HomeMy WebLinkAbout58000330237027_Variances_05-05-20111091972
DOC# 1091972 1091972
Fee: $46.00
Well Certificate [ ] Rec'd
OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER
OTTER TAIL COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Certified, Filed, and/or Recorded;
May 12, 2011 8:45 AM
Wendy L. Metcalf, Recorder
Returned To:
LAND & RESOURCE
By: LL
THE ABOVE SPACE IS RESERVED FOR THE COUNTY RECORDER
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
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.us
Application Fee
Receipt Number \
Accepted By / Date VAV* '(V'iV-'tC)
COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK INK
iiii cLtI 'Jra\/C/ -^rlkw/x _______DAYTIME PHONE 7 O' ~ 3
1 (CrntY. T4
PROPERTY OWNER
m10 so-n: so m.MAILING ADDRESS 10 i 2 Ua llc^ Or \0L
LAKE NUMBER ^0'
T
________________________ LAKE CLASS \\] ^
TOWNSHIP NAME )OlW TWf
LAKE NAME U-'Vuucti
SECTION 33 TOWNSHIP RANGE/1
PARCEL E-911
ADDRESSNUMBER ^^0Q0'?'SOl3‘7O3d^ ?oZy VHO /3l i70 C^l-T Cce. LrliDA I 527
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED (Please Check)
structure Setback ^ Structure Size Sewage System ^ Subdivision Cluster Misc.
SPECIFY HOW YOUR PROJECT VARIES FROM ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS. PLEASE BE BRIEF AS
THIS WILL BE USED FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.
Ccn^huct YoV7;2^>^7. -y^
Ju)Clli7v Ccttsfrucfed, ai>^roK. /6' 4rzi,r\ Ol-I^L and £>nt -foot -Pr^tn eas7 let Ane ^stt-aefure, 7^
attcci-rV non - rfiAt-oCjh'Ar, oA i, 9<T>dSf-PA7s/wf>e AoSti. dePirnffneJ
^ Ci-'A^t->-i^c.ho,t A) Pujc/tim }b^Pron-i OHwL~ and Pn>,yf ^(^/^//we zr>W/3^cas/jowl
rartd. 6’ J?O.St>^/o. \Anartr< for ^ph'o b^,'na app<oA. fit,m
UJ1-C rCnun'^d Sctb/ick. /S /Scfj. • J J ''
/e.d w-*^e/7rc/not.
Q^i?on B -s c <i-
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 &
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGARDING THIS MATTER.
[/Ix.T'luJ C li______________________
SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER / AGENT FOR OWNER
jO' 'S 2- l6
DATE
APPLICANT MUST BE PRESENT AT THE HEARING
{Applicant Will Receive Notification As To The Date/Time Of Hearing)
•;3
Qj?^0(\ 3 Sio' /(.'I OL ShrA^<L i>l(i- / ^^Mj> • /f'tJt'\J ^ua.rtor^ C fv rcmoo^J ouh^A^
Zri'S/^ /o/ , S^ruc,fu.Y€ ,Of^WL CLi\d om. poof P
<>/wg' 3^. /y. Cst^^c ^ A:. ^c74"
/6' OHVjL , J-ir\ff'i.
\(p‘ ^rOMre/v,
- 4uie.il)*t Jlot^JA mc ^i
^ufu<fe^ cluJC./l\/\^ CorCA. e
ConS^frUcft'0/\^ af>j
\/i3irikAAC'^ f^r ^Cjyh'o
m^CeeAf “9ld'nc-n vie4 (2? •= ^
Sttr/w-Ce. @
4>S ' //2./M OHWL (1 f W s ef/>« JC
/v^/
t' C// £>c<Spre^.
ni. •
(S /6o9-
ft rrA-c/'l? L> <9H££^r £?P ^
^'^LL CiA^^EAJr ST/fucm^e^ uJil.l bE EEMoi/ED. Exis/~/a/E u>ebb5 Eo Et
SBf^LB D /^AJ/D <4 "A/tLu" "D££PU)£lL" DRILLED.
/y^E'/^/r)../E- g7-Date Of Hearing E)o/ O Time
o?<?//Em.V' yy
jr 7,2P En\Motion
Michael Schnoes - Denied. (7:25 p.m.) - December 2, 2010 meeting - The audience was polled with Creighton Clemens, Loren Frigaard and Curt Mark expressing concerns with the
development as proposed. Emails from Donna Mark and Craig Utterberg in opposition to the variance as requested was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve
Schierer made a motion, second by Rick Wilson and unanimously carried, to table, with the applicant's verbal permission, the hearing on this variance application until the next regularly
scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting to provide the applicant with an opportunity to consider other development which would require substantially fewer variance request. The general
consensus of the Board was that the applicant's property is not large enough to support the development as currently being proposed. April 14, 2011 meeting - The applicant presented
a revised development plan for consideration by the Board of Adjustment. After consideration and discussion, Thomas Lee made a motion, second by Steve Schierer and unanimously
carried, to table with the applicants' verbal approval the hearing on this application .until the May 5, 2011 Board of Adjustment meeting to provide the applicant with an opportunity to
consider other development which would require substantially fewer variance requests and greater setback distances. It was the general opinion of the Board that the proposed
development is excessive for this property. It was suggested that the applicant attempt to develop a plan that would contain a structure having a depth of no more than 20', would place
the proposed development at least 60' from the ordinary high water level, at least 20' from the edge of the road easement to the north, at least 20' from the road right-of-way to the east
and would not require any variances tor the placement of a septic system. May 5, 2011 meeting - After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a motion, second by Paul
Larson and carried with Rod Boyer abstaining, to deny the variance application as requested for lack of representation at the May 5, 2011 meeting and for not providing the Board with
prior written authorization allowing the Board to table this application until the June meeting. Note - Since the applicant did not appear at the May 5 hearing and since the applicant did
not provide prior written authorization to table the application to the next meeting,.the.Boardis-oniy option at the May 5th meeting was to deny the variance application. However, if there were circumstances that prevepted-tTf^pplicant from attending the May-5 meeting and it the ap^ant submits written authorization to table this application to the County Auditor's'office
within three business daysTfom this ijreeting date, the application wifl be considered tabled and rescheduled for the June 2, 2011 meeting; otherwise, the motion as passed will stand and
the applicant would neda to submika new.applicatio
Chairman/Ott^Tail County Board of Ad^tment
Permit(s) required from Land & Resource Management
Yes (Contact Land & Resource Management)
No
•'t'l
•1/
LR Official/Date '
Gopy of Application Mailed to Applicant, Co. Assessor and the MN DNR
bk 0407-001 f-' ti
1
329,512 - Victor Lundeen Company, Fergus Falls. Minnesota
May 5, 2011
,Page # 3
Kathryn Erickson Et AI - Approved the modified request with a condition. (7:18 p.m.)
Kathryn Erickson Et Al, part-of Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 14 of Pelican Township by Prairie Lake, requested
the following: Request is for subdivision of lake, property without a plat. Creating two parcels meeting minimum
platted lot size requirements of the Shoreland Management Ordinance, but being less than 5 acres. Retained parcel
exceeds 5 acres. .April 14'^, 2011 Meeting - The applicant was represented by Paul Johnson, Steve Johnson and a
representative from Moore Engineering, Inc. The audience was polled with no one speaking for or against the
variance as requested. After consideration and discussion, Thomas Lee made a motion, second by Steve Schierer
and unanimously carried, to table with the applicants’ verbal approval the hearing on this application until the May 5,
2011 Board of Adjustment meeting to allow the applicants and the Land and Resource Department an opportunity to
determine if either Parcel A or Parcel B, as identified on the registered survey’s drawing, is within the bluff impact
zone. Concern was also expressed with identifying the hardship/practical difficulty that would allow for the granting of
the variance as requested instead of having the proposed subdivision reviewed through the Planning Commission’s
platting procedures and process. May 5*'^, 2011 Meeting - The applicant was represented by Paul Johnson, Steve
Johnson and a representative from Moore Engineering, Inc. It was noted that proposed Parcel B was impacted by a
bluff; therefore, the applicant is requesting permission to create one parcel containing 2.69 acres or 117,513 square
feet instead of the two parcels as originally requested. After discussion and consideration, Steve Schierer made a
motion, second by Thomas Lee and carried with Rod Boyer abstaining, to approve the subdivision of a 2.69 acre
parcel from an existing 20.62 acre parcel with the condition that a registered surveyor’s drawing must be provided at
the time of conveyance and noting that the proposed parcel does have public road access and exceed the size
requirements for a platted lot. Note - the proposed subdivision as approved is the combination of Parcel A and Parcel
B as shown on the drawing which was submitted with the variance application dated December 16, 2010.
Tom and Kim Noah - Tabled (7:21 p.m.)
Tom and Kim Noah, Lots 3 and 4 Anderson Beach, Pelican Lake in Dunn Township, requested the following:
Construct a 34’ by 40’ replacement dwelling approximately 50’ from the ordinary high water level. Also the back of the
house will extend approximately 4’ into the bluff. Construct a 14’ by 34’ deck approximately 36’ from ordinary high
water level. Construct a 5’ by 25’ cantilevered walkway. The walkway will be above the bluff held up by two 16”
diameter concrete piers that will be bored into the slope of the bluff. Walkway to run from.rear of new structure to
road right-of-way. Existing wood ramp from road to bottom of lot to be removed permanently. Existing creosote
railroad ties for bluff support to also be removed and replaced with concrete landscape blocks. April 14**^, 2011
Meeting -The audience was polled with no one.speaking for or against the variance as requested. Prior to the public
hearing the applicants submitted a letter requesting that their application be tabled until the May 5, 2011 meeting.
After consideration and discussion, the Board of Adjustment by general consent accepted the applicants requested to
have the hearing tabled until the May 5, 2011 Board of Adjustment meeting. May 5**', 2011 Meeting - Prior to the
public hearing the applicants submitted a letter requesting that their application be tabled until the June 2, 2011
meeting. After consideration and discussion, Randall Mann made a motion, second by Steve Schierer and carried
with Rod Boyer abstaining, to accept the applicants requested to have the hearing tabled until the June 2, 2011
Board of Adjustment meeting.
^^^/f^ichael Schnoes - Denied. (7:25 p.m.)
Michael Schnoes, part of;Government Lots 5 and 6, Section 33 of Tordenskjold Township by an unnamed lake,
requested the following: '
Option A - Construct 40’ by 72’ by 25’ storage building with temporary living quarters, to be removed when dwelling
constructed, being approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level and one foot from east lot line, structure to exceed
20’ non-dwelling allowance - 5’ foot variance requested. Future dwelling area of-1,904 square feet. (Shape to be
determined at time of construction.) Dwelling approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level and 7.5’ from west lot
line and 13’ from easement road. Impervious surface coverage at 20.86%. Variance for septic system being
approximately 43’ from ordinary high water level (required setback is 150’).
Option B - Construct 36’ by 72’ by 25’ storage building with temporary living quarters (to be removed when dwelling
constructed) being 16’ from ordinary high water level'and one foot from east lot line, structure to exceed 20’ non
dwelling allowance. 5 foot variance requested. Future dwelling area of 1408 square feet (shape to be determined at
time of construction) being approximately 16’ frorn ordinary high water level. Impervious surface coverage at 17.8%.
Variance for septic system being approximately 35’ from ordinary high water level (required setback is 150’).
Mry 5, 2011
Page # 4
December 2, 2010 meeting - The audience was polled with Creighton Clemens, Loren Frigaard and Curt Mark
expressing concerns with the development as proposed. Emails from Donna Mark and Craig Utterberg in opposition
to the variance as requested was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a
motion, second by Rick Wilson and unanimously carried, to table, with the applicant’s verbal permission, the hearing
on this variance application until the next regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting to provide the applicant
with an opportunity to consider other development which would require substantially fewer variance request. The
general consensus of the Board was that the applicant’s property is not large enough to support the development as
currently being proposed. April 14, 2011 meeting - The applicant presented a revised development plan for
consideration by the Board of Adjustrhent. After consideration and discussion, Thomas Lee made a motion, second
by Steve Schierer and unanimously carried, to table with the applicants' verbal approval the hearing on this
application until the May 5, 2011 Board of Adjustment meeting to provide the applicant with an opportunity to consider -
other development which would require substantially fewer variance requests and greater setback distances. It was
the general opinion of the Board that the proposed development Is excessive for this property. It was suggested that
the applicant attempt to develop a plan that would contain a structure having a depth of no more than 20’, would place
the proposed development at least 60’ from the ordinary high water level, at least 20’ from the.edge of the road
easement to the north, at least 20’ from the road right-of-way to the east and would not require any variances for the
placement of a septic system. May 5, 2011 meeting - After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a
motion, second by Paul Larson and carried with Rod:-Boyer abstaining, to deny the variance application as requested
for lack of representation at the May 5, 2011 meeting and for not providing the Board with prior written authorization ,
allowing the Board to table this application until the June meeting. Note - Since the applicant did not appear at the
May 5 hearing and since the applicant did not provide prior written authorization to table the application to the next
meeting, the Board’s only option at the May 5th meeting was to deny the variance application. However, if there were
circumstances that prevented the applicant from attending the May 5 meeting and if the applicant submits written
authorization to table this application to the County Auditor’s office within three business days from this meeting date,
the application will be considered tabled and rescheduled for the June 2, 2011 meeting; otherwise, the motion as
passed will stand and the applicant would need to submit a new application.
With no further business, Randall Mann, Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Prepared,by:
rWayne ^ein, Secretary
The minutes were mailed on Friday, May 6, 2011 to the Otter Tail County Board of Adjustment. Official action
regarding these minutes will be taken by the Board of Adjustment at their next regularly schedule meeting.
April 14, 2011
Page # 3
Michael Schnoes - Tabled. (7:10 p.m.)
Michael Schnoes, part of Government Lots 5 and 6, Section 33 of Tordenskjold Township by an unnamed lake,
requested the following:
Option A - Construct 40’ by 72’ by 25’ storage building with temporary living quarters, to be removed when dwelling
constructed, being approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level and one foot from east lot line, structure to exceed
20’ non-dwelling allowance - 5’ foot variance requested. Future dwelling area of 1,904 square feet. (Shape to be
determined at time of construction.) Dwelling approximately 16' from ordinary high water level and 7.5’ from west lot
line and 13’ from easement road. Impervious surface coverage at 20.86%. Variance for septic system being
approximately 43’ from ordinary high water level (required setback is 150’).
Option B - Construct 36’ by 72’ by 25’ storage building with temporary living quarters (to be removed when dwelling
constructed) being 16’ from ordinary high water level and one foot from east lot line, structure to exceed 20’ non
dwelling allowance. 5 foot variance requested. Future dwelling area of 1408 square feet (shape to be determined at
time of construction) being approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level. Impervious surface coverage at 17.8%.
Variance for septic system being approximately 35’ from ordinary high water level (required setback is 150’).
y December'2, 2010 meeting - The audience was polled with Creighton Clemens, Loren Frigaard and Curt Mark ^ expressing concerns with the development as proposed. Emails from Donna Mark and Craig Utterberg in opposition
to the variance as requested was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a
motion, second by Rick Wilson and unanimously carried, to table, with the applicant’s verbal permission, the hearing
on this variance application until the next regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting to provide the applicant
with an opportunity to consider other development which would require substantially fewer variance request. The
general consensus of the Board was that the applicant’s property is not large enough to support the development as
currently being proposed. April 14, 2011 meeting - The applicant presented a revised development plan for
consideration by the Board of Adjustment. After consideration and discussion, Thomas Lee made a motion, second
by Steve Schierer and unanimously carried, to table with the applicants’ verbal approval the hearing on this
application until the May 5, 2011 Board of Adjustment meeting to provide the applicant with an opportunity to consider
other development which would require substantially fewer variance requests and greater setback distances. It was
the general opinion of the Board that the proposed development is excessive for this property. It was suggested that
the applicant attempt to develop a plan that would contain a structure having a depth of no more than 20’, would place
the proposed development at least 60’ from the ordinary high water level, at least 20' from the edge of the road
easement to the north, at least 20’ from the road right-of-way to the east and would not require any variances for the
placement of a septic system.
Barry and Connie Rongen - Approved the application as requested with conditions. (7:36 p.m.)
Barry and Connie Rongen, Lot 13 Star Lake Beach, Star Lake in Star Lake Township, requested a variance of 20’
from the required road right-of-way setback of 20’ for the placement of a structure 0’ from the road right-of-way. The
audience was polled with Kris Svingen, Attorney, speaking on behalf of the owner (Dawn Sternal) of Lot 8, Star Lake
Beach. The only existing access to the property owned by Mr. Svingen’s client is this so called abandoned road,
which at the present time has not been legally vacated. It was noted that if Mr. Svingen’s client could obtain access to
her property through another means she would probably have no objection to this request. An email from Paul
Randall in support of the variance as requested was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve
Schierer made a motion, second by Michael Harris and carried with Rick Wilson voting no, to approve a variance of
20’ from the required road right-of-way setback of 20’ for the placement of a structure 0’ from the road right-of-way of
the abandoned road as depicted on the drawing submitted with the application with the condition that the so labeled
abandoned road must be legally vacated before any permits can be issued for the proposed development and with
the condition that no more than 25% of the total eligible lot area can be covered with impervious surfaces once the
proposed development can be completed.
f-
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Thursday, December 2, 2010
The Otter Tail County Board of Adjustment met Thursday, December 2, 2010, with the following persons in
attendance:
Paul Larson
Steve Schierer
Mark Ronning, Land and Resource Management
David Hauser, County Attorney
Thomas Lee
Rick Wilson
Michael Harris
Randall Mann
Called to Order - Randall Mann, Chair called the meeting of the Board of Adjustment to order at 6:30 p.m.
Minutes Approved - The Board of Adjustment approved the minutes of the November 4, 2010 meeting as mailed.
The Board of Adjustment considered the following applications for variance:
Donald and Janet Nelson - Variance approved as requested with a condition. (6:31 p.m.)
Donald and Janet Nelson, part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 24 of Elizabeth Township
by Jewett Lake, requested a variance to subdivide 4.5 acres from an existing 32.54 acre parcel for residential use.
The minimum size for metes and bounds parcels within the shoreland area is 5 acres. The audience was polled with
no one speaking for or against the variance as requested. After discussion and consideration, Steve Schierer made a
motion, second by Thomas Lee and carried with Michael Harris voting no, to approve a variance to subdivide 4.5
acres, depicted as Tract D on the drawing submitted with the variance application, from an existing 32.54 acre parcel
for the purpose of residential development with the condition that a registered surveyors drawing must be presented
at the time of conveyance. The parcel has access to a public road and exceeds the required size for platted back lots.
Michael Schnoes - Tabled. (6:38 p.m.)
Michael Schnoes, part of Government Lots 5 and 6, Section 33 of Tordenskjold Township by an unnamed lake
requested the following:
Option A - Construct 40’ by 72’ by 25’ storage building with temporary living quarters, to be removed when dwelling
constructed, being approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level and one foot from east lot line, structure to exceed
20’ non-dwelling allowance - 5’ foot variance requested. Future dwelling area of 1,904 square feet. (Shape to be
determined at time of construction.) Dwelling approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level and 7.5’ from west lot
line and 13' from easement road. Impervious surface coverage at 20.86%. Variance for septic system being
approximately 43’ from ordinary high water level (required setback is 150’).
Option B - Construct 36’ by 72’ by 25’ storage building with temporary living quarters (to be removed when dwelling
constructed) being 16’ from ordinary high water level and one foot from east lot line, structure to exceed 20’ non
dwelling allowance. 5 foot variance requested. Future dwelling area of 1408 square feet (shape to be determined at
time of construction) being approximately 16’ from ordinary high water level. Impervious surface coverage at 17.8%.
Variance for. septic system being approximately 35’ from ordinary high water level (required setback is 150’).
The audience was polled with Creighton Clemens, Loren Frigaard and Curt Mark expressing concerns with the
development as proposed. Emails from Donna Mark and Craig Utterberg in opposition to the variance as requested
was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a motion, second by Rick Wilson
and unanimously carried, to table, with the applicant’s verbal permission, the hearing on this variance application until
the next regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting to, provide the applicant with an opportunity to consider
other development which would require substantially fewer variance request. The general consensus of the Board
was that the applicant’s property'is not large-enough to support the development as currently being proposed.
420 SQ. FT Driveway
300SQ. FTShed/Wen
3,878 SQ. FT House/Garage
® ■ ^18.85% Covering Property
Red Lines = Property Lines
Blue = Lake Bondry
Purple = Road
Green = Proposed Buildings
Buildings = Near Property
= Line of Sight
9 = Ordinary High Water Level
T
•)»
Michael Schnoes
1012 Valley View Dr.
Ida Grove, lA 51445
Land and Resource Management
Government Services Center
540 Fir Ave W
Fergus Falls, MN 56537
Dear Variance Board Members:
1 am applying for variance for the two properties that 1 currently own. I am
applying for a variance due to that fact that my two lots are only 108 feet deep on
an unnamed environmental lake (56-420). 1 would like to build a machine shed
40’X72’X35’ (3,108 sq. ft.) with a one foot overhang. The building would be
placed on footings and have a cement floor, I would also like to include a 28’X28’
(784 sq. ft.) living space inside the unit until 1 am able to build a house. Once the
house is built the. living space will be taken out of the machine shed. I would like
to build the machine shed one foot away from the (58000330237030) west
property line for the simple fact that my property line is fifteen feet away from Golf
Course RD.
I am hoping that I will be able to build a home with in the next three to seven
years or possible sooner. I would like the house to be 34’X56’X35’ (2,088 sq. ft.)
or 32’X44’X35’ (1.564 sq. ft.). There is also a 32’X79’ (2,500sq. ft.) area for the
sewage treatment area.
1 would personally like to build the home with the machine shed but unfortunately
I have not been able to find a position near my property. Currently I use the
property for my second home, which I spend my summers and weekends at. I am
currently a high school teacher in Iowa.
I have enclosed two options (“A” and “B”) that I would like but 1 am more than
willing to work with the board on changing the size of the home and machine
shed.
1 have enclosed photos of the current property, which include the current
structures. I have also included my neighbor’s garage, which is sitting against the
property stake on the northeast corner of lot 58000330237027. His garage was
built in 2000.
Sincerely,
|'\a, I —■
Michael Schnoes
iMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCULATION WORKSHEET:
I
List of Onsite (Existing and Proposed) Impervious Surfaces (must be shown on scale drawing):
R2. Structure(s);
Ft2Deck(s):
^ OfTloM a"112.Ft2Driveway(s):
Ft2Patio(s):
1Ft2Sidewalk(s):
Ft2Stairway(s);\0
Ft2Retaining Wall(s):
Ft2Landscaping:
(Plastic Barrier)
Other;Ft2
Ft2TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:t
Ft2LOT AREA:
9.0.u= .3ox1C> (r).%X TOO =•f 1TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIOLOT AREA
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCULATION WORKSHEET:
List of Onsite (Existing and Proposed) Impervious Surfaces (must be shown on scale drawing):
U^ooo Ft2Stmcture(s):
Ft2Deck(s):
Ft2Driveway(s):
Ft2Patio(s):
Ft2Sidewalk(s):
Ft2Stairway(s);
Ft2Retaining Wall(s):
\tFt2Landscaping:
(Plastic Barrier)
Other:
.\0
\0'Ft2
Ft2TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:/
2 7 K Ft2LOT AREA:
^ g-17,^H 277,0 =.%X 100 =
, TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIOLOT AREA
■j
■7
H ,,,v,
Pre-Applicatiori SjitSllRspection Request
r-'
i
Lake / River No. Lake / River Name Lake/River Class Section T\wp Name
%ib:l^^
oProperty (E-911) Address
\ i^cU-
Parcel(s) No.;000 '^'b ^Xb'~\ OTTl
'0& coo Tfh OWl
r-
Property Owner Information:
lAC^t.SName(s):
\j/x,\\‘0| VbimAddress:
\ V^-V-; :---04; v-A -iro O V i 4-f\ ^,(7.^ tvC-U-gA- ^ ..^o3 4-R-Daytime Phone:
Type of Request:
Bluff:___Determination
y. Determination
___Determination
Stake Setback Verify Setback
OHWL:Stake Setback Verify Setback
Stringtest:
Non-Conforming Repair or Replacement Structure:
Miscellaneous:___________________________
Describe Request: 4ia OH\.OL i
Confirm Consistency With Existing Structure
, {OMM) avd][?y viWi^^oHniA
A scale drawing must accompany Pre-Application Site Inspection Request
& request must be staked onsite
(o-22-/d
Property Owner Date
HiA'MkxkM'Received By;y
Land & Resource Management Staff Date
INSPECTION COMPLETED (Inspection must be done within 10 days of receipt):
Date Onsite Date Property Owner Notified Inspector
(Inspector must provide site drawing or field notes on other side.)
mbowman Application & Forms Pre-Application Site Insp Request Form10/1/07
i