Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Winona County Board of Adjustment approves variance letting after‑the‑fact dwelling remain near feedlot
Summary
The Board approved variances to allow a dwelling built without prior permits to remain 275 feet from a neighboring feedlot and on prime soils, subject to conditions including required permits and a conditional use permit; the vote was 3–1 after a failed motion to impose a double permit fee.
The Winona County Board of Adjustment voted April 16 to approve variances permitting a single‑family dwelling that was constructed without prior permits to remain 275 feet from a neighboring feedlot and to be sited on Class III (prime) soils rather than the non‑prime soils required by county ordinance.
Chair Jordan Potter introduced Docket BOA 04-16-26-01 and Planner Olivia Stroinski presented maps, soils analysis, feedlot proximity and an After‑the‑Fact permit status. Stroinski noted a township acknowledgement from St. Charles Township indicating the Town Board had "no comments" on the proposal. The Board approved the variances on a motion by Lynn Redig, seconded by Kelsey Fitzgerald; the tally was Yes — 3 (Jordan Potter, Kelsey Fitzgerald, Lynn Redig), No — 1 (Amy Cordry).
The Board's Findings of Fact concluded the request was in harmony with the intent of the county ordinances and consistent with the comprehensive plan, citing the parcel's predominance of prime soils and limited alternative building locations. The decision permits the existing dwelling to remain but attaches conditions: compliance with all applicable federal, state and local regulations; meeting State Electrical Code requirements where applicable; and obtaining a conditional use permit to allow a dwelling on a parcel smaller than 40 acres in the Agriculture and Resource Conservation (A/RC) zoning district.
Petitioner Jake Shetler of Utica told the Board the building had been moved onto the parcel and that he was unaware a permit was required to move a building. Board discussion referenced feedlot proximity, soils constraints and the history of parcel development when evaluating alternatives.
The Board also read an appeal procedure to District Court before closing the matter. The petitioners must complete the required permitting steps identified in the Board's conditions; the minutes note that any enforcement related to a denied permit would be handled by St. Charles Township if needed.
