1A, Planning Case 09-003, Zoning Code Amendment

Home Browse Search

A. Planning Case 09-003; Zoning Code Amendment Regarding Shoreland Regulations; City of Arden Hills—Public Hearing City Planner Beekman reported that the proposed amendments impact three sections of the Zoning Code. She then provided background information and stated the purpose of this update is to clarify the regulations, introduce a reasonable amount of flexibility for unique situations, and enhance the City ability to enforce the regulations. She reviewed the existing regulations and the proposed amendments in Sections 1305.04, 1330, and 1325.07 and stated Staff is recommending the following two revisions: 1. Section 1330.031 Subd. 1 — Note should refer to Section 1330.03, Subd. 4, rather than Subd. 5. 2. Section 1330.031 Subd. 4 — the words "or more'' should be removed from the first sentence. Chair Larson opened the floor to Commission questions. Commissioner Holewa asked for clarification on the Section 1330.03, Subd. 4. City Planner Beekman explained that a new home construction or new addition would need to meet the average setback of the two adjacent homes minus ten feet. This is to protect the sight lines of the properties. Commissioner Holewa asked if other cities have this type of language in their codes. City Planner Beekman stated that other cities do have similar language. The language being presented is modified from the..Shoreview regulations and the "minus ten feet" language was used in that City's ordinance. Commissioner Modesette asked if the"minus ten feet" was a common distance in other cities. City Planner Beekman stated she did not find any cities that used a greater distance than ten feet. She clarified that the intent of this regulation is to create a minimum setback and that homes could always be constructed with a greater setback to the shoreline. Commissioner Holewa clarified if three houses were twenty feet from the lake and the middle home was reconstructed, it would have to meet the fifty foot setback amount versus the twenty feet it was previously at. City Planner Beekman explained that State Statutes regarding non-conforming structures would apply and this states that the home could be unproved, replaced, or repaired but it could not be expanded in any way. The home could be rebuilt at twenty feet from the lake if they used the exact same footprint of the original