Laserfiche WebLink
. • <br />© <br />c <br />I <br />MINUTES OF A PUNNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 12. 1978 <br />PAGE 5 . <br />After further discussion, it was decided to have <br />the staff review the 75 ft. encroachment, Hannah <br />made the following motion: as presented to the <br />Planning Commission the variance for the 2* setback <br />should be approved based on the fact that the lot <br />is very odd>shaped and narrow causing some <br />hardship to the lot. Motion seconded by Hammerel; <br />Ayes (3), Nays (2) Hurr and Frahm, Abstained (2) <br />^fcDonald and Hassel (Hassel abstained due to the <br />fact that his firm represented Mr. Nitz in the <br />original subdivision); motion passed. This item <br />will be presented to Council 6/29/78. <br />Wbr. Reardon, owner af the lakeshore lot, was present. <br />He stated that when hfc sold the property, he <br />maintained an easement to the tennis court. The <br />reasoning behind the placement of the tennis court <br />was for drainage and also to preserve trees on <br />Mr. Reardon's property. McDonald made a motion <br />to deny the variance as no hardship was shown <br />and it would set a precedent for other accessory <br />structures to be built without a main structure. <br />Motion seconded by Hurr; Ayes (3), Nays (4) <br />Wilson, Hammerel, Hannah and Hassel; motion fails. <br />After some further discussion, Wilson made the <br />following motion: We make the determination that <br />the tennis court being built by the Owner of the <br />lakeshore lot upon the back lot would fall in our <br />ordinance permitting an accessory use ahen the <br />primary structure is already in use, and that no <br />variance would be required; and that we grant a <br />variance up to 10' of the lot line of the back lot <br />subject to: 1) satisfaction of the Village staff <br />that such a variance is required by drainage and <br />soil conditions, 2) the nei^bors are notified prior <br />to the Council meeting, 3) >fa:. Reardon provides <br />proof of the easement to the tennis court in an <br />satisfactory form for the Council, and be granted <br />with the understanding that any future structures <br />built on the lot with the tennis court be built <br />without any variances. Motion seconded by Hammerel; <br />Ayes (6), Nays (1) McDonald who felt it set a <br />precedent for accessory structures built prior to <br />the main structure and the fact the neighbors weren't <br />notified. Motion passed. <br />JOHN HANNAH <br />2608 Mapleridge <br />VARIANCE <br />(y/388) Cont. <br />STANFORD WEINER <br />3080 North Shore Dr. <br />VARIANCE <br />(#389) <br />...