Lake County board approves septic setback variance, denies broader zoning request
A septic mound variance at Snowbank Beach Road was approved, but a Highway 61 proposal to add dwellings and repurpose a cabin was denied.
Lake County drew a sharp line on shoreline development at its June 8 Board of Adjustment meeting, approving a narrow septic setback variance in Fall Lake Township while rejecting a broader bid to intensify use on a resort-commercial parcel in Silver Creek Township. The rulings show how little room remains for new construction, cabin conversions, and added density along the county’s tightly regulated shoreland.
The board met at 1 p.m. in the Law Enforcement Center meeting room at 613 3rd Ave. in Two Harbors, where it follows a regular second-Monday schedule. In one case, board members granted Serenity at Snowbank LLC relief from structure setback requirements so the company could install a septic mound at 14577 Snowbank Beach Road in Ely. The parcel is listed as 1.32 acres, Residential-Recreational, in Section 35, Township 64, Range 9, PID 28-6409-35505, and the request was tied to Section 3.02 of Lake County’s Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Ordinance No. 11.
That approval matters because septic placement is often the deciding factor on lake-adjacent lots, where setbacks, soils, and water-quality rules can determine whether a project is feasible at all. Lake County has also been updating those standards, announcing amendments to its SSTS ordinance in 2025 that took effect July 4 of that year. The variance approved for Serenity at Snowbank did not open the door to broader redevelopment, but it did show the county is willing to make limited adjustments when a proposal stays within the boundaries of its sewage and shoreland rules.
The board was less flexible on a separate request from Kevin Jagielski and Tamara Imbertson for a property at 2018 Highway 61 in Two Harbors. Their 1.8-acre parcel, identified as RC Resort Commercial, PID 29-5361-15280, is described in the notice as Outlot 13 of Government Lot 3 east of Minnesota Highway 61, in Silver Creek Township. The couple sought relief from frontage and acreage requirements to allow two dwellings within the riparian zone, shoreline setback relief to convert a nonconforming cabin into a guest quarter, and permission to change use and improve the cabin into a sauna.
That request was denied, leaving intact the county’s ability to enforce density limits and shoreline setbacks even when an owner wants to reuse an existing structure. Minnesota Statute 394.36 authorizes counties to regulate nonconforming lots, uses, and structures in shoreland areas, and state shoreland rules are meant to control crowding, prevent pollution of surface and ground waters, provide space for sewage treatment systems, and preserve natural shoreline character. For Lake County property owners, the two votes offered a clear signal: small infrastructure fixes may pass, but proposals that deepen development pressure near the water still face a high bar.
This article was produced by Prism’s automated news system from verified source data, official records, and press releases, then run through automated quality and moderation checks before publishing. The system is built and supervised by the people who set the standards it runs under. Read our full AI policy.
Did this article answer your question?
