Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Winona County Board of Adjustment approves variance for home on regulated soils in Saratoga Township
Summary
The Board of Adjustment granted the Allens’ variance to create a roughly 2.7–3.0 acre parcel and build a single-family home on soils mapped mostly class 2 and 3, despite staff findings about slope, wetlands and limited septic suitability. The township supported the application; the board approved the variance by voice vote with conditions and read
The Winona County Board of Adjustment on a voice vote granted a variance to James and Charlene Allen and Jeremy and Aaron Allen to allow creation of a roughly 2.7–3.0 acre parcel and placement of a new single-family dwelling on soils mapped predominantly as class 2 and class 3 in Saratoga Township.
Staff planner Aaron told the board the parcel as proposed would contain about 46.9% class 3 soils and about 51.2% class 2 soils and that the county’s ordinance limits dwelling-containing parcels to a maximum of 40% class 1–3 soils unless a variance is granted. He said the application site is a panhandle parcel reached by a field road off Sinclair Road, and he summarized mapped constraints including nearby wetlands shown in the National Wetlands Inventory, Trout Run Creek and an associated floodplain and shoreland district, areas of steeper slope to the north, and soil-survey ratings showing nearby unregulated (class 4–8) areas that are “very limited” or “extremely limited” for dwellings and mound septic systems. As Aaron put it, “If we’re going to determine that there’s no reasonable way to avoid a variance and the least variance necessary is being asked for. We we need to compare what another site might look like or what another proposal might look like in order to do that.”
The staff report and county attorney provided draft findings and recommended conditions if the board chose to approve. The Saratoga Township board indicated support for the application, and no other public commenters spoke at the hearing. Petitioner Jeremy Allen, who gave his address as 330 Ninth Street NW, Plainview, Minnesota, told the board the family currently rents most of the farmland and that they had not finalized whether the two- to three-acre building parcel would retain any cropped area or be converted to lawn.
Board members debated erosion risk, comp-plan consistency and precedent for residential uses on productive soils. One member said the family circumstance carried weight for his decision but described the choice as difficult: “I’m gonna vote in favor of this variance, but I’m extremely torn in my decision to do so.” Staff noted that erosion-control plans and Soil and Water Conservation District review are standard parts of the building-permit and erosion-control process and would be required if construction proceeds.
Following discussion, a motion to approve the variance “as written” (using the findings and conditions prepared by the county attorney and staff) was moved and seconded. The board approved the variance by voice vote with no member recorded as opposed. The chair read the statutory appeal instructions and the 30-day district-court appeal period.
The variance allows the petitioners to proceed with the next administrative steps (surveying, permitting, erosion-control review and septic review) subject to the conditions attached to the board’s approval.
