HomeMy WebLinkAbout46000080055000_Variances_11-14-2002Variances
2
Barcode 128
II-I^-ZOOZ 1
OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER
OTTER TAIL MINNESOTA
this Instrument #
was filed/recorded in this office
for record on the day of
i.^r' 2002 atQ'.tfefam)pm
recordn^ f^
V weii 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 Ext. 225
Otter Tail County’s Website: www.co.ottertail.mn.us aO
ISO —Application Fee
COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK INK Receipt Number _
Accepted By / Date ____________
DAYTIME PHONE
At^'-rr -T ^
vl. Dcl
UL>Al4^| ’Au€-/0 6BHjl€Ai*>\/aUey Kw.
LAKE NAME
^ TOWNSHIP
PROPERTY OWNER
MAILING ADDRESS
LAKE NUMBER ____LAKE CLASS
OGtcvr To.! ITOWNSHIP NAMESECTIONRANGE
PARCEL
NUMBER
E-911
ADDRESS4t> QOOO^ OOS^QCO 4\30Q I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
sisiMS
TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED (Please Check)
Structure Setback Structure Size Sewage System Subdivision Cluster Misc.
SPECIFY VARIANCE REQUESTED , .A \ tyjsKdJL Ts ^ sdHpa.ciiL 6^
-f-VjL tt» 2^ lDcAu^Ji^ Ul(c4^
^ WvLtc r5 I #
\a<X2a4^ r W^VmTuJW, Will irMAAA>A\. vA-\, loC4^-m.
I UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHORELAND
MANAGEMENT ORDINANCBSUBDIVISION CONTROLS ORDINANCE OF OTTER TAIL COUNTY.
I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT OTHER PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED, IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO
CONTACT LAtm& RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGARDING THIS MATTER.
/o//y/oz^
' DATESIGNATURE OF PROPERTY ER
APPLICANT MUST BE PRESENT AT THE HEARING(Applicant Will Receive Notification As To The Date/Time Of Hearing)
At<:^ y
• OOO
C> / ■ 0-00
- OOO
^-00/
% - OOO,
^9-coo
So -OOO
S f - ODOyOUj
5^ -or 0
Sa -00/
53 - 90o
S9-00/,d^
3S -OOO
Sc 00 /
'-r
/
O
S'. OeP /?/nn/.yc <s>^Date Of Hearing Time
Motion
Ann and Barbara J. Dacy - Approved with condition. (7:02 p.m.)
Motion was made by Paul Larson, to approve the variance as requested. This motion died for lack of a second. After
additional discussion and consideration, motion was made by Randall Mann, second by Steve Schierer and
unanimously carried, to approve the raising of the existing house by 3’ with the condition that the dwelling must be
moved back to at a location which is 10’ from the lift station as currently depicted on the applicants’ drawing. It was
noted that the proposed project is normal maintenance for this structure.
Chairm^n/(!5tter Tail County Bo^ of Adjustment
Per|^t(s) required from Land & Resource Management
X Yes (Contact Land & Resource Management)
No
LR Offici^/Date •Copy of Application Mailed to Applicant And the MN DNR
BK-0402-001
309,424 - Victor Lundeen Company, Fergus Falls, Minnesota
/
E. LINE OF GOV'T LOT 2
BEARINGS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUHED DATUn
• DENOTES IRON MONUHENT FOUND.
O DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET MARKED "RLS IS&20 4 17325".
o
j
ELEVATION AT OS.A.H. NO. I - 1331.37 FEET (NAVD IS66J-\
A
yA
\
a\
I
I ‘
^14'
I
APPROXIMATE CENTER
OF DRAIN FIELD
A—4.1 17.7
o
\.GARAGE'^
2 ».0 *1 1741
e.^
N I323.S6nI-^O ^•3.43 i322.<rr
JLIFT STATION
JB22.7i023.cn
1323.0
27J ;
§t!3
MO.S.0 HOUSE§
^ IJ32?.<K TOP OF HBJ.dr B23.4I 022.30
023.03
TOP OF IRON MONUMENT - 1322.5S(NAVD IS33)
ELEVATION AT TOP OF BLOCK ^ - I323.4I(NAVD IS36)1322.77
022.92 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR:LIME
I32f.9l\022.77
I323.U
1323.03
BARBARA J. DACY023.C0 023.43]1323.23
023.35
■H
(0 UINE023.43
A'
FIELD BOOK
AL5-13^/25
DRAWN BY
JPP
,1324.53 CONTRACT NUMBER
38&-02NDERSON LAND SURVEYING, INC.
313 SOUTH MILL STREET, FERGUS FALLS, MN 56533-0125 (2\3) 73H-5263
H16 hJASNINGTON AVENUE, DETROIT LAKES, FIN 56501 ('213^ 347-0500
U
FIELD CREW
SML i JPPCHECKED BY
DAA
CRD FILE
46^1-01
CRD DISK
121 DRAWING NUMBERELEVATION OF OTTER TAIL LAKE ON 10/10/02 - I320.S{NAVD IS66J
ORDINARY NIGH HATER - I322.I('NAVD IS66J PER D.N.R.DWG DISKDWG FE^:
3&6-02 5244 J5oq
Vl \Jcori».i^'^MEMO TO:Otter Tail County Bo^d of Adjustment
FROM:Barbara Dacy, Co-Owner
DATE:October 17,2002
SUBJECT:Variance Request at 41300 County Road 1
The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information regarding the variance
request at 41300 County Road 1 on Otter Tail Lake.
Subject Property Ownership and Surrounding Ownership
I am co-owner of the subject property and am acting oh behalf of my sister Ann, and my
mother Juliana, who has placed this property in a Life Estate. The property immediately
to the west is also part of the Life Estate, and contains a recently remodeled home where
my mother vacations during the summer months. The two vacant parcels to the east are
owned by my oldest brother and sister. There are five children in tiie Dacy family (I am
the youngest), and the four parcels will ultimately inure to us as prescribed in the Life
Estate document uponTnother’s death.
The five of us have formed our own “property association” to provide for the ongoing
maintenance and upkeep of the property. While the association has not been formally
incorporated, it is a structured means by which each of us shares equally in the decisions,
expenses, and benefits of the properties.
History of Property
My grandfather, George Haas, purchased both the subject parcel and the vacant
properties to the east in 1948. At that fime, there was more than 100 feet of land between
the front of the house and the lakeshore. The existing structure on the subject parcel had
been built by the previous owner in 1938. These parcels have been consistently owned
and used as the family home every.summer since 1948 (my family was transferred
around the country because of my father’s employment with the VA Medical system).
The parcel to the west was purchased by my grandmother, Edna Haas, in 1965. After her
death in 1977, this property and the subject property was all under my mother’s
ownership.
Purpose of Variance
The requested variance is for a 22 foot setback variance from the 75 foot structure
setback requirement from the Ordinary High Water level of Otter Tail Lake. The
necessity for the variance was brought to our attention when qur contractor, Mr. Robert
Bjorgaard was making application for a Site Permit to raise the house up to 3 feet and to
complete a residing project, installing a new roof, and completion of interior remodeling.
i'
Mr. Bjorgaard had completed a similar project on my mother’s house two years ago, and
we were attempting to complete the same amount of maintenance on the house on the
subject parcel. It is my understanding that because the house is considered non
conforming (it is 53 feet from the OHW), raising the house eliminates the “grandfather”
protection and triggers the requirement for the variance, The house is not being moved
closer to the lake, only to improve the foundation strength and to provide additional
elevation as a means to further protect against potential flooding.
Why Raise the House?
It has been a never ending battle between settlement of the house and yard and the
cha.nging elevations of the water table and the lake. To use an analogy , the house is
located at the bottom of the “bowl”. The top of the existing foundation block is at
1323.41 feet. The lake however is at 1320;9 feet, and the road elevation is at 1331.37
feet.
Since 1948, we have had to undertake many projects to prevent flooding in the yard arid
to protect the house from the rigors of the “freeze/thaw” cycle of the water table on the
foundation. The following summarizes the events and the projects which have led us to
the current situation:
• The existing house was built in 1938, prior to the family ownership, at its current
location. The foundation consisted of concrete blocks at each comer of the house.
• In 1953, when the Orwell Dam was constmcted, about 15 feet of lakeshore was
eliminated. My mother says that this area used to be known as “sandy beach”.
• In the 1960s, we installed large beams underneath the house to support the
sagging floors. The fire place which was once on the west side of the house was
removed because the bricks had pulled away from the house. This is testimony to
the, settling of the house.
e In 1977, the house was raised in order to pour a continuous concrete footing with
two to three levels of block on top of it. A new septic system was also installed
(at our expense) to the north of the home. While the new foundation certainly
helped to stabilize the home, water has been discovered underneath the house
from time to time due to the high water table and periodic flooding after storm
events.
• In 1984, a first floor bedroom addition with proper footings was added on the
west side of the house.
• In 1985, the front yard and east side yard was overtaken by water. This event
prompted us to fill certain portions of the yard and to install large rip rap along the
entire length of the shore line, backed up by additional fill contained by a
retaining wall (proper permit obtained).
• Over 50 feet of distance has disappeared between the front of the house and the
lakeshore. In the meantime, the house and yard have continued to settle, and the
elevations of the water table and lake seem to increase.
Raising the house up to 3 feet/3 blocks will enable us to repair/replace the existing
foundation which in 25 years has surely experienced wear and tear from the thaw/freeze
cycle from the high water table. Mr. Bjorgaard completed a similar project on my
mother’s house to the west two years ago, and found cracked blocks at the comers of the
house. Raising the house will help us to continue proper maintenance of the stmcture,
and will also protect our home. If the yard is overtaken again by water, fill will have to
be brought in, and if we do not raise the house, the house would be at a lower elevation
than the fill.
Justification for the Variance
Section V.5. of the Shoreland Management Ordinance establisher five criteria based on
which the Board may grant a variance. It is my position that the circumstances of this
request meet the required criteria.
A. The condition causing the hardship is unique to that property.
The original and current location of the structure was established in 1938, prior to our
family’s ownership. The house was constmcted at the current location under a
completely different environment than exists today. Granting the variance will enable us
to raise the house to complete needed maintenance and strengthening of the foundation
and to protect the house from future inundations of water. Further, the house is located at
an elevation which over time continues to settle and is subject to a high water table and
rising lake elevation' If the yard is overtaken again by water, fill will have to be brought
in, and if we do not raise the house, the house would be at a lower elevation than the fill.
The existence of the retaining wall along the lakeshore, ongoing maintenance of rip rap
along the shoreline, and the consistent pattern of having to shore up the foundation and
fill the yard substantiate the necessity to raise,the house.
B. The variance is proved necessary in order to secure for the applicant a right or
rights that are enjoyed by others in the same area or district.
The house is subject to a consistent pattern of settling due to. a high water table. The
topography of the surrounding yard has also settled and has been flooded from time to
time. It is entirely necessary and appropriate to permit the house to be raised as a means
to strengthen the foundation and to protect the house from unforeseen events. The
request simply maintains the current position of the house, does not decrease the distance
to the lake and will permit my family to continue to enjoy the property.
C. Granting the variance will not be contrary to the public interests,, to policies of
the area or district, damaging to the rights of other persons or to property values in
the neighborhood.
Grantirig the variance will not be contrary to.the public interest and will not adversely
affect adj^eht properties. A similar project was completed on my mother’s house to the
west and the project is clearly not detrimental to adjacent property values.
D. No variance may be granted for a prohibited use or for the expansion of existing
prohibited use.
The existing use is not prohibited.
E. No variance shall be granted simply because there are no objections or because
those who do not object out number those who do, nor for any other reason unless
a hardship established.
A hardship has been established. The location of the house was determined by a previous
owner. Second, the house is subject to a consistent pattern of settling due to a high water
table. The topography of the surrounding yard has also settled and has been flooded from
time to time. Further, as can be seen in the attached survey, moving the house back will
trigger a chain reaction of relocating the septic system, drain field and driveway which
ultimately may not solve the issue of high water table conditions and the settlement of the
yard and house.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. My family loves our property at Otter
Tail and we want to do everything necessary to protect the property so that future
generations of our family can enjoy it.