ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MN
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Government Services Center
Government Services Center
320 West 2nd Street, Suite 301
201 South 3rd Avenue West
Duluth, MN 55802
Virginia, MN 55792
(218) 471-7103
(218) 471-7103
VARIANCE REQUEST PERMIT APPLICATION
Your Contact Information.
If the information is not correct, you may need to update your contact information using the 'Maintain Contact Information' option once you have filled out this application.
Matthew
Schon
14985 44th Ave. N
Plymouth
MN
55446
--
matthew.schon@gmail.com
Any
General - This application is used to apply for a Land Use Permit. Applicants will need to attach the appropriate worksheet(s) in order to process. Incomplete applications will be returned. Note that the 'clock' does not begin until after payment has been processed for the application. For more information, see our website at:
www.stlouiscountymn.gov/BuildingStructures
502-0020-03130
502-0020-03140
502-0020-02880
502-0020-03160
502-0020-03260
502-0020-03230
502-0020-02831
Is this application being submitted for a Rehearing?
If this application is being submitted because a previous Variance Permit application was denied or disapproved, please select Yes.
No
Enter Applicant Information
Landowner
Matthew Schon
14985 44th Ave. N
Plymouth
MN
55446
(612)380-3497
matthew.schon@gmail.com
--
--
Mailing Address Information.
This address can default from the address you selected. If the values defaulted are not correct, please enter the correct information.
Matthew Schon
14985 44th Ave. N
Plymouth
MN
55446
matthew.schon@gmail.com
Site Information
If there is no site address, the application will be forwarded to 911/Communications to assign one.
Yes
8775 Nor Pine Drive, Duluth, MN 55803
No
US Forest Service
US Forest Service
MN DNR, Area Hydrologist
MN DNR, Area Hydrologist
MN DNR Land and Minerals
MN DNR Land and Minerals
St. Louis County - Duluth
St. Louis County - Duluth
Government Services Center
320 West 2nd Street, Suite 301
St. Louis County - Virginia
St. Louis County - Virginia
Do you have written authorization from the leased property owner?
If Yes, you must attach written authorization form.
How is the property accessed?
Enter Project Information.
If you answered 'Yes' to any of the questions below, it is required that you submit a copy of a septic permit to construct or certificate of compliance approval or municipal/sanitary district approval when applying for a land use permit.
Is this project on a parcel less than 2.5 acres?No
Is this project within 300 feet of a stream/river or 1,000 feet of a lake?Yes
Is this project adding a bedroom?
Include home, garage, and accessory dwelling.No
Total # of bedrooms on property after project completion.0
Does this project include plumbing or pressurized water in proposed structure?No
If Yes, please explain:--
Is this project connected to a municipal or sanitary district system?No
VARIANCE REQUEST WORKSHEET
A variance allows the use of property in a manner otherwise forbidden by a zoning ordinance by varying one or more of the performance standards such as lot size, setbacks, etc.
Variances from official zoning controls are defined under Minnesota Statutes 394.27 and require the landowner to prove that the property could not otherwise be used or enjoyed in the proposed way by complying with ordinance requirements and that there will be no negative impact on surrounding properties.
It is advisable that you discuss your request with Planning and Community Development staff prior to submitting the application. Approval or denial of your request is dependent on the justification you provide in answering the questions on this application. For more information, please check our website at: www.stlouiscountymn.gov/VarianceRequired
VARIANCE REQUEST INFORMATION
Complete this form along with the Land Use Permit Application
What kind of variance request is this?
If this is a Variance After the Fact, you must answer additional questions below.
Variance After the Fact Request
Describe what you are varying from and the situation that makes it difficult to comply with county ordinances.
If your proposal includes a structure, please also list the length, width and height of the structure.We are requesting a variance from the requirements of official controls for the required setback distance specified in the County's building ordinances. We rebuilt an existing deck and added a roof and pillars to allow it to become a screened-in porch. Structure Dimensions: 21’x31’x12’
Responses to Practical Difficulty as defined by Minnesota Statute 394.27 subd. 7.
Our proposed use does not differ from our current use. We plan to continue using the shack as a place for family and friends to enjoy nature. A restful retreat where the proximity to the water creates a soothing calmness that rejuvenates the soul. In fact, it’s the proximity to the water and near perfect views that makes this location so special. We simply desired to create a space where people can spend more time outside but where weather and pests remain at bay.
The shack was constructed long before we became the landowners, and has existed in its location far too long to be effectively displaced. The original builder knew what they were doing when they constructed the shack. It’s located on possibly the only flat space with such proximity to the water, oriented to face the entirety of the private lake in a manner that captures sunsets all throughout the year. They realized the value of the views, sounds, and the feelings of that spot were priceless. Our screen porch simply stems from a desire to make that place more accommodating.
Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulty, but as mentioned elsewhere, we have spent a considerable amount of time and financial investment in constructing this project, and in conjunction with the prior points on Practical Difficulty, we believe the economic considerations may be considered alongside those.
Describe the intended/planned use of the property.With the remodeling of the detached deck into a screened-in porch, we would be able to enjoy the outdoors and scenery at Warren Lake for much more of the season. It would provide protection from bugs and weather, making it more enjoyable to be outside and be with loved ones. We plan to continue using the site as it is, as a weekend getaway location.
Describe the current use of your property.This part of our property is used for friends and family to get away, rest, and enjoy nature. The current building, which existed when we bought the property, is a rustic shack that does not have all modern services. The building is only used in spring, summer and fall, and about one to two times per month. The use is light enough where it does not impact the environmental and shoreline quality. We love the rustic nature of the building and that is a big draw for our family and friends that visit. It is a chance to get away from the busyness of life and reconnect with nature. We have enjoyed the ‘roughing-it’ experience and see it as our piece of paradise.
The building will be used more frequently with the addition of the screened-in porch, allowing a greater opportunity to enjoy the lake and environment. It provides a larger area that is flat (safer for our elders) with a table and chairs to enjoy the scenery.
We are working through a performance standard subdivision of this parcel. Once that occurs, there will be one parcel for address 8779 Nor Pine Drive, and then the shack and porch will be a primary structure on its own parcel.
Describe other alternatives, if any.Alternative 1: Allow the screened-in porch to remain and be grandfathered into the existing structure with an after the fact variance for the remodel. This alternative would allow us to continue enjoying the area as we have been thus far.
Alternative 2: Remove the addition and submit a variance permit to rebuild what we had just taken down. This would negate all the time and money spent on what was already constructed. We would have to rebuild all that is currently complete.
Alternative 3: Build vertically on the current building, per regulations on non-conforming additions. This alternative is not ideal as it would keep everything inside of a building instead of more outdoor space to enjoy the outdoors, fresh air, and nature. Also, a taller structure would not blend into the environment as well as this porch.
The shack building and detached deck existed when the property was purchased in 2018. Any alternative other than grandfathering the screened-in porch into the existing structure will not allow us to continue enjoying the existing property and building in our proposed and intended way.
If approved, how will the proposed use, with the variance, fit into the character of the neighborhood/area?The shack was the first building on this property. Surrounded by nothing but wilderness, alone on a private lake, the shack was a vessel that brought humans closer to nature. A place of solitude, reflection, and peacefulness. Prior to modernization and development of the Township, one might consider the shack and its location to be the essence and definition of the essential character of the locality. It was in that spirit we began building the porch, a desire to add to the essential character and make it more accessible.
Our intent is to not alter the natural landscape. We appreciate the beauty and responsibly develop on our land. The screened-in porch will be painted to match the existing building and blend into the environment. The homeowners around the lake appreciate the look of the undeveloped lake and the screened-in porch is barely visible to the other built homes around the lake. It will allow us to enjoy the scenery and environment which also is a priority of the neighbors.
Describe how neighboring properties and the use of those properties will be impacted by the proposed use with the variance.We are listed as homeowners for 8811 Nor Pine Drive, but currently our parents spend the most time at that address. They, and the homeowners on the soon-to-be parceled 8779 Nor Pine Drive have full access to this building and would benefit from this proposed use. They already use the screened-in porch and share it with friends and enjoy the scenery. The full screened-in porch will allow them to spend more time outside later in the day and longer in the season. The addition is not majorly visible to the other property owners on the lake and would have no impact on their lives or use of their property.
Describe how negative impact to the local environment and landscape will be avoided.The shoreline was not impacted by the construction of the screened-in porch. Minimal excavation was done to level the ground where deck blocks are used to support the deck and it is set back enough that it is minimally visible by other lakeshore owners. Our primary goal is to develop and build on our land in a sustainable and eco-friendly manner that preserves the natural beauty and ecological balance of the area. We are committed to employing environmentally responsible practices and adhering to all relevant regulations to minimize our impact on the surrounding environment. We have considered the unique characteristics of the site and our design was done to protect the local wildlife, water quality, and natural landscape for future generations to enjoy.
Describe the expected benefits of a variance to use of this property.The benefits include allowing us to spend more time outside without the bother of bugs, pests, or weather, allow the current homeowners/landowners to use the space for their enjoyment, and provide more space for friends and family to gather and enjoy. We are proud of the work we did to build the porch and hope it will be allowed to remain.
The building was existing at purchase of the property. We built the screened-in porch to increase the ability to enjoy the property and make use of the existing building. We felt that utilizing the existing building was a way to reduce impact on the environment, as opposed to tearing down and constructing new.
Include additional comments that will clarify your request for the Planning and Community Development staff members and the Board of Adjustment.The St. Louis County Comprehensive Plan states in Goal LU-3.3 that variances are allowable for exceptional circumstances. A variance would be allowed per Minnesota Statute 394.22 when “...the strict enforcement of the official controls would cause unnecessary hardship.”
We recognize the importance of conforming to official controls. At the same time, the County understands there are circumstances that allow for deviations from official controls. To move the shack to a conforming location would not just be extremely difficult to do while maintaining its integrity, the greatest hardship would be losing the simple perfection one sees and feels when they stay at the shack. We have spent thousands of hours stewarding the land and the lake while living in that shack. I would much rather continue spending my time caring for the forests than tearing down a Landmark, something so simple and perfect, something that so many enjoy.
We care about our land and the natural environment. We are the owners of the majority of the shoreline and have an interest and goals to protect the shoreline and environment of the lake. We do not plan to intensely develop all around the lake because we want to retain its unique character and beauty. Our care for the environment is also evident through our forest stewardship plan for our entire property. We care a lot about the health of the environment and sustainability of our land. We did not intend to be nonconforming with the zoning ordinance, but since the structure is already built and adding value, we are applying for this variance.
IF YOU ARE RESPONDING TO A PERMIT VIOLATION, PLEASE ANSWER THESE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS
Describe your reasons county zoning ordinance requirements were not followed.Since the deck was already there, we were not aware of the requirements. The deck on the shack needed replacing for safety reasons. We are from the Twin Cities and not fully versed in St. Louis County code, and thought if a deck or porch is not attached to a building, it’s not considered an extension to the home. We failed to double check that assumption.
Our lack of awareness in this instance is clearly demonstrated in the fact that we did apply for a build permit for the cottage and workshop we built in other areas of the land, but not for the deck/porch. We knew we needed a permit to build something new but didn’t know we needed one to rebuild something that already existed.
Describe your effort to comply with the ordinance and to obtain a land use permit and/or other required permits.Our neighbors were building a new home on the property and were basically homeless since they had sold their previous home before finishing construction on the new home. We are currently working on a performance standard subdivision to parcel off the land for their home, which currently is on the same parcel as the existing shack. In order for them to get a build permit for their home and to keep construction progressing, we learned about the non-compliance with our screened-in porch addition and had to promise the County we would remove our addition. We didn’t have time to file for a variance first because our friends had to finish their home before winter. In that same agreement with the County, we entered a build permit for a compliant sized deck. In the end, since we have already built the porch, we would much rather keep that in place, which is why we are submitting this variance application.
Describe any substantial investments, construction and/or repairs made to the property before you discovered you needed a variance.We have spent approximately $15,000 on construction materials. We built the upgrade ourselves, requiring hundreds of combined hours. We had 3-4 people spend four, 8-hour days building the deck framing/boards. We had 4 people working for five, 10-hour days to build the porch on top of the deck. We had 3 people work another three, 8-hour days to complete the steel roof and trim. There was some additional time spent here and there as well to complete caulking and other finishing touches.
In total, we spent an estimated combined total of 400 - 450 man hours on construction.
If there was construction or repair, on what date did it begin? What date did it end?
Who performed the construction or repair work?All the construction was done by the owners and their immediate relatives.
Was a survey of your property boundaries obtained?No
Prior to the construction or repair work, did you speak with anyone from the Planning and Community Development Department?No
By submitting this application, I certify and agree that I am the owner or the authorized agent of the owner of the above property, and that all uses will conform to the provisions of St. Louis County. I further certify and agree that I will comply with all conditions imposed in connection with the approval of the application. Applicants may be required to submit additional property descriptions, property surveys, site plans, building plans, and other information before the application is accepted or approved. Intentional or unintentional falsification of this application or any attachments thereto will make the application, any approval of the application and any result invalid. I authorize St. Louis County staff to inspect the property to review the application and for compliance inspections. Furthermore, by submitting this application, I release St. Louis County and its employees from any and all liability and claims for damages to person or property in any manner or form that may arise from the approval of the application or any related plans, the issuance of any resulting permit or the subsequent location, construction, alteration, repair, extension, operation or maintenance of the subject matter of the application.
If your name, contact information or email address have changed, you should update your contact information in the portal by selecting 'Maintain Contact Information' at the top of this page.
Matthew Schon
14985 44th Ave. N
matthew.schon@gmail.com
I have read and agree to the statement above.
