Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />• <br />• <br />accessory use in all residential districts. <br />Per the definition of accessory building, again, it is 'A portion of the principal building <br />(emphasis added) or a detached structure on the same lot which is used for an accessory <br />use." Again, sport courts are by definition, an accessory use (Section 1, Subdivision 2, <br />item F9). By placing an accessory use into "a portion of the principal building" it becomes <br />by definition, an accessory building. <br />We are having trouble construing any meaning other than the indoor sport court is an <br />accessory building per the definitions and ordinance citations. <br />The zoning code limits the size of accessory structures and buildings to avoid a significant <br />use of the land which is not principal in its use. Zoning codes protect property and values, <br />and we believe that allowing this accessory sport court use and building, especially so <br />close to our lot line, will negatively devalue our lakefront home. We implore upon you <br />members of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to interpret the zoning ordinance <br />literally, as we believe would so be done by a court of law, to avoid irreparable harm to our <br />property and its value. Again, attached, per the request we made of staff, is a copy of the <br />proposed addition, showing it is near as close to our property as can be placed by <br />minimum setback requirements. Having this significant mass of structure with accessory <br />use next to our property, running several hundred feet along our side yard, is an obtrusive <br />use that the spirit of the zoning ordinance does not purposefully allow. We kindly ask for <br />your careful consideration of our request to avoid irreparable harm to the value of our <br />lakefront home. <br />Thank you for your consideration in this request. <br />Respectfully submittedr, <br />/ <br />f <br />Paul and Julie Schwartz <br />2140 Otter Lake Drive <br />Lino Lakes, MN <br />