The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About36000990322000_Variances_08-04-2005Variances 2 Barcode 128 9^4“ 1005 OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER 981629 OTTER TAIL MINNESOTA 981629I hereby certify that this instrument #__ was filed/recorded ip this office for reconf on the_2_day of -----2005 at.21S.^^pm M^aJ^oumty R^^rderWendy L by;ityIS..fecorcnng fer .well certificate /it THE ABOVE SPACE IS RESERVED FOR THE COUNTY RECORDER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE RECEIVED JUN 2 9 2005 COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL GOVERNMENT SERVICES CENTER 540 WEST FIR, FERGUS FALLS, MN 56537 (218) 998-8095 Otter Tail County’s Website; www.co.ottertail.mn.usLAND & RESOURCE Application Fee COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK INK Receipt Number _ Accepted By / Date SfhC'k * DAYTIME PHONE /- 9oO /sPROPERTY OWNER LjJO(SMAILING ADDRESS _____________________LAKE CLASS TOWNSHIP NAME ,L£A F MOUATTA/A^ LAKE NAMELAKE NUMBER t^\n RANGETOWNSHIPSECTION 4^/$y/ Ofk}cli Arpt-^x, iii}s Lc'^ E-911 ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER LEGAL DESCRIPTION /-of / , P/oc-k ^J Ldl^/ d/ocA k fc^^s /) TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED (Please Check) Structure Setback ^ Structure Size Sewage System Subdivision Cluster Misc. SPECIFY VARIANCE REQUESTED rkt. /W-/V ts /^f^o4A'>vv cir U/Ai^k Covle( ;V 'f'kjs /ouj 'ffu^ cUr^^ ^ X ^ V^LhkAA<^^ tL±£u^o/cl^ ' -^r «. Va-yUtM^e. is njtSohalle, S T^lr 4j7'<3>'tV/W«A, I UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE/SUBDIVISION CONTROLS ORDINANCE OF OTTER TAIL COUNTY. I/C I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT OTHER PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED, IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT LAND & RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGARDING THIS MATTER. SIGN^URE OF PROPERTY OWNER DATE APPLICANT MUST BE PRESENT AT THE HEARING (Applicant Will Receive Notification As To The Date/Time Of Hearing SCANNED 6. 3 o p,m .6?OOS TimeDate Of Hearing Motion Gene E Stephens - Denied (6:30 p.m.) After discussion and consideration, Steve Schierer made a motion, second by Cecil Femling and unanimously carried, to deny the variance as requested as no adequate hardship unique to the property had been shown that would allow for the granting of the variance. The Board noted this subdivision had been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and during that process a determination had been made that a buildable site does exist at the required 200’ setback from the ordinary high water level. The Board noted that the granting of the variance as requested would establish precedence and a reasonable use of this property can be obtained without the granting of this variance request. • ' ’ / dtairman/b'tTeTfalfCounty Board of Adjustment Permit(s) required from Land & Resource Management Yes (Contact Land & Resource Management) No LR Officiai/Date* Copy of Application Mailed to Applicant, Co. Assessor and the MN DNR bk 0903-001 315,694 • Vicior Lundeen Co., Primers • Fergus Falls, Minnesoia 7 • ^3^000^^03X^060 Tax parcel Number(s) Drav:ing must be to scale. Drawing shall identify project and include the setbacks to all of the existing and proposed lotlines, road right-of-way(s), ordinary high water level(s), structure(s), septice tank(s), drainfield(s), bluff(s) & wetland(s). Must also include all proposed topographical alterations. / ^ /OO^/J/A- Ofr O % Impervious SurfaceScale RECEIVED JUN 2 9 2005 LAND & RESOURCE ^ 73 Lo I iJI, scm Signature of Property Owner Date BK — 0505 322.180 • Victor Lundaen Co. Printers • Fergus Falls, MN • 1-800-346-4870 July 7, 2011 Page # 3 Bryce and Julie Anderson - Approved the variance application with a modification. (7:20 p.m.) Bryce and Julie Anderson, Lot 20 Sky Blue Water Beach, Lake Six in Hobart Township, requested a variance of 30’ from the ordinary high water level setback of 100’ for the construction of a 14’ by IT porch and 14' by 22’ sunroom and front entry. The addition is intended to provide an accessible entry into the home from the driveway, without steps. The home does not have an accessible entry and the owner needs an accessible entry. The audience was polled with no one speaking for or against the variance as requested. A letter from Anita Olson in support of the applicants’ request was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a motion, seconded by Thomas Lee and unanimously carried, to approve placement of an addition no closer to the ordinary high water level than the front (lakeside) of the existing dwelling, which does not included the deck. The variance as approved will provide the applicants with a reasonable use of their property. The variance as approved does not directly or indirectly grant any other variances for the proposed development and the variance as approved will maintain the existing building line in this immediate area. Raymond Baumler - Approved the variance for the dwelling and denied the variance for the deck with a condition. (7:40 p.m.) Raymond Baumler Et. Al. Lots 84 and 85 Nedberg Nye Survey Lots of Government Lots 1, 2 and 3, Section 1 of Edna Township by Devils Lake, requested the following: Demolish and build in same location, but raise cabin about 4’ with a 4’ concrete foundation and floor joists. Cabin will be exact size of existing cabin. The existing cabin is approximately 20’ from the ordinary high water level, requesting a variance of 55’. Also requesting a variance to replace the existing deck with a new deck being approximately 10’ from ordinary high water level. The required setback is 75’. Also requesting a 4’ variance from the road right-of-way. The audience was polled with no one speaking for or against the variance as requested. After consideration and discussion, Paul Larson made a motion, seconded by Steve Schierer and unanimously carried, to deny the variances as requested for the proposed deck replacement project and to approve the variances necessary for the demolition, the raising and the construction of the new dwelling in the same footprint as described in the variance application dated June 9, 2011 with the condition that a site permit for the proposed development cannot be issued until either an approved new septic system can be installed or the existing septic system is approved for use. The applicant’s property is significantly impacted by high water/flooding. Gene Stephens - Tabled. (7:52 p.m.) Gene Stephens, Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 1 Block 4 Koep’s Subdivision, Spitzer Lake in Leaf Mountain Township, requested the following: I am requesting a variance of 25’ from the northeast side of my proposed structure. The 200’ setback from the north is fine. The 200’ setback from the southeast side of the proposed structure is also fine. This slight variance adjustment would not only allow for a lot less grade and fill but also would eliminate a potential water . problem, since the original approved buildable area is located in the (ravine-like) lowest area. Please note: the gravel road (Spitzer Lake Road) divides the 175’ setback on northeast side which should not be an environmental problem. The audience was polled with Greg Anderson expressing an interest in the outcome of this public hearing as the outcome might have an impact on the future development of the property he represents. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a motion, seconded by Thomas Lee and unanimously carried, to table with the verbal agreement of the applicant this public hearing until the next meeting of the Board of Adjustment, which will provide the applicant with adequate time to obtain a written report from Bill Kalar, Land and Resource Director, regarding his on-site meeting with Mr. Stephens and with his recommendations. It was noted that the applicant’s property is a recent plat, which when developed should have identified a buildable site for each lot within the plat. The members of the Board are interested in knowing where that site is and why that site is not suitable at this time before continuing with this variance hearing. SCANNED i Department of LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OTTER TAIL COUNTY Government Services Center - 540 West Fir Fergus Falls, MN 56537 PH: 218-998-8095 OTTER Tail County’s Website: www.co.otter-tail.mn.us October 31,2007 Gene Stephens 5748 Birchwood Ave. NE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE: Property (Tax Parcel #36-000-99-0322-000), on Spitzer Lake (56-160) Dear Mr. Stephens: Enclosed please find a copy of Koep’s Subdivision received and discussed by the Planning Commission on May 8, 2002. As you will see, a buildable area compliant with the 200’ lake setback requirement was indicated (green highlighted area). This is the designated buildable area I referred to in my previous letter. As we have discussed, any request to construct or place a structure outside of this designated buildable area, requires a Variance from the Board of Adjustment. As has also been discussed, any request to alter the existing onsite topography requires either a Conditional Use Permit (Planning Commission) or a Grade and Fill Permit (our Office). Please note that our Office has jurisdiction for projects involving up to 300 cubic yards of earthmoving. As to the likelihood of approval for either a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit, I will not offer an opinion. This is due to the fact that the Board of Adjustment is comprised of 6 members and the Planning Commission is comprised of 10 members, each of whom may have differing opinion on this matter. As to the likelihood of a Grade and Fill Permit being issued, I will not comment on this until I have had an opportunity to review a completed Grade and Fill Application form. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 218-998- 8095. Sincerely. Bill Kalar Administrator s : 9 RECEIVED OCT 1 1 2007 LAND & RESOURCE Gene Stephens 5748 Birchwood Ave Ne Prior Lake, MN 55372 October 8, 2007 Bill Kalar Otter Tail County 540 Fir Ave. W.' Fergus Falls, MN 56537 Dear Mr. Kalar: Thanks for your response dated 10/4 However, my questions weren’t quite answered completely & left me somewhat confused. I had hoped you would have talked to Tim Griep regarding the situation of the ravine after he re-measured the 200’ setback. Bill, who in their right mind (except maybe the Planning Commission & Board) would build in the very bottom of the ravine? I’m sure Tim would give you some insight &/or suggestions on how this area can/should be altered. All I ask is that you talk to him & get his input Bill, would I be better off applying for a Grade/Fill Permit so that we can take off some of the hill & make it more feasible to build without tampering with the environment? If this can be granted, I would be able to meet the required setback of 200’ & not have to file for the other application. I’d like your honest opinion on whether I’d be able to do this. Also, what do you mean on your suggestion for a topographical alteration within the previously designated build able site?.,., the one from 2 years ago (which was approx 130’ from the west & 150’ from the north) or the new one I’m requesting now (225’ from west & 200’ from north & 175’ or so from east with gravel road in between)? Also, are you saying that if I would have filed for a Conditional Use Permit Application 2 years ago, I would have had a better chance of getting it? I doubt it! I would like your honest opinion on whether I could be granted this Conditional Use Permit Application with my new buildable site. If you don’t think I could get it, then I’ll just chuck it & put a For Sale sign up & not mess with this problem anymore. Othen/vise, you can send me the application forms so I can get started on it right away. Thank you! I hope to hear from you real soon. Sincerely, Gene Stephens SCANNED Department of LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OTTER TAIL COUNTY Government Services Center - 540 West Fir FERGUS Falls, mn 56537 PH: 218-998-8095 Otter Tail County’s Website: www.co.otter-tail.mn.us October 4, 2007 Gene Stephens 5748 Birchwood Ave NE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE; Property on Spitzer Lake (56-160) Dear Mr. Stephens: Upon reading your letter (dated September 28, 2007), I reviewed our file pertaining to your properties (Lot 1 BIk 3 and Lot 1 BIk 4 of Koep’s Subdivision). Specifically, I reviewed the Board of Adjustment’s (Board) August 4, 2005 Meeting Minutes (copy enclosed) pertaining to your original Variance request. As you will see, the Board indicated that your property has a buildable site (meets all setback requirements) and therefore, a Variance should not be granted. For this reason, a new Variance request may not be your best option (and yes you would be required to pay the entire $350.00 Variance Application Fee since this fee helps offset County processing costs such as staff time, postage, per diem for viewing and meeting, and mileage). A better option may be a request for a topographical alteration within the previously designated buildable site. This would require you to submit a Conditional Use Permit Application form, site drawing (1 original and 10 copies), and the $350.00 Application Fee. Please note that should you choose this option, the “burden of proof changes from a hardship to one of environmental impact (drainage, erosion, etc.). Flopefully this helps answer your questions. If you have any additional questions or wish to discuss my comments further, please contact me at 218-998-8095. Sincerely, Bill Kalar Administrator BK/aja Enclosures SCANNED RECEIVED OCT 0 1 2007 LAND & RESOURCE Gene Stephens 5748 Birchwood Ave NE Prior Lake, MN 55372 September 28, 2007 Bill Kalar Otter TeM County 540 Fir Ave. W. Fergus Falls, MN 56537 Dear Mr. Kalar: You may recall 2 years ago (Aug 4, 2005) when I applied for a variance on Spitzer Lake & didn’t even get to 1st base. I wasn’t even considered as a worthy applicant Since then, I had the lot back-holed & thought I measured the buildable area to be lust east of the ravine. I showed my builder (Jim Seelhammer from Deer Creek) met with Tim Griep from Land & Resource Mgmnt at the site &took the measurements from the 200’ setback only to end up right smack at the bottom of the ravine. My builder said it’s not oossible to put a structure (Timberiine Model) up with a foundation so low because of water problems & he had a long talk with Tim. He says the only way to put up a structure at the designated area would be to take 6-7 feet off the top of the hill & fill in part of the ravine or aoDly for a variance & move it 20-25’ or so to the east which is still 100’ from the gravel road but less than 200’ from the water to the east (which I think is a formality ’cause the environment isn’t actually affected). Bill, is this reasonable & doable or would I be wasting my money again in applying for a variance? As you can see, this variance request is rather mild than the one I applied for two years ago. First, I would like your feedback & opinion on this after you’ve talked with Tim Griep who would verify & recollect this rare situation when he met with Jim Seelhammer. I think it requires special attention starting with you (I think). Secondly, if I applied for a variance for the second time pertaining to the same buildable area but a whole lot closer, would I get a reprieve on the fee or some kind of discount since I already paid for the original fees & didn’t even stand a fighting chance from the get-go? In conclusion, if it’s not feasible or even a remote possibility for a variance, how could this lot have been approved for sale to me (by Luhman Real Estate) as being a buildable lot (on that designated area)? How was I misled & who should be responsible for misrepresentation? Bill, I need your help & support on this situation as I was looking forward to retiring on this property & live in this community. For me to get shut down, it would surely be devastating & at this point in my life I don’t want to have to sell & start all over. Thank you! I hope to hear from you real soon. Sincerely, , 4- SC* Department of LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OTTER TAIL COUNTY Government Services Center • 540 West Fir Fergus Falls, MN 56537 Ph: 218-998-8095 Otter Tail County’s Website: www.co.ottertail.mn.us September 14, 2005 Gene Stephens 4648 Birchwood Ave NE Prior Lake MN 55372 RE: Variance Fee Refund, Spitzer Lake (56-160) Dear Mr. Stephens; On September 6, 2005,1 presented your request (letter dated August 28, 2005) for a refund of your Variance Application Fee ($220.00) to our County Board of Commissioners (Board). As you will see from the enclosed copy of the Board’s Meeting Minutes, your request has been denied. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact our Office. Sincerely, Bill Kalar Administrator SCANNED OTC Board of Commissioners’ Minutes September 6, 2005 • Page 2 Motion by Lee, second by Froemming, and unanimously carried to authorize an extension, until October 15, 2005, to complete a driveway, for Bernard & lla Larson, Conditional Use Permit #6194, for property on Lake Lida (56-747). Motion by Lee, second by Mosher, and unanimously carried to authorize a CUP extension, until November 1,2005, to complete the roads, for Q5 Investments LLLP, CIC known as “The Dunes at the Palms of Lida”, on Lake Lida (56-747). Request for Refund of Variance Fee Land & Resource Director, Bill Kalar, presented a letter from Gene E. Stephens regarding property located in Section 17 of Leaf Mountain Township on Spitzer Lake (56-160). A variance for this property was requested from the Board of Adjustment, and subsequently, the request was denied. Mr. Kalar stated that Mr. Stephens is requesting a refund of the Variance Application Fee. Discussion followed. Motion by Lee, second by Nelson, and unanimously carried to deny Mr. Stephens’ request for a refund of the Variance Fee. By policy, the Variance Fee is a non-refundable fee. Proposed Scope for Environmental Impact Statement for Blue Heron Bay Development Otter Tail County Resolution No. 2005 - 53 Commissioner Nelson offered the following and moved its adoption; WHEREAS, On November 20, 2002, R. Murray Partnership submitted to Otter Tail County an application for a Conditional Use Permit for a project known as the Blue Heron Bay project (the “project”); and WHEREAS, On April 1, 2003, the Board of Commissioners declared that an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS") was not required for the project; and WHEREAS on April 22, 2003, the Board of Commissioners granted a Conditional Use Permit for the project; and WHEREAS, on February 1, 2005, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the decision not to require an Environmental Impact Statement for the project and remanded the issue to Otter Tail County for Preparation of an EIS; and WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners desires to initiate the process to prepare an EIS by establishing a proposed scope for the EIS based on the decision of the Court of Appeals and documents that were submitted to the court stating the grounds for the appeal of the Board of Commissioners decision; and WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners will issue its final decision on the scope of the EIS upon completion of the EIS Scoping Process provided in Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that it is proposed that the EIS shall address the following alternatives: SCANNED P'^r:F'V!::r) AUG 2 9 2005taene b. s>cepnens o/fio Dircnwooa /we. wa t'rior Baxe, mjm d3o LAi\L' 6i Ki-o^oi^CE ^p,-2fA /\ugust <:wus eixx naxar ucxer laxx councy o<iu txr /we. w. cergus caxxs, ew sooj/ uear w£. x.axar; X am wrxtxng xn regaxas uo my varxance roeecxng cnat toox. pxace on Aug. duuo, it COOK axi or xu mxnutes to aeny me or any consxaeratxon. xca. was racner appaxxxng co xxsten co cnese guys cexx me cnac cney axa noc even cnecx out my staxes x naa marxea xor my ruture awexxxng oecause cney uiamexy uecxx cemxingj saxa xt was too tnxcx ot mosquxtoes to even waxK xn tne wooas!:!un ya, tnxs quote xa on tne recoraxng wnxcn just goes to siiow tnat cney naa cnexx mxnas maae up even oerore tni.s nearing ana x was given no regara wnatsoever xn raaKxng tnis appxicacxon. x was noc given my aue, respect, or any consiaeracion wnatsoever. xney oerxnitexy oia not ao tneir joo oy not roj.towing tnrougji witn cnexr ooxxgacion or autxes oy pnysicaxxy cnecKxng out tne property. i was sxigntea a axscrxmxnatea in every way possioie. rnererore, x am requesting tnat x receive a tuxx reruna ot xr not,I may have to send a letter to the editor of the Fergus Falls journal repeating wnat x nave just expxainea to you. xnis event is a snam a a scam ana x want my money oacKs »ixx, x Know you are a reasonaoxe man. x just want you co maxe it rignc ror me a put tnis matter to rest oexore x taKe It to tne next xevex. inanK you. now xair is cnac/ t.ene b. ntepnens cc;Kamstaa, nenneay a ooyce. Attorneys rrior x.aKe k 'C SCANNED