Laserfiche WebLink
~aucks <br />~m <br />• <br /> <br /> <br />August 29,1995 <br />PLI:VNERS <br />ENGINEERS <br />SURVEYORS <br />DESIGNERS <br />ARCHEOLOGISTS <br />Mr. Steven Ach <br />City of Elk River <br />13065 Orono Pazkway <br />Elk River, Minnesota 55330 <br />Re: Meadowvale Heights Second Addition <br />Request for Variance setback on Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, Elk River, Minnesota <br />Loucks Project No. 93-101B <br />Dear Mr. Ach: <br />On behalf of the developer, Mr. Dennis Backes, we are requesting a variance to the front yard <br />and reaz yard setback for Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, in Meadowvale Heights Second Addition. The <br />requested variance is for the following: <br />1. Front yard setback of 25 feet (5 foot variance) <br />2. Setback. from ditch 30 feet (20 foot variance) <br />The purpose of the variance is to allow construction of homes on these two lots with an <br />approximate 40 foot house pad without relocation of the existing ditch, see attached drawing. <br />During Phase I, we obtained permission. from the City, County, DNR and Army Corps of <br />Engineers to fill the ditch and install a culvert in order to build the roadway (192 1/2 Street) to <br />Meadowvale Road. In addition, we met with the County Engineer and the County Ditch <br />Inspector to design. the final ditch relocation. At that time, the County .required this ditch <br />segment be incorporated into the County ditch system by placing easements over the ditch. It <br />was our understanding that the County was the agency to approve the ditch realignment. The <br />DNR wrote a letter to the City of Elk River dated March 30, 1993, indicating that the ditch <br />filling did not need a permit. Because lot sales were not going as anticipated in Phase I, the <br />ditch relocation process was. put on hold by the developer. <br />This yeaz when we proceeded with the final plat for Meadowvale Heights Second Addition, we <br />approached the County and City to relocate the ditch. It was also .our belief that the DNR <br />would not have jurisdiction over this section of ditch because it had a tributary azea under five <br />square miles as stated in their March 30,1993, letter. Circumstances and approvals are different <br />than what was anticipated in 1993. The County position is that the City is responsible for the <br />ditch. We submitted the plans to the City and they required us to get DNR authorization. The <br />DNR now claims jurisdiction over the ditch and has indicated they will not approve the ditch <br />relocation. After reviewing the ditch relocation with the City staff and the DNR, it was <br />7200 HEMLOCK LANE, SUITE 300, MAPLE GROVE, ~'1l,VNESOTA X5369-5592 <br />TEL: (Fi 1 2) 424-5505 F:~x: Iti 1 2) 424-822 <br />