HomeMy WebLinkAbout17000991903000_Variances_09-14-2006100S865 COUNTY RECORDER
OTTER TAIL MINNESOTA
I hereby certify that- ..
this instrument <t
was filed/recorded in this office ^
the^Z^day of
'''' “I006at^i/pmWeni
w
%ecord^
^Deputy^recording fee
! weli certificate
UL
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
(30.
Application Fee
?lnCo(fCOMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK INK Receipt Number .
Accepte(d By / Date
DAYTIME PHONE / S
lx> ^^ Sc j- •x ____0 flhCO ^
' /V^iPROPERTY OWNER
MAILING ADDRESS
5L-7G (LAKE CLASSLAKE NUMBER LAKE NAME
0^7-A g i'\SECTION TOWNSHIP
n~00O’“ OCX)
I7~OCO-0^ - 00^7-QO\
RANGE TOWNSHIP NAME
PARCEL
NUMBER
E-911
ADDRESS
0.LEGAL DESCRIPTIONUf I ^ u3 o4 A'Sjic^ /S /Om ^ ^ -I-(i.t> A i Oy^
TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED (Please Check)
i-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.
^ f
I c/lA. c/
<2. »/L.
p^J
» v-x » C\ ^ ^
S /<VL A«/i /h<k '
/- -/~g 0'(' /TirT-4>^ s ^^ VA
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.
u^/4.
OWNSSIGNATURE OF PROP0pf DATENER
APPLICANT MUST BE PRESENT AT THE HEARING(Applicant Will Receive Notification As To The Date/Time Of Hearing)
J'/c /fmDate Of Hearing Time
/
Motion
William M Biasczyk- Denied. (9:10 p.m.)
After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a motion, second b,y Paul Larson 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 as requested and noting that the granting of the variance as requested would establish a precedence that the Board
does not wish to establish. The Board also noted that the applicant does have other alternatives to consider.
(f
^rman/Otter Tail County Board of Adjifstment
Permit(s) required from Land & Resource Management
Yes (Contact Land & Resource Management)
No
9 \ofl/mCopy of Application Mailed to Applicant, Co. Assessor and the MN DNR
L R Official/Date
bk 0106-001
V. Lundeen 324855
September 14,2006
Page # 4
John Stumpf-Denied. (8:15 p.m.)
John Stumpf, Lot 2 Block 1 Perrin Subdivision, Crystal Lake in Lida Township, requested the following: we request a
variance to leave a deck that was constructed in the bluff impact zone. The deck currently serves as a protective
erosion control measure. A letter from Timothy Haugen in support of the.variance as requested was read for the ■
record. The audience was polled'with no one speaking for or against the variance as requested. After consideration
and discussion, Paul,Larson made a motion, second by Randall Mann 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 as requested and noting that this is an after the fact request and had the applicant submitted a request prior
to the start of the project the Board would not have granted a variance for the project as currently developed. After
additional consideration and discussion, Paul Larson made a motion, second by Randall Mann and unanimously
carried, to require that the applicant remove, under the direction and supervision of the Land and Resource
Department, the deck on or before January 1,2007. The Board requested that the removal process be directed and ’
supervised by,the Land and Resource Department to assure that the removal is done in a manner that will protect the
bluff and eliminate erosion.
Wayne Horgen - Tabled (8:30 p.m.)
Wayne Horgen, part of Government Lot 1, Section 30 of.Girard Township by West Battle Lake, requested the
following: “This is a variance request to develop three residential back lots with a reduction in the minimum frontage
requirements for residential back lots. The requirement for residential back lots for a General Development lake is
200 feet of frontage and 40,000 square feet: ' The request is a reduction for Lot 1 of 100 feet and 2 and 3 is reduction
of 150 feet from the required 200 feet. On proposed Lot 2 and Lot 3, the proposed plan is to have a common shared
driveway for the lots.' Upon approval for the variance, the applicant will proceed to submit to the Otter Tail County
Planning Commission to subdivide the lots. Jim Peterson appeared with the applicant at the public hearing. The
audience was polled with Orlo and Barbara. Basiington, James Line and Bob Westgaard expressing concerns with the
variance as requested. Letters from Glennis Decker-Brosz, Marilyn Eastman, Michael Werner, Robert and Judith
Reed and William and James Jedlicka,' Rod and Bonnie Nelson and James and Linda Line in opposition to the
variance as requested was read for the record. An email from Mark Neitzke and Nancy Grossman opposing the
variance as granted was read for the record. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer made a motion,
second by Randall Mann and unanimously carried, with the verbal permission of the applicant, to table this application .
until the October 5, 2006 Board of Adjustment meeting to allow the applicants an opportunity to consider other
subdivision alternatives.
William M Blasczyk - Denied. (9:10 p.m.)
William M. Blasczyk, part of Government Lot 13, Section l and part of Government Lot 11, Section 2 of Dunn
Township by Little Pelican Lake; requested the following: Requirements are for 5 acre minimum lots for metes and
bounds standards in the shoreland area. I would like a variance to allow for ten smaller lots as indicated on the
survey filed with'the County Auditor's office. A total of 10 parcels will be created. These 10 parcels will also have a
1/10 interest in a larger tract. The proposed ten parcels range in size from 1.6 acres to 3.2 acres. The audience was
polled with Fred Manuel speaking for the variance as requested. After consideration and discussion, Steve Schierer
made a motion, second by Paul.Larson 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 as requested and
noting that the granting of the variance as requested would establish a precedence that the Board does not wish to
establish; The Board,also noted that the applicant does have other alternatives to consider.
ri(<'I
4 ^// //~