Winona County board grants variance to allow house on parcel mapped as prime soils in Saint Charles

The Winona County Board of Adjustment voted unanimously to grant a variance that will allow construction of a single-family dwelling on a roughly 2-acre wooded parcel in Section 26 near Saint Charles, the board said during a public hearing.

The variance (docket number BOAO7172501) was requested by property owners Lee and Kathy Gribner with an identified prospective buyer, Colton Pearson, to allow a dwelling on land mapped as class 1–3 soils. County planning staff said the parcel previously received a variance in 1994 but new soil standards adopted in February 2011 created the current need for a fresh variance.

Lou, planning department staff, presented the staff report and slides to the board, describing the property as one of three roughly 2-acre lots created in the mid-1970s and largely wooded. Lou said aerial photos show the woodlot has been forested since at least 1936, the parcel is relatively flat (1–6 percent slopes), and the nearest sinkhole area is located northeast of the site. He told the board the highway department raised no substantive access concerns but noted a driveway access permit will be required.

Kathy Gribner, who identified herself as the property owner, told the board she and her husband bought the parcel in 1994 and that neighboring Schultz family members live adjacent to the parcel. She said the area where the prospective buyer plans to site a house “is, like, a perfect area for not interrupting the trees,” and that the buyer intends to preserve mature trees where possible.

Chad Garteski, the real estate agent representing the property and speaking on behalf of Colton Pearson, told the board the parcel’s original variance application in 1994 had been filed by a member of the Schultz family and noted the land “is not farmland” based on aerial and site photos. John Pearson, Colton’s father, said Colton’s intent is to “leave every tree that he can.”

Board members asked for clarifications about setbacks and prior approvals. Planning staff stated the applicable setbacks described in the record are 20 feet from the property line (side), 50 feet from the rear, and 65 feet from the road centerline; staff said the proposed house location would sit slightly more than the minimum side setback. Staff also confirmed that variances granted in 1994 “run with the land” and remain attached to the deed.

After closing the public hearing, Board member Ed moved to grant the petition “with the findings of fact prepared by staff” and the conditions attached to the petition; Board member Kelsey seconded the motion. The board recorded a unanimous voice vote in favor; the chair stated “none opposed,” and the board announced the variances were granted.

The board’s decision includes two conditions attached to the granted variance; the staff packet referenced those conditions but the board record presented at the hearing did not enumerate them in the discussion. Planning staff read aloud the board’s final appeal information, noting that any aggrieved person, department, board or commission may appeal the decision to the district court within 30 days on questions of law and fact.

The board’s action allows the prospective buyer to pursue required building permits and a driveway access permit subject to the variance conditions and other applicable regulations. No specific timetable for construction was recorded at the hearing.

Votes at a glance Motion: Grant variance BOAO7172501, adopt staff findings of fact and apply conditions attached to the petition. Mover: Ed (Board member) Second: Kelsey (Board member) Vote: Ed — yes; Kelsey — yes; Lynn — yes; Amy — yes Outcome: approved (unanimous)