Planning commission approves variance allowing shed at zero-foot lot line and additions within 35-foot shoreland setback at Ivy Lane property

The Nisswa Planning Commission on May 5 approved variance application 010-26 for a Shoreland Residential property at 21934 Ivy Lane (PIDs 283-506-11, -12 and -13), permitting a 0-foot contiguous lot-line setback for a relocated shed and a 35-foot setback to the ordinary high-water mark for proposed dwelling additions.

City staff described the proposal and recommended conditions. The staff report noted the property lies largely within the FEMA flood fringe; the proposed finished first-floor elevation was calculated at 1200.1, above the regulatory flood plain elevation of 1198. Staff said a final certification of elevation will be required after construction, and that flood-plain rules require the residence be elevated on fill with the pad extending 15 feet outside the structure. A three-bedroom septic system design accompanies the application, and staff recommended either consolidation of the three parcels or other deed clarifications and a wetland delineation or a no-wetland letter prior to land-use permit issuance. The report listed existing and proposed impervious cover at 22.2% and 22.5%, respectively.

Applicant Mark Brown told the commission the dwelling was originally built in the late 1950s, had been modified in the 1970s–80s, and that he and his wife acquired the property from an estate. "My goal is to make it just an amazing piece of property and house for people to enjoy the lake," he said, describing plans to remodel or replace the structure and to move the existing shed to make room for a new septic and drain field.

The motion to approve the variance included standard findings and nine conditions. The commission read an additional eighth condition on the record requiring that areas shown as "to be removed" on the certificate of survey dated March 26, 2026 "must be removed by significant project completion or permit expiration, whichever is sooner." The commission also required that the project comply with flood-plain construction requirements (including sealed tank risers as described in the staff report) and that a certification of elevation be submitted after construction.

Commissioners answered the variance criteria on the record, finding the request to be in harmony with the ordinance and comprehensive plan, that the property’s unusual configuration limited alternative layouts, and that issuance would maintain the character of the locality. After a motion, second and an aye vote, the commission approved the variance application with the listed conditions.

Next steps: the applicant must satisfy the conditions of approval — including any required parcel consolidation, wetlands documentation, compliance with septic and flood-plain construction requirements and submission of a post-construction elevation certificate — before a land-use permit will be issued.

Authority and legal notes: staff cited Minnesota Statute 462.357 during discussion of the existing foundation footprint and protections for nonconforming structures. The approval included site-specific conditions as listed above.