The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About29000990785000_Variances_05-01-2008Variances Barcode 128 1038323 OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OTTER TAIL MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this instrument #1038323 was filed/recorded in this office for repprd on the In day of ___2008 at^^ulhmmm) mimi.recording fee J_well certificate Lif- 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 RECEIVED APR 1 0 2008 LAND & RESOURCE Application Fe^________ Receipt Number Accepted By / Date . C<U>yie> ^ DAYTIME ^ Qfa OC| MAILING ADDRESS cX-^Q p-Z, S. i-J/. 3b if, Lfl i<^-S -4^. Surtanrl-er- ,, -h*^n.»'iA_A , 73 y LAKE NUMBER LAKE NAME [l). LclV/ -* COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK INK BlMj^Ad/tOS- PROPERTY OWNER LAKE CLASS F^jIAAA^b 'Q3^TOWNSHIP NAMERANGETOWNSHISECTION 133 4-1 "1 ^ ^r<xc-gE-911 ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER LEGAL DESCRIPTION 'FfU. Poa^ - LjF /sa/OJIjZ^ TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED (Please Check) Sewage System 38^ SubdivisionStructure Setback 8^ Structure Size Cluster Misc. SPECIFY HOW YOUR PROJECT VARIES FROM ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS. PLEASE BE BRIEF AS THIS WILL BE USED FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION. , , , .. ...rrjorK *RtLnnm.A ^u_rvxL«au<s^l>a<X-fV'orrt ciccfC(p»''Rpos^-Sc/3t<r>«iiiL-^ «>n. 6A<-s'iAt f isa. on. tfnv.'ty*. r*«s+or~<_oo<" nS-nLsaJ*'' -to cteotl eet^^ os ■es+o+>lii.h*d Sc. u>-e. bu.i)A H-hi, sc-r-aTocd*iA^ evr^a^-io « ctojtJCLiAsL-ecui <ov 3-4-K 4ror0 «d^ . -IL Vs ouy'^rc>blem '^hjd' cl Vi n.4 iCnoui -eycticrfly Uilvt.f''*. oar' di'o.irLrf't«-B u)03, ou-r' olaefC hnS ju.st' i2)-W -frona d rain_-Pi<Jd. u)«. ori. OLsI^rri^t 'Uoii do/LS idar Q-Oor»ar»«i«_-fer r-e«v&*nE' •AdaH'L.: SiVv-*^ -tfu. dc.cki. Vs tJCiii-F oa. p<^sts^ uA a/'«_ st/ll 2^-fh-frart\ drd(ru^-H«E.Id *hb ^dcojncuj^ •fi-g.tcl t&Msfern : Our-^rfenn ts oud'dafe.A 0.rui loMI be_ rW bdta^oiVr oKi/'j o|34ioit_ Va o. Irvold i<^<^ '^qaX . on -th<_'Toso U)iv^ -to cojT ,’"n * ouj' cl^sirT^lo aonn^xsl 'TA«_ Is s<ir^ry^ .Vu ar^ . To^ t>o.vId -f.h-o stYo^rv.Jr7n- oM. oJor^ i«, Ck.rrJ^'<-rn f'-r,jn I ly -Tn<>. rtiAJKT~ i _I UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE ALLIED FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMEl^TS OF THE SHORELAND ^VER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE/SUBDIVISION CONTROLS ORDINANCE OF OTTER TAIL COUNTY. ' ' r^k^d^r-^ t^-7.- •niAA-■ >1KXT^ I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT OTHER PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED, IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT LAND & RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGARDING THIS MATTER. - DATESIGNAWftE OF PROPERTY OWNER / AGENT FOR OWNER APPLICANT MUST BE PRESENT AT THE HEARING(Applicant Will Receive Notification As To The Date/Time Of Hearing) (j) an S' mm ih& fffcjuif^^l ^O' SiibacK beiAfl doproximakl^ l^' -from fkt Drai'oPi^icI -b pfoppS-^id S>cr?£yi€A io adclihon +o (X y/ VlotvitxiK-C bom 'th-e f^ciixif-ed IS'S^Hoack. bom' tv^€ ^*'^3 afprol^mcLklij -71' Uctbom tM %uen-ed )Vi cxdcb^iox) \v I)iv^l)mj (per phone donotrsa-h'on fifpU'oLnj- qq l)-izi-oS & OOc9^/Y)a /TimeDate Of Hearing Motion Gene and Nadine Tetrault - Approved Request No. 2 and Denied Request No. 1 with a condition. (8:42 p.m.) After discussion and consideration, Michael Harris made a motion, second by Rod Boyer and unanimously carried, to approve a variance of 4’ frpm the required ordinary high water level setback of 75^’ for a screen in addition to the dwelling 71’ from the ordinary high water level as described in the variance application;dated7Aprji.9, 2008 and as depicted on:fhe drawing submitted with the application with the condition that no more than 25% of the total allowable lot area can be covereci with impervious surfaces and to deny the variance as requested for the location of the drain field as no adequate hardship unique to the property had been shown that would allow for the granting of the variance requested for the drain field. Concerns with health issues were expressed as the reason for denying the variance as requested for the drain field. • . i* Chairman/Otter Tail County Board of Adjustment Permit(s) required from Land & Resource Management y Yes (Contact Land & Resource Management) No 'f • "-i: Copy of Application Mailed to Applicant, Co. Assessor and the MN DNR bk 0407-001 329,512 - Victor Lundeen Company, Fergus Falls, Minnesota SCALE DRAWING FORM e^coo - 4v / J 03 Q IS 7Tax Parcel Number(s) must identify the type, size (square feet), and location of all existing and proposed structures, additional onsite impervious surfaces, road right-of-way(s), ordinary high water level(s), septic tank(s), draintield(s), blutf(s) & wetland(s). Must also Include all proposed topographical alterations. The scale drawing must include the outside dimension (lotlines) of the property above the ordinary hig Imperviois Surface Ratio (Must Complete Worksheet On Other Side) % tr RECEIVED APR 1 0 2008 RESOURCE |OOr?4^/V\ a (A C:5or 4- b^dr&ona:) c.0 o ..........■ • 0Ar saA ■SOf‘>^^zjn«eS^ ihi 'tJuuhi" ■')'io A- liil'h 3.00 ( )IrG-. e !t io ;i II i !! [ ; i X ‘ i Ol_c:-<2_ 4 ' DateSignature of Property Owner BK — 0207 329,086 • Victor Lundaen Co., Printo’s * Fergus Falls. MN • 1-800-346-4870 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCULATION WORKSHEET: List of Onsite (Existing and Proposed) Impervious Surfaces (must be shown on scale drawing): /QKo Ft2Structure(s): Ft2Deck(s): Ft2Driveway(s): 5 Ft2Patio(s): (iDi /I jKc/ tjude^ Lolyji.,pQrn^nsjC^Ft2Sidewalk(s): Ft2Stairway(s): Ft2Retaining Wall(s): Ft2Landscaping: (Plastic Barrier) Other:Ft2 Ft2TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: Ft2LOT AREA:/ TOT AREA >ERVioire surf; /X100 =.% SURFACE RATIOIMPERVIOTOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE • » -i May 1, 2008 Page # 4 Gene and Nadine Tetrault - Approved Request No. 2 and Denied Request No. 1 with a condition. (8:42 p.m.) Gene and Nadine Tetrault, Lot 13 Grace Etta Beach, West Battle Lake in Girard Township, requested the following: Mark Ronning has found our setback from water to deck (proposed screened in area) to be 7T on one side and 72’ on. other Please restore our 75’ water setback to deck edge as established in 1983 so we can build the screened in area to edge of deck instead of 3-4’ from edge. It is our problem that we didn’t know exactly where our drain field was, and our deck has been just 13’ from drain field. We are asking you to consider a variance for these reasons Health: Since the deck is built up on posts, we are still 25' from drainage field to cabin foundation. Repair of drainage field and system: Our system is outdated and there will be no repair. If the system goes bad, our only option is a holding tank. Practicality: After adding on the two wings to our A frame; it is our desire to connect the three areas with this screened in area and to build the screened in area along the whole front is architecturally the most pleasing. 1. ) Requesting an 8’ variance from the required 20’ setback being approximately .12' from the drain field to the proposed screened in addition to dwelling. 2. ) Requesting a 4’ variance from the required 75' setback from the ordinary high water level being approximately 7T back from the ordinary high water level with the screened in addition to dwelling. The audience was polled with no one speaking for or against the variance as requested. After discussion and consideration, Michael Harris made a motion, second by Rod Boyer and unanimouslycarried, to approve a variance of 4' from the required ordinary high water level setback of 75’ for a screen in addition to the dwelling 7T from the ordinary high water level as described in the variance application dated April 9, 2008 and as depicted on the drawing' submitted with the application with the condition that no more than 25% of the total allowable lot area can be covered with impervious surfaces and to deny the variance as requested for the location of the drain field as no adequate hardship unique to the property had been shown that would allow for the granting of the variance requested for the ■ drain field. Concerns with health issues were expressed as the reason for denying the variance as requested for the drain field. George Gary Mathiesen - Approved the variance from the ordinary high water level as requested with a condition. (8:55 p.m.) George Gary Mathiesen, Lot 4 Stewart’s Oak Harbor, Belmont Lake in ClitherallTownship, requested a variance of 120' from the required ordinary high water level setback of 200’ and a variance of 10’ from the required road right-of- way setback of 20’ for the construction of a 40’ by 40’ structure 80’ from the ordinary high water level and 10’ from the road right-of-way. Scott Schauff, agent for the property owner and Russ Stobel, potential buyer of the property represented the applicant at the public hearing. The audience was polled with no one speaking,for or againdt the variance as requested. It was noted by the potential buyer that the variance requested for the road right-of-way is not needed and is being withdrawn from consideration. The potential buyer did present another drawing/plan for consideration; however, this plan required greater variance than originally requested, therefore, the Board could not consider that presentation at this public hearing. After discussion and consideration, Steve Schierer made a-motion, second by MichaeLHarris and unanimously carried, to approve a variance of 120’ from the required ordinary-high water level setback of 200’ for the construction of a dwelling 80’ from the ordinary high water level with the condition that no more than 25% of the total allowable lot area can be covered with impervious surfaces.- It-was noted that the variance as approved will place the proposed development no closer to the ordinary high w/ater |eyel than the ■ dwellings on the adjacent properties. It was also noted that the variance as approved does not directly or indirectly grant any other variances for the proposed development. Hardship is a substandard lot of record. Michael and Claudia Pederson - Dwelling addition approved and the deck request denied. (9:07 p.m.) ; .- Michael and Claudia Pederson, Lots F and G, Lillis Survey Plat of Government Lot 2; Section 16 of Dead Lake ■ Township by Dead Lake, requested a variance of approximately 76’ from the required ordinary high water level setback of 200' for the construction of a 26’ by 34’ addition to an existing dwelling 124’ from the ordinary high-water level. A portion of the existing dwelling will be demolished to^make room for the addition. The proposed addition will meet the 30’ bluff setback. ^ ' r