Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance Highway Setback topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Winona County board approves variance for 100-by-60 structure with living quarters near Highway 14
Summary
The Winona County Board of Adjustment approved a variance allowing a 100-by-60 multi-use structure with a small living area near Highway 14 in St. Charles Township, granting an 80-foot setback where 30 feet is normally required and a prime-soil variance, subject to staff findings and conditions.
The Winona County Board of Adjustment on Oct. 12, 2025, approved a variance allowing Mark Leonard to build a 100-by-60 multi-use structure that includes a small living quarter on a T‑shaped parcel near State Highway 14 in St. Charles Township. The approved variance included an 80-foot setback from Highway 14 where the county ordinance requires a 30-foot setback and a required variance related to prime soils on the parcel.
County staff told the board the parcel is fully overlaid by prime soils (class 1–3) and that Minnesota Department of Transportation District 6 had been asked for comment but, "As of today, we have not received any additional feedback from MnDOT regarding this request," according to county staff member Eric. Staff also recommended conditions and provided a draft findings of fact prepared with the county attorney.
During the hearing, applicant Mark Leonard said he and his wife plan the structure for storage, a motor home and smaller farm equipment and that they intend to include a corner of the building for limited living quarters as they approach retirement. "We're getting close to retirement age ... so we're probably gonna go down to hopefully go down south for the winters," Leonard said, describing that the living quarters would be used seasonally and that the motor home would be stored inside the shed.
Staff described the property as a remnant parcel shaped by an old railroad bed and noted the proposed building would use an existing shared driveway and possibly rely on an existing well and septic provision on an adjacent relative's parcel if approved. The staff presentation included topographic contours, photos of existing nearby structures, and a note that MnDOT had acknowledged receipt of materials but had not returned comments.
Board discussion touched on traffic and septic/well service. A board member observed that if the use were commercial, traffic could be a different concern; staff answered that would trigger different review. Board member Ed moved to approve the variance subject to the staff findings and conditions; the motion was seconded by Amy and the board approved the variance with no recorded opposition.
With approval granted, the applicant will next pursue building permits and any required on-site septic or holding-tank permits; staff noted that plumbing, septic and other permitting requirements must be satisfied at the permitting stage.
Votes at a glance: Motion to approve the variance for the structure and setback (mover: Ed; second: Amy) — approved, unanimous (no opposed recorded).
