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

Home Browse Search

Arden Hills City Council February 11,2010 Page 3 b. The"Minus Ten (10)foot"Language Is Not in the Public Interest. On the other end of the scale is the negative effects to existing homeowners and lake quality that will result from allowing new home after new home to creep 10 feet closer to the minimum 5 0- foot setback,3 Lakeshore homeowners position their homes and design layouts to achieve the best sightlines and lake views This includes numerous recent new homes whose owners have expended significant resources to construct homes consistent with neighboring lakeshore setbacks. The plain purpose of the Adjacent Lots Setback Rule is to assure that existing lakeshore owners who have invested their hard earned dollars to maximize their lake view will not have those views blocked every time a neighboring lot is redeveloped. But if the Rule is amended to allow the 10- foot creep towards the shoreline, existing homeowners who wish to maintain their open sightlines and wide lake views would be left with only one option: move closer to the lake and hope that their neighbors do not in turn move even closer. Of course,many lakeshore residents do not have the desire or financial wherewithal to redevelop or expand their homes. And even if there were unlimited resources to continually remodel or replace existing homes,it simply is not --- good public policy to force existing homeowners to continually expend significant amounts of money just to maintain what they have today. Finally,the Stantons would like to address a suggestion that the"minus ten(10) feet"language will increase property value as suggested by a real estate agent during the Public Hearing. In my practice,I focus considerable time on real estate valuation and I do not agree with the overly broad claim that property values are generally based on redevelopment potential. Assessed values are generally determined based on the value of the existing improvements and the value of the land with those improvements in place. It is hard to imagine how the value of an existing home is not reduced when what had once been a view of green space and lakeshore is now completely blocked by a neighboring home. Further,as a matter of basic appraisal techniques, the only time that the"redevelopment"approach to valuation would be proper is when the value of the land for redevelopment exceeds the value of the land and existing improvements. Certainly for those property owners who have invested in excess of$500,000 on a new home,the market value of their property does not derive from its potential to be redeveloped 10 feet closer to the lakeshore. Of course,the redevelopment value of any lot presupposes that the owner wishes to sell or remodel. In addition,the real estate agent's theory assumes that the greatest factor in setting the value of any lakeshore lot for redevelopment is how close proposed redevelopment can occur to the shoreline. Again, I disagree with such a blanket statement. While there may be some who will focus on shoreland setbacks,there are many more who will pay a premium price based on lake frontage,lake quality and the aesthetic environment of the neighborhood. That premium price across an entire neighborhood will be destroyed if new homes are allowed to creep even closer to 3 In the Edgewater Avenue area of Lake Johanna,that means the standard setback of approximately 100 feet,honored by every home in the neighborhood except one,could quickly be reduced to the 50 foot minimum.