditions and requirements as
deemed appropriate such as to location, number, appearance, screening, or
other criteria.

6.

Temporary storage containers, not associated with an active construction

project as identified in Number 2 above, are permitted in non-residential
districts and the UFR District only, must be located within the rear yard, and
must be screened from the public right-of-way or navigable water ways and
adjoining properties.
B.

Temporary Storage Trailers, Semi-Trailers, or Commercial On-Road Trailers
1.

Placement of a temporary storage trailer shall require the issuance of a
temporary permit by the Zoning Administrator. The term of the temporary
placement shall not exceed ninety (90) days. The fee for said permit shall be
as prescribed in the adopted County fee schedule.

2.

Temporary storage trailers accessory to a construction or remodeling project
are permitted in any zoning district. Trailers are permitted on site for a period
not to exceed the duration of the construction or remodeling project and
must be removed within one (1) month of receiving approval of final
inspections and/or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

3.

Temporary storage trailers are permitted in any zoning district when used for
loading or unloading. Temporary storage trailers are permitted on site for this
purpose for a period not to exceed seven (7) days. Such temporary storage
trailers present for loading or unloading do not require a temporary use
permit.

4.

Requests for temporary storage trailers exceeding ninety (90) days in
duration shall require the issuance of an administrative temporary permit.
Administrative temporary permits shall be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis and may exempt and/or require screening, parking, maintenance, and
appearance conditions and requirements as deemed appropriate.

5.

Requests for temporary storage trailers exceeding one (1) year shall require
the issuance of an Interim Use Permit. Interim Use Permits shall be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis and may exempt and/or require screening, parking,
maintenance, and appearance conditions and requirements as deemed
appropriate.

6.

Temporary storage trailers less than forty-eight (48) feet in length are
permitted in all districts and must be located upon an improved aggregate
parking surface. Temporary storage trailers more than forty-eight (48) feet in
length are allowed in all non-residential districts.

7.

If present for longer than seven (7) days, the temporary storage trailer must
be screened from the public right-of-way or navigable waterways and
adjoining properties.

CHISAGO COUNTY ORDINANCES: ISSUE IDENTIFICATION TRACKING MATRIX
February 5, 2026
No.

ISSUE TOPIC / SUMMARY

1

Rural Retail Tourism Wedding/Gathering Venues

2

Major Home Occupation Horse / Equine

Zoning Map Amendment - RR
3
Districts Consolidation &
Renaming of UR District

DATE
IDENTIFIED

SECTION
LOCATION(s)

PAGE(s)

ISSUE NARRATIVE / DETAIL

ALTERNATIVES / SOLUTIONS

12/18/24

5.06
4.17

119
104

Improve code treatement of Rural Retail Tourism busineses - wedding/gathering venues.
Review recent wedding venue proposal on 260th for issues discussion.

Expand and detail wedding/gathering venue perfomrance standards
within the code

118
66
9

Proposed by Commissioner Whitney. Horse-Equine Businesses are better suited as
Permitted Agricultural Use rather than a Major Home Occupation. An equine facility
whether it’s amateur or professional and whether its focus is on training, breeding,
showing, sales or boarding of equine animals is an agricultural business which should
meet agricultural standards NOT Major Home Occupation standards.

01/03/25

01/07/25

5.06 B & C
4.04
3

5.02

116

As a part of the recent comprehensive update of the Chisago County Zoning Ordinance,
the Rural Residential Zoning Districts (RRI and RRII) were consolidated into one single
Amend the zoning map to reflect consolidated RR District and change
Rural Residential (RR) District; and "Urban Fringe" residential terminology is used in place the map legend to reflect Urban Residential as Urban Fringe Residential.
of "Urban Residential".

4

Zoning Map Amendment
Work Plan

02/06/25

5.02

116

Proposed by Commissioner McCarthy on 02/06/25 during public hearing to consider
adoption of Official Zoning Map with Amendments (matrix item no. 3). Added to
02/20/25 work session agenda but held over due to McCarthy's absence. Added to
04/09/25 meeting agenda but held over at McCarthy's request. Added to 05/01/25
meeting agenda, with consensus reached by Planning Commission on same date.

5

SSTS Ordinance 10-1

03/19/25

Full Ordinance

All

Comprehensive "housekeeping" review and update of 2010 septic system ordinance

6

Short-Term Rental Licensing
Ordinance 060320-1

06/18/25

Full Ordinance

7

Data Centers

10/02/25

NA

8

9

Water-Related Regulations
within Zoning Ordinance

Temporary Storage and
Shipping Containers

11/06/25

11/12/25

Ref. Commissioner Whitney research/reccomendation papers dated
01/02/25, 02/16/25, and 02/24/25

COMMISSION / BOARD
CONSENSUS & DIRECTION

ACTION PRIORITY
High / Annual Update / Other

STATUS

High

Completed 08/20/25 Ordinance Amendment
Enacted as Ord. No.
2025/0820-2

Commisison Direction
Requested; Commission
Consensus and Direction on
04/03/25 to Have Staff Further PC 04/03/25
Develop Verbiage and
Definitions; County Board
direction on 05/07/25 to proceed

High

Completed 08/20/25 Ordinance Amendment
Enacted as Ord. No.
2025/0820-1

Board Directed Public Hearing

CB 01/07/25

High

Completed 02/19/25

County Board Directed

Commission Consensus
Requested for County Board
Endorsement and Direction

PC 05/01/25

Other - Ongoing Effort

In Progress - Planning
Commission and Staff
Discussing Strategy(ies)

Update of the 2010 Chisago County SSTS Ordinance in close consult
with MPCA staff and related rule and policy adjustments of the past 15
years.

Board Direction to Proceed

CB 03/19/25

Other

In Progress - Staff Review

All

Update the Short-Term Rental Licensing Ordinance 060320-1 based on
recommendations provided by sub-committee

Board Direction to Proceed

NA

Proposed by Commissioner McCarthy on 10/02/25 to consider potential sizes and
impacts of data centers.

Develop Zoning Ordinance regulations specific to data centers.

Commission Direction Requested

Consider suggested ordinance amendment(s) based on feedback from
the Lower St. Croix Watershed Partnership and its consultant.

Preliminary discussion at
11/06/25 Planning Commission
meeting

3
7.13-7.18

4.19

County Board has directed the Planning Commission to monitor effectiveness and review
109-112
Section 4.19 over the course of the next year to consider adjusting appropriate
allowances and approval processes for varied uses of storage and shipping containers.

CB 12/18/24

Coordination and engagement with local units of government (LGUs)
with the intent of opening lines of communication, building awareness,
and providing opportunity for the LGUs to be more involved.

Based on concerns expressed during County Board's 05/21/25 Citizen's Forum and
subsequent disucssion at County Board's 06/18/25 meeting, County Board has expressed
interest in organizing a sub-committee of County Board members and staff to review
ordinance and determine if an Amendment is warranted.

The Lower St. Croix Watershed Partnership (LSCWP) extended an offer to review the
County's water-related regulations / ordinances to identify possible updates which
9-58
provide clear, effective, and consistent standards with the intent of protecting the
179-182
County's lakes, rivers, and wetlands. The LSCWP has engaged a counsultant to carry out
the review.

CONSENSUS
DATE

Potential development of updated regulations pertaining to the
temporary use of storage and shipping containers.

CB 06/18/25

Other

Other

Other

Completed 07/17/25 Subcomittee met on
07/17/25 and determined
Amendment was not
warranted. Instead,
Department will
coordinate with CCSO for
increased awareness of
licensed properties.
Staff to present topic to
County Board for
consideration and
direction
In Progress - Consultants
providing first
presentation to Planning
Commission on 02/05/26

Staff presented memo to
Board Direction to Proceed with
Planning Commission on
Other - Over the Course of the Next
Monitor & Review of Section
CB 11/12/25
02/05/26 providing
Year
4.19
framework and ideas for
future discussion