02-07-18 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

located such that, combined with the other efficiency measures taken in our house, almost all of our heating needs comes from solar gains; we do not have a traditional furnace or venting system in our home.[p3] This is only possible if our windows have full solar access -- which means blinds or planted privacy walls closer to the house than a certain angle are not an option. We bought this property specifically with this type of house in mind, knowing that to the south we'd have, and need to have, the privacy to give us the access to solar we needed. Everything was calculated, angled, sized, and situated according to an energy model that falls apart if we cover the east, south, or west-facing windows. To be clear, our house's viability in winter is dependent on clear access to the sun. From a privacy standpoint [p4], functionally, our windows are effectively floor-to-ceiling - including rooms like our bedroom.[5] This is acceptable if woods are next door or people are at grade level - it's unacceptably public if multiple houses are in the proposed location. Houses going in next door would require us to both get expensive external blinds[6] as well as an entirely new and different heating system to make up for the lost solar at a sum total of $26,895[p7] Not to mention the ongoing costs. We cannot afford either the upfront nor the ongoing costs and would potentially have to move (and take a significant hit to our property value due to the various other issues with this plan as already noted). This is not mere inconvenience. City code states "The subdivision will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to adjacent tracts in the area in which the subdivision tract is located;"... this is quite injurious to me, an adjacent tract. Not even counting the lowered property values for the area in general. It's worth noting that access to passive solar was noted as a reason for approval of variance in setback of a house at siems court and arden place[p8] so Arden hills has a long standing position of valuing solar as well as it being enshrined more recently in various rules and regs: it was suggested be part of TCAAP guidelines, the 2040 comprehensive plan, the minimum requirements for Arden Hills and other places.[p9] It has been used in many other places and appears to be enshrined into city codes. Beyond direct costs and impact to the viability of our home, the proposed basin plans include basins so close to some of the trees on my property that it would most assuredly kill them. These are the trees that shield my house from the Ford's house[10] [1] Memo_4 - staff notes [2] May 3, 2006 [3] Attachment C with property sizes... also in Memo_4 somewhere [4] http://www.cityofardenhills.org/documentcenter/view/1344 [5] Attachment F [6] 03-12-07-R - city council meeting discussion of partial easement vacation [7] PCP 06-07-2206 - Planning commission discussion of PC06-013. It's worth noting there is a file error on the system taht caused these to the be notes for the previous month meeting.