Board splits decision on Markergaard application: feedlot setback variance approved, shoreland setback variance denied

Houston County—s Board of Adjustment on July 31 issued split rulings on an application from Adam Markergaard (Sheldon Township, parcel 12.0114005). The board approved a variance dealing with feedlot-setback requirements but denied a requested shoreland top-of-bluff setback reduction for a proposed dwelling.

Markergaard had requested three variances: reduction of the setback from an existing feedlot, a reduction of the top-of-bluff shoreland setback and a reduced side property-line setback. During the hearing, staff and the applicant explained the site constraints: an old house foundation, a quarter-quarter property line, prime agricultural soils and shoreland overlay within 300 feet of the stream. Staff recommended allowing a feedlot-related variance in recognition of the property—s historical use but raised concerns about shoreline encroachment.

Board members and staff weighed competing priorities: protecting shoreland and bluff integrity, retaining tillable acreage, avoiding disturbance of previously filled foundation soils, and the presence of existing dwellings and subdivisions in proximity. The DNR (state Department of Natural Resources) had been kept in the loop and had indicated reservations about shoreland variances, though no formal DNR public comment was filed in packet materials.

After discussion and separate votes, the board approved a variance for the feedlot setback (motion language: grant a variance of 110 feet below the required setback as presented) and recorded an affirmative roll-call with Ken Anderson, Franklin Hahn, Dean Hoppell, Wayne Runigan and Ken Visker voting yes. The board then considered the shoreland variance request (a 15-foot reduction to the 40-foot top-of-bluff setback) and voted to deny that shoreland variance. The board indicated applicants could redesign a dwelling location that avoids shoreland encroachment or return with an altered proposal; the record shows the denial followed concerns that the proposed shoreline encroachment could be avoided by shifting the building onto tillable ground or reconfiguring the house footprint.

Members emphasized the limited role of the board to judge variance criteria rather than broader disputes: they noted the feedlot predated current zoning and that the feedlot setback variance could be granted while maintaining shoreline protections. The vote on the shoreland item carried to deny the reduction, and staff advised the applicant that alternatives remain available, including locating the dwelling outside the shoreland overlay or submitting a revised plan.

Both decisions were recorded at the July 31 meeting; the feedlot-related variance approval allows the applicant to pursue site plans for the farm buildings consistent with the county findings, while the shoreland denial leaves the top-of-bluff setback in place for the proposed dwelling.