Laserfiche WebLink
—square feet,minimum <br /> Building height-feet,maximum 25 25 25 <br /> Building height,accessory structure-feet, 13 13 13 <br /> maximum <br /> Comments from the lake associations: <br /> Cullen Lakes Association: <br /> We have no objection to the proposed guest cottages/guest quarters language allowing <br /> them to be placed on a conforming riparian lot. We especially appreciate the language <br /> regarding the SIZ protection/restoration requirement and the stormwater management <br /> requirements. <br /> Thank you for reaching out to the lake associations within your jurisdiction. <br /> Ann Beaver <br /> Cullen Lakes Association president and chair of its Land Development Committee <br /> East T�vin Lake Association: <br /> ETLA would be comfortable with the following: <br /> • Reducing the required lot width from the current i8o feet to ioo feet; <br /> • Requiring a io foot setback along the lot lines - I think this is the same as <br /> for home structures; <br /> • Only i (one) guest cabin be permitted per lot; <br /> • Setback from the lake would have to be at least 75 feet; <br /> • Guest quarters would be allowed in an "out"building (i.e. storage barn, <br /> etc.)but only allowed if there is a primary home on the property. <br /> Mavo Lake Association: <br /> In the feedback we have had from the Board members, which do not support the <br /> amendments, the responses have to do exclusively with the concern that the ability to add <br /> guest cottages or quarters would open the property up for additional rentals. On a larger <br /> lake, these issues may not be as obvious,but on our small lake, we have had problems <br /> with rentals, one in particular, and the possibility of additional rentals is driving that <br /> response. If the amendment allows for a reduced lot size that makes this a geater <br /> possibility. We also understand that the amendments provide for more rigorous <br /> stipulations,but those could be a minor barrier for someone who is really committed to <br /> the addition of a guest dwelling. We don't suppose that the amendment could require that: <br /> 1) dwelling may not be used as a rental; and/or 2) leave the 180 foot minimum for the <br /> width of the lot size? <br /> Thank you for giving us an opportunity to comment. <br /> Pequot Lakes Staff Report 6•2-3 <br /> November i9,2020 <br />