Resolution 851 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

E (3) The openness or "open space" of the side yard will remain the same as if no easement existed. 9. The proposed location of the single family dwelling is set back more than 75 feet from the shoreline as required by the city ordinance. a. The proposed location of the front of the house exists closer than the average distance from the shore- line of existing residence buildings and nearby lots. b. The "average set back requirement" was not designed nor has it been interpreted in the past to prevent the development as proposed on this sort of unique angulated shoreline adjacent to Jack Rhode's lot. C. The intent of the "average set back requirement" was to protect the sight lines of neighbors. d. The only neighbors whose sight line or view of the lake will be obstructed by the proposed location, the Lauers, have no objection to the proposed location of the dwelling. 10. The city council has granted variances in such cases in the past. 11. A prior house, now removed, was approximately 40 feet from the lakeshore. 12. Mr. Lauer wants the building to be as far forward as possible. 13. Mr. Becker wants the building as far to the rear as possible. 14. Less than 25% of the area lying between 75 feet of the shoreline and the rear lot line will be covered by "hard cover." 15. The carriage house, presently in existence on the lot, was in existence at the time of the passage of applica- ble ordinances as well as at the time when Mr. Rhode's lot was created and given its description as presently recorded. 16. Mr. Rhode's proposed use of the carriage house for storage of his passenger cars and personal belongings does not qualify the house as a garage and therefore an accessory struc- ture. The carriage house is in excess of the size limitation for an accessory use. Such a continued use of the carriage