Minot planning commission backs rezoning and interim permit for Earhart Hills site to allow continued clay extraction and enable stormwater project

The City of Minot Planning Commission on Feb. 4 recommended that the City Council approve a future land use map amendment, rezoning to M1 (Light Industrial), a preliminary plat subdividing the site into two lots, and an interim use permit to allow mining/extraction at 2100 Valley Street (the Earhart Hills addition).

The recommendation, which the commission approved by roll call, followed staff findings that the site has been used for clay extraction under a legal nonconforming status and that the requested entitlements are needed to plat a parcel for a Ward County Water Resource Board stormwater project. Planning staff recommended a termination date for the interim use permit of Jan. 1, 2036, and a requirement that the owner complete land reclamation or submit a development plan when mining ceases.

Commissioners and staff said the rezoning and permit would not create new extraction rights beyond the property's existing legal nonconforming use but would bring the site under the City’s Land Development Ordinance and thereby require buffer yards, landscaping and other protections for adjacent properties if future development occurs. City staff also said the Jan. 1, 2036 end date was chosen because public works projects to complete flood controls are projected to finish in February 2035, after which the city expects the temporary need for nearby emergency pits to decline.

Residents who live near the site spoke against the rezoning and interim permit during the public hearing, saying extraction and associated truck traffic and dust have affected property values and erosion has encroached on neighboring parcels. Mike Baker, a neighboring property owner, said the operation had expanded since he bought his property and described recurring washouts that he said have damaged his land and deposited sediment in the Souris River. "This gravel pit is 1.5 miles from this building right here...When we first bought this property, it was zoned residential R‑1…There was no gravel being pulled from this property," Baker said.

Several other neighbors, including Lexi Baker, described inconsistent responses from county and city staff when they reported activity and asked for enforcement. City staff said proving a violation of legal nonconforming status requires evidence sufficient for legal enforcement, and that staff resources to monitor every nonconforming use are limited.

Representatives of the property owners said extraction on the site has occurred for decades, is modest in scale and in part has been used for regional flood‑control and road projects. Bruce Langseth, who identified himself as related to the property owners, said the operation helps pay taxes for elderly owners and that the activity dates back to the 1950s and 1970s.

During deliberations the commission debated adding a fixed buffer requirement between extraction and adjacent properties. A motion to approve staff recommendations with a 600‑foot buffer was made and seconded but failed on a roll call vote. A subsequent motion to approve staff findings of fact and recommend that the City Council approve the future land use map amendment, rezoning, preliminary plat and interim use permit passed on a separate roll call.

Because the property is in the city's extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction (outside city limits but inside the city's zoning area), staff said the rezoning reflects inherited county zoning maps that in this case had assigned a residential designation when the parcel was annexed into the extraterritorial zone; changing the underlying zoning now would align the map with the site's long‑standing extractive use and allow the Ward County Water Resource Board to plat a lot for the stormwater project. Staff emphasized that denial of the application would not by itself stop the present legal nonconforming extraction activity; the operator could continue under existing nonconforming rights.

The commission's recommendation is advisory; the City Council is scheduled to consider the proposal at its meeting on Feb. 22. If the council approves the rezoning and plat, the stormwater project would be eligible to proceed, subject to any required permits and conditions.

Votes at a glance: the planning commission ultimately voted to recommend approval (roll call recorded as a majority yes); an earlier motion that would have added a 600‑foot buffer failed.