Loading...
Memo and MinutesCITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 21,2012 Page 3 of 9 Yard setback is 10 feet on each side. In response to another question from Hasek, Nielsen stated the smallest rear yard setback is 35 feet. Hasek questioned why someone might need to have a ramp extend 30 feet into a rear yard setback. Hasek asked if anyone else finds that problematic. Director Nielsen recommended that the encroachment into the rear yard setback for ramps be changed so that setbacks of not less than 20 feet shall be maintained. Hasek moved, Arnst seconded, recommending approval of the Zoning Code Amendment pertaining to allowable front yard encroachment subject to changing it to require a rear setback of 20 feet be maintained. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M. 2• CITY CODE DISCUSSION — ANIMAL REGULATIONS (Except Dogs) — FINAL DRAFT Director Nielsen stated the meeting packet contains a copy of the fifth, and hopefully final, draft of an amendment to Shorewood's Municipal Code Chapter 704 that will establish rules for the keeping of farm and other animals. This draft includes the final two revisions recommended by the Planning Commission during its February 8, 2012, meeting. The Commission asked to see the final draft before it was sent to Council. Commissioner Hutchins stated Section 704.09 Subd. 2.(i.) states `Any person having more than the allowable number of animals set forth in paragraphs g. and h., above, shall not replace animals in excess of those limitations." He asked if having more than the allowable number of animals means at the time the ordinance is approved. Director Nielsen responded it does. Hutchins asked if it needs to say that. Hutchins expressed concern that a person could buy more than the allowable after the ordinance goes into effect. Nielsen stated the phrase "at the time of the adoption of this Ordinance" will be added to that provision. Commissioner Amst asked for confirmation that no one will be grandfathered in; everyone will have to apply for a permit. Director Nielsen confirmed that. Hutchins moved, Davis seconded, recommending approval of the final draft of an amendment to the Shorewood Municipal Code establishing rules for the keeping of farm and other animals subject to amending Section 704.09 Subd. 2.(i.) to read "Any person having more than the allowable number of animals set forth in paragraphs g, and h., above, at the time of the adoption of this Ordinance shall not replace animals in excess of those limitations." Motion passed 7/0. 3. CITY CODE DISCUSSION — LIFE -CYCLE HOUSING — ACCESSORY APARTMENTS Director Nielsen explained one of the topics on the Planning Commission's 2012 work program is life - cycle housing. One potential aspect of this is what is referred to as "accessory apartments". The City's Zoning Code limits the number of dwellings to one per property for single-family residential zoning districts. The Code does not allow for accessory apartments in single-family homes. The proposed amendment would allow people to create an apartment within a dwelling. Allowing accessory apartments would address both ends of the life -cycle housing spectrum. It would support older parents moving in to single-family homes with their adult children, or adult children moving in with their parents. The concept of accessory apartments in single-family homes is not a new idea around the country. Cities in the eastern part of the country have been addressing this for 20 or more years. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 9 Nielsen then explained that after reviewing many accessory apartment codes staff has assembled a list of provisions that should be considered for any amendment to Shorewood's zoning regulations. He reviewed a proposed definition for accessory apartment. It reads "A small apartment that meets the standards of Section of this Code and is located within and is subordinate to an owner occupied single family dwelling. An accessory apartment shall not be considered to be a dwelling unit even if it allows fully independent living." He noted that four of the zoning districts are for single-family dwellings only, and three are single and two-family dwellings. He stated if the accessory apartments were to be considered dwelling units there would end up being two-family dwellings in single-family districts. Nielsen emphasized that the apartment, like other accessory uses, must be subordinate to the principal use. He stated that at this time Staff recommends these be limited to an apartment within the existing single-family home. It should not be an accessory structure. A cautious approach to this is recommended. It represents a fairly drastic change by allowing more people into the various zoning districts. He explained some cities limit the square -footage size of the accessory apartments. Staff has chosen not to recommend that. There are very large homes in the City and someone may want to use an entire lower level of the home for such an accessory apartment. Staff suggests a percentage of the total square footage of the home instead. Nielsen stated Staff is suggesting that there be a public process and that accessory apartments be categorized as conditional uses in single-family residential zoning districts (R-1 and R-2). A public hearing would be involved. Neighbors within 500 feet would be notified of the application and how a request does or does not comply with the zoning standards. Staff recommends that accessory apartment provisions be placed in the Section 1201.03 General Provisions of the Zoning Code because it applies to seven zoning districts. Nielsen reviewed a list of provisions that are intended to generate discussion. They are as follows. "Subd.22. Accessory Apartments. a. Purpose. b. Conditional Use. Accessory apartments shall be allowed by conditional use permit in the following zoning districts: R-JA, R-111, R-IC, R-ID, R-24 R-2B, R-2C and in the P. U.D. that allow single-family residential dwellings. c. Standards. Accessory apartments are subject to the provisions of Section 1201.04 of this Code. In addition, the following standards shall apply: (1) The accessory apartment shall be clearly a subordinate part of the single-family dwelling. In no case shall the accessory apartment be more than forty (40) percent of the building's total floor area nor have more than two (2) bedrooms. (This allows most if not all of the lower level to be used for an accessory apartment.) (2) The principal unit shall have at least 850 square feet of living space remaining after creation of the accessory apartment, exclusive of garage area. Accessory apartments shall have at least 500 square feet of living space. Living space square footage for the accessory apartment shall be exclusive of utility rooms, common hallways, entryways or garages. At minimum, living space for the accessory apartment shall include a kitchen or cooking facilities, a bathroom and a living room. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 21,2012 Page 5 of 9 (3) No front entrances shall be added to the house as a result of the accessory apartment permit. (The intent of this is to try and ensure the house remains in character with the single-family neighborhood. It does not mean there cannot be a separate entry.) (4) An addition to the original building is permitted provided that the addition does not increase the floor area or volume of the original building by more than twenty (20) percent, and the addition will not alter the character of the building. (The purpose is not to make homes drastically bigger just to accommodate accessory apartments.) (5) The owner of the residence in which the accessory apartment is located shall occupy the dwelling unit itself or the accessory apartment. (6) Occupancy of the accessory apartment shall be limited to persons related by blood or marriage to the owner of the residence. In cases where the accessory apartment is occupied by the owner, occupancy of the dwelling unit itself shall be limited to persons related to the owner by blood or marriage. (7) The owner of the single-family residence shall enter into a Residential Use Agreement with the City stipulating that the home will not be used except for single- family residential purposes and that the accessory apartment shall not be rented out in the future to anyone not related by blood or marriage to the owner. Prior to occupancy of the accessory apartment the owner shall provide evidence to the City that the Residential Use Agreement has been recorded with Hennepin County. (8) A minimum of three off-street parking spaces must be provided, two of which must be enclosed. (Two spaces are currently required. It may be prudent to talk about some type of screening.) (9) The accessory apartment and principal unit must meet the applicable standards and requirements of the Building Code, Fire Code and the Shorewood Rental Housing Code. (10) The building and property shall remain in single ownership and title and shall only have one mailing address. (11) Only one accessory apartment permit may be issued per detached single family home. Chair Geng stated he thought the first draft is very good. Commissioner Hutchins stated he and Commissioner Arnst have concern that Standard c.(6) does not allow for a full-time live-in caregiver. Director Nielsen stated it should allow for that. Hutchins then stated with regard to Standard c.(3) he asked if someone had a sliding patio door if that could be retrofitted into an entrance for a lower level accessory apartment. Nielsen stated that is allowable. Commissioner Arnst suggested Standard c.(8) be changed so that the third parking space isn't on the grass. Director Nielsen stated that needs to be addressed in another area of the General Provisions section. Commissioner Hasek stated that would apply to hard surface coverage. Chair Geng asked how a situation where the property is already at the maximum impervious surface allowed would be handled. Director CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 21, 2012 Page 6 of 9 Nielsen stated they will have to give up hardcover somewhere. Nielsen stated that is where some allowance for permeable pavers could factor in. Director Nielsen stated for most of the City's zoning districts the driveways tend to be longer. Therefore, there should be room for the third vehicle. Commissioner Hasek asked what the City's shortest front yard setback is. Director Nielsen responded 30 feet in the City's normal zoning districts. There are some planned unit developments (P.U.D.$) where the setback is 20 feet. Nielsen noted the front yard setback is not counted as part of the parking area except in P.U.D.s. The required parking spaces have to comply with setbacks. A vehicle can't be parked within 15 feet of the street surface. area is ea. Director Nielsen Hasek then asked root Hasek stated S ndards c.(1) and c.(2) O regarding square part of the total floor rof area don't seem to responded typically work together mathematically. The 500 square feet requirement is more than the more than percent of the original total floor area for smaller homes. Nielsen stated he will revisit thossee two standards. Hasek gave an example of how Standard c.(6) may be too limiting. A married couple move into the husband's parent's home. The couple gets divorced and the husband moves out. The former fooddaugshould law continues to live in that house. The City shouldn't care about that. He questioned why blood should factor into this situation. Commissioner Davis noted that earlier during this disegivers.cussion Commissioners Arnst and Hutchins noted that the Standard doesn't allow rwho s no longer legallDirector fNielsen amily me beer Hasek isn't necessarily talking about a caregiver; j aperson Nielsen noted there will always be exceptions to things. Hasek asked if the City allows overnight parking on the street. Director Nielsen responded the City does and that it depends on the time of year. Commissioner Hutchins stated he doesn't understand what Commissioner Hasek's concern is about the square footage stipulations in Standards c.(1) and c.(2). Commissioner Artist stated based on the square footage stipulations in those two Standards it will not work for any house with less than 1,350 square feet of total floor area. Director Nielsen stated one of the two Standards has to be adjusted. Nielsen then stated the provisions should not eliminate some of the smaller homes in the City. Commissioner Arnst stated during her second meeting, she thinks, as a Planning Commissioner she brought this topic up. During that meeting Director Nielsen had stated the City didn't want to look like Kenwood. She thanked Nielsen for his change of perspective on this and for the terrific progress made on moving this forward. She noted this is something she wanted to see move forward before she stopped being a Planning Commissioner. Nielsen stated the City has chosen to have a different character for the community than many other cities; it isn't better or worse just different. Director Nielsen stated accessory apartments are probably the City's best means of getting to affordable senior housing and affordable housing in general. He noted there are a lot of young families that can't afford to live in the City. Director Nielsen asked the Commissioners what they thought the neighborhood reaction to accessory structures would be. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 21,2012 Page 7 of 9 Commissioner Amst stated in her neighborhood there are at least four homes where something like this is going on. And, there are at least four homes that have become rental properties. As long as people are quiet there is not a problem. She then stated residents in her neighborhood realize things are changing. Chair Geng stated the only issue he can foresee is parking; one being too many vehicles and/or run down vehicles. He and his wife had someone with a rundown car staying with them and some of his neighbors didn't even like that car being parked in their driveway. Director Nielsen stated he will revise the draft amendment. He asked the Planning Commission if the life - cycle housing sub -topic of accessory apartments warrants its own public hearing rather than a public hearing for all Code changes related to life -cycle housing. Chair Geng and Commissioner Arnst stated they thought it warrants its own hearing. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. OLD BUSINESS None. 6. NEW BUSINESS None. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated during the March 6, 2012, Planning Commission meeting there will be a discussion about low maintenance landscaping and natural landscapes. That topic of conversation ties to the GreenStep Cities Program sustainability goals. The March 20, 2012, meeting will be devoted to talking about the Smithtown Crossing study. Sometime in April there will likely be a discussion about a request for an interim conditional use permit for a property. Commissioner Hutchins asked if the Commission will appoint a chair and vice -chair during its next meeting. Director Nielsen stated if there is a full complement of Commissioners there will be. Administrator Heck stated Council will interview applicants on February 27 h and Council will consider appointments during its regular meeting that same evening. 8. REPORTS Liaison to Council Planning Commissioner Davis reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 13, 2012, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Council Liaison Hotvet stated Councilmembers continually hear from residents about the speeding issue. Director Nielsen noted the volume of vehicles on Yellowstone Trail is very substantial. He stated he doesn't know how people can speed there. He then stated that all the things that should be done to traffic calming measures on Yellowstone Trail already exist there. Council Liaison Hotvet stated having a trail