Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout41000020013004_Variances_08-12-1999Variances Barcode 128 OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OTTER TAIL MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this instrument # _ was filed/recorded in this office for record on the 1*7 day of 850B66 /iu 1999 at i2lOQ.arry^) Wendy L. Mdtcalf, County/Recorder §Dc-^ Recording lee ^ I by:.QapOty well certificate THE ABOVE SPACE IS RESERVED FOR THE COUNTY RECORDER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL COURTHOUSE, FERGUS FALLS, MN 56537 (218) 739-2271 COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK INK ***(^'0 0 Application Fee Receipt Number j JPROPERTY OWNER DAYTIME PHONE ADDRESS es-LAKE NUMBER SECTION TOWNSHIP /3<^ RANGE PARCEL NUMBER LAKE NAME LAKE CLASS TOWNSHIP NAME '^ /93FIRE/LAKE t.D. NUMBER LEGAL DESCRIPTION C/tV 7t// Os/' ^3^'^0/6^ 0SO.k' TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED (Please Check) structure Setback \/ Structure Size Cluster Misc.Sewage System Subdivision SPECIFY VARIANCE REQUESTED oP- CeAciK^'S'O AauO S-^TT^fA'G- fooLMOATlc^A^. Ax>-q vtto^ :s)Oacl^ *7^ 7»e op /A/<Sr . Tne- (o«£ <0#- 7h€i ~S>LK^^iJi(-f(i^ rs. ^IY)^k\AA> Fy /^O ) 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 ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT OTHER PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED, IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT LAND & RE IE MANAGEMENT REGARDING THIS MATTER. 7- OS- - </j SIGNATURE O^PRO^RTY OWI^DATE APPLICANT MUST BE PRESENT AT THE HEARING(Applicant Will Receive Notification As To The Date/Time Of Hearing) /-f^ccdJl 'iiux Cau^iCt^V '3 'AAugust 12, td^9-00/ Page 24 3/3 ■>S’ 3// Accepted By Land & Resource L & R Official/Date JoDate Of Hearing Time 7^ Motion Edward and Sylvia Christopherson - Approved as requested. Motion was made by Cecil Femling, seconded by David Holmgren and unanimously carried, to approve a variance that would allow the applicants to replace a cracky ^d settling foundation. After additional discussion andr.^S^^wwKandall Mann and unanimously carried, to approve a variance for a 6’ by 14’ addition to the rear of the existing dvyelling. It was noted that the proposed addition is behind the existing building away from the lake. U)M consideration, motion was made by David hla«ser Chaimian/Otter Tail County Board o^djustment Permit^) required from Land & Resource Management Yes (Contact Land & Resource Management) No Copy of Application Mailed to Applicant And the MN DNR LR Official/Date bk 0198-001 291.306 • Victor Lundeen Co.. Primers • Fergus Falls. Minnesota August 12,1999 Page 7 and Sylvia Chnstoptiersori -Approved as requested. Edward and Sylvia Christopherson, Alexandria, MN, requested a variance for the replacement of a cracked and settling foundation and for a 6’ by 14’ addition to the rear of the building. The lakeside of the dwelling is approximately 50’ from the lakeshore and approximately 54’ from the creek. The required ordinary high water level setback is 100’. The property is described as part of Government Lot 7, Section 2 of Nidaros Township by East Battle Lake. The audience was polled with no one speaking for or against the request. After consideration, motion was made by Cecil Femling, seconded by David Holmgren and unanimously carried, to approve a variance that would allow the applicants to replace a cracked and settling foundation. After additional discussion and consideration, motion was made by David Hauser, second by Randall Mann and unanimously carried, to approve a variance for a 6’ by 14’ addition to the rear of the existing dwelling. It was noted that the proposed addition is behind the existing building away from the lake. m^l^vin Christiansoft^^Clanfication. Kevin Christianson appeared before the Board of Adjustment to request their approval of a road for Sunlight Beach as it has been constructed and for clarification as to exactly what the Board of Adjustment intended to approve at their June 10, 1999 meeting. Kevin Christianson presented two letters for consideration by the Board of Adjustment. One letter was from Craig Broman, the owner of Lot 2, Sunlight Beach, encouraging the Board of Adjustment to approve the road as constructed based on the applicant's understanding of what was talked about at the June 10, 1999 meeting. Mr. Broman indicated that the constructed road met the understanding that the applicants had agreed to at the June’lO, 1999 meeting. The second letter was from Merle Miller, Dunn Township Chairman, who stated that the township does not have a problem with the road as constructed. Mr. Miller also noted that the right-of-way has been dedicated and if a different road is needed it could be constructed at that time. There was much discussion regarding the June 10, 1999 meeting as each board member try to remember what was presented, discussed and finally accepted. For purposes of clarification, motion was made by Randall Mann, second by Cecil Femling to accept a road consisting of 20’ of black top with 2’ of shoulder on each side leading up to the cul-de-sac, going through the cul-de-sac and leading out of the cul-de-sac. This motion passed with David Trites abstaining. The members of the board did not feel that they could simply approve the road as constructed as they could not and did not recall any discussion regarding ditch and slope construction. The board did note as the township did that the 66’ road right-of-way has been dedicated and is available for road right-of-way purposes. A motion was made by Cecil Femling to direct Kyle Westergard and Jennifer Lessinger to discuss with the Land and Resource office how this road issue needs to be resolved. There was no second to this motion. David Trites offered a motion to request that the Land and Resource Department and the Highway Engineer prepare a report as to the current construction of the road verses the county road standards. This motion also died for lack of a second. The general consent of the Board of Adjustment was that the request for a variance that was before the board at their June 10, 1999 meeting was for a variance from the road top requirements and the road top is what the board members felt was addressed at the June 10,1999 meeting and has now been clarified by the motion stated above. It was also the general consent of the Board of Adjustment that any other issues related to the road should be handled by the office and if additional variances are required then a new application should be submitted.