Winona County Board of Adjustment approves variance allowing limited disturbance of prime soils for family home

The Winona County Board of Adjustment voted to grant variance petition BOA05212601, allowing a 44‑acre parcel split in Warren Township for construction of a single‑family home while limiting disturbance of class 1–3 prime soils to four acres.

The decision, made after a public hearing and extended discussion, follows a staff presentation that said the proposed parcel would be about 44 acres and that roughly 3–5 acres of cropland would be removed for the home, driveway, septic and lawn. Planning staff Aaron (planning staff) told the board the soils analysis for the proposed parcel showed about 52% regulated soils under the county’s mapping and that slope regulations and soil classifications make buildable areas scarce in the location near the city of Stockton.

Board members debated whether approving variances like this one undermines the county’s comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance. Ed (board member), who initially moved to deny the application, argued repeated approvals risk “death by 1,000 cuts” to the protections for high‑quality soils. “As the board continues to grant these variances … you add that all up and you’re whittling away at a goal that the comprehensive plan has clearly told us that we’re supposed to keep foremost in our mind,” Ed said.

Aaron (planning staff) and Commissioner Meyer (Meyer) responded that the board of adjustment’s role is to balance reasonable development and preservation goals, and noted that the ordinance’s jurisdictional rules mean the portion of the land inside the city of Stockton cannot be counted toward the applicant’s non‑tillable acreage for purposes of the soils percentage.

Applicant Sarah Slavi (applicant), who spoke at the hearing, said the family sought a location close to the existing homestead to keep family nearby and that they did not intend to remove 40 acres from agricultural use. “We’re just trying to make a good plan for the family for the future while staying in with within all of the rules and regulations of the county,” Slavi said.

After discussion, Ed withdrew his denial motion and moved to approve the variance with an added condition limiting development and disturbance of class 1 through 3 soils on the subject parcel to a maximum of four acres, including the dwelling footprint, attached structures, driveway, well and septic. The condition requires that the remaining class 1–3 soils remain in agricultural use or undisturbed natural cover and not be converted to lawn, landscaping or other nonagricultural uses without further review by the board of adjustment. Amy (board member) seconded the motion and the board voted to approve it.

The chair read the appeal procedure: any aggrieved person or entity has 30 days from receipt of the notice of decision to file an appeal to the district court on questions of law and fact. The board then adjourned.

Details: the staff report cited county performance‑standards provisions that generally restrict dwelling placement to class 4–8 soils and apply a 40% threshold for class 1–3 soils; the proposed parcel was described in staff materials as comprising class 2–7 soils and approximately 44 acres with an estimated 52% of the proposed parcel mapped as regulated soils. The applicant noted driveway access requirements (30 feet of road access) and said the actual disturbance footprint would be roughly the same size as the historic farmstead, with 3–5 acres affected by the proposed home site and associated infrastructure.

The board’s action grants the variance subject to the 4‑acre limit on class 1–3 soil disturbance; any appeal must be filed in district court within 30 days. The planning department provided staff analysis and draft findings and noted the county attorney had proposed conditions for consideration.