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

Home Browse Search

02/02/10 TLTE 10:071 FAX FAXL4000 - 121002 February 2, 2010 Ms. Meagan Beekman, Planner City of Arden Hills 1245 Highway 96 West Arden Hills, Minnesota, 55112 RE: Proposed Shoreland RegulatiODSection 1.330.03, Subd.4 -- Adjacent Lots I am writing in opposition to the proposed amendment of Section 1330. I am especially concerned about the words"minus ten (10) feet"' which will permit a shoreliai.e setback that is less than the average of the setbacks for existing adjacent dwellings. he proposed amendment will let the genie out of the bottle. Once one homeowner takes advantage of the reduced setback-- impairing the site lines to the lake from adjacent homes -- the neighbors with impaired views will respond in - kind by building closer to the lake to try to recapture their lost views,thereby reducing yet again the required setback. And so on and so on until eventually all structures clang the entire shoreline are built to the minimum setback of 50 feet. That will not happen.overnight, but it will inevitably happen. What a tragedy that would be for the residents of Arden Hills, and not just for those living on the lake but for alb residents who enjoy the green space around the City's lakes. That is what makes Arden Dills special and it will be fast if this aznendment is passed. As drafted, this is a very detrimental amendment with long-term and irreversible effects. I encourage the Planning Commission to Recommend Denial. 1 Would be supportive of the amendment if the words "ininus ten(10) feet" were deleted from the proposed Section 1330.03, Subd.4—Adjacent bats. I am a trustee of the Trust that owns the residence at 1569 Edgewater ,Avenue in the City of Arden Hills where my mother Elizabeth Stanton resides. Sincerely yours, Mary Then Stanton