|
Solum property brought into compliance with purchases of adjoining properties
|
|
|
By Charlie Warner
Argus News Editor
A long-running legal battle over zoning issues between Houston County and Matthew and Beth Solum, 23642 Maple Leaf Drive in Spring Grove Township was resolved earlier this month. The county had taken the Solums to court for purchasing a non-ag building (a single family dwelling) on class 3 soils on less than 40 acres.
Matthew and Beth Solum had purchased the home and property in November of 2005 from Jared Solum. The home was in compliance with county zoning laws because Jared Solum had secured purchase agreements with neighboring property owners and met the “one house per 40 acres” law. When Matthew and Beth Solum purchased the house and 8.36 acres from Jared, the property was no longer in compliance.
According to Houston County Zoning Administrator Bob Scanlan, Gary Thomas purchased the house and 8.63 acres from Matthew and Beth Solum, 15 acres from Jim and Cindy Thorson and 17.69 acres from Jared Solum.
The business transactions were actually completed in December of 2008, according to public record, but not recorded with the Houston County Recorder’s Office until the second week in May. A court hearing set for May 12 was cancelled once the purchase transactions were recorded with the county, putting the house in compliance with county zoning laws.
Scanlan reported the deed was recorded under Mapleleaf Acres LLC in care of Gary Thomas, except six of the acres purchased from the Thorsons, which was recorded solely under Thomas’ name.
A letter was hand delivered by a county deputy later in the week notifying Thomas that the property was now in compliance with zoning laws and that “to maintain compliance all parcels must remain intact and shall not be sold off in order to maintain compliance, indefinitely.
“In addition, any future sales of the property must be approved by the Houston County Zoning Office in writing before the sale can occur.”
The county took legal action against Matthew and Beth Solum in 2007 when it was determined the home was no longer in compliance with the “one per 40 acres” law.
The case was heard in Houston County District Court, where the court ruled in the county’s favor. The Solums took the case to the District Court of Appeals, which also ruled in the county’s favor.
The Solums requested the Minnesota State Supreme Court review the case. But the Supreme Court denied the request.
Had the purchase agreements been recorded with the county in December, the property would have been in compliance at that time, according to Scanlan.
You can contact Charlie Warner at
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
