Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wabasha County denies rezoning request citing spot-zoning and agricultural preservation
Summary
After a public hearing and applicant remarks, the board followed the Planning Commission’s 4–0 recommendation to deny Dorothy O’Reilly’s request to rezone an 80-acre parcel from A-1 to A-2, with commissioners citing precedent and the county’s goal to preserve agricultural land.
WABASHA — The Wabasha County Board of Commissioners voted to deny a request to rezone an 80‑acre parcel in Guilford Township from Agricultural Protection (A‑1) to Agricultural Urban Fringe (A‑2).
Planning staff reported the March 7 application by Dorothy O’Reilly (parcel R03.00176.00) sought rezoning to allow splitting the property to create an additional dwelling. The Planning Commission held a public hearing April 28 and on a 4–0 vote recommended denial, citing five findings: the proposed rezoning would create an island of A‑2 zoning surrounded by A‑1, could conflict with adjacent land uses, is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance, and would confer a special benefit to the owner.
Mary Gassner, one of the family property owners speaking at the board meeting, said the roadway already divides the farm into two 40‑acre halves and that the request aims to create more affordable parcels for family members while retaining tillable acreage. She asked the board to reconsider the commission’s reasoning, saying the parcel’s layout is “unique” and that the change would preserve family ownership.
Commissioners who attended the Planning Commission hearing and others on the board said they supported the commission’s finding that approving the rezoning would amount to spot zoning because surrounding parcels remain A‑1 and the request would create a nonconforming island. Several commissioners noted the county zoning ordinance’s purpose is to preserve agricultural land and avoid conflicts between residential uses and farming operations.
A commissioner moved to accept the Planning Commission recommendation to deny the rezoning request; the motion carried unanimously. The board recorded no conditions or alternative approvals; the ruling stands as a denial of the requested A‑2 rezoning.
