Staff MemoE
�.� City Council Work Session Item
Title/Subject: Amendments to Zoning Regulations to Implement the Item
Comprehensive Plan for High Density Land Uses 6B
Meeting Date: October 28, 2024
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Reviewed by: Marc Nevinski, City Administrator
Attachments: Planning Commission Memos
Proposed Ordinance 608
Resolution for summary publication
Background
The City recently adopted a new Comprehensive Plan and several alterations to the zoning
ordinance and zoning map are required to implement the direction provided in the new
Comprehensive Plan.
This amendment is to revise the R-313 zoning district to allow development on parcels guided
for high density land uses consistent with the density allowed by the Comprehensive Plan (8-30
• units per acre). Other sections of the zoning ordinance are also proposed for amendment as
needed to allow projects consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The attached Planning Commission memo has detailed background on this request.
On October 1, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the draft ordinance
amendments. The Commission discussed the proposed amendments, held the public hearing
and unanimously recommended approval of the amendments. The minutes are attached to the
Council's packet.
Summary of Public Engagement: On October 1, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed the
amendments at a public hearing. Notice of the meeting was published in the official newspaper
at least 10 days prior to the meeting. No correspondence was received and no one from the
public requested to speak.
A copy of the ordinance was posted on the website, on the city hall notice board, and emailed
to all those who requested notices of ordinance changes. At the time this report was written,
513 people were signed up to receive ordinance amendments. Of the 513 people, 379 opened
the email, and 107 clicked on links to review the ordinance language.
Staff also mailed a copy of the proposed ordinance to the property owners of the three parcels
that are likely to be rezoned to this zoning district.
• Next Steps: The city is obligated to rezone the three parcels that are currently guided for high
density residential uses on the future land use map but zoned for C-2 (Service Commercial).
k:
Financial or Budgi
The amendments
ordinance summa
Action Request(
Motion to apprc
density land use
vote of the full C
Motion to appr
of the name of
publishing the i
City Council.
Considerations
drafted in-house and would have costs associated with publication of an
if the ordinance is adopted.
ordinance 608 amending the zoning regulations to implement the high-
ection in the comprehensive plan. Action on this motion requires a majority
Council.
a resolution adopting a summary publication ordinance allowing publication
inance 608 and the summary pursuant to MN Statute 331A.01 without
e ordinance. Action on this motion requires a minimum of 4/5 vote of the
•
•
E
Planning Commission Meeting Item
Title/Subject: Amendments to the Zoning Regulations to Implement the Comprehensive Plan
High Density Classification Item
Meeting Date: October 1, 2024 4A
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments: Draft Ordinance
Memo from September 17, April 2 and March 19, 2024 meetings
APPLICANT: City of Shorewood
BACKGROUND
The Comprehensive Plan guided two existing apartment buildings (zoned PUD) and three new parcels in
the High -Density Residential land use classification (8-30 units per acre) in order to provide potential
property to redevelop with densities to create some of the 55 new high -density housing units the city is
required by the state to provide. In order to implement these changes, the zoning regulations must be
changed to create a district to allow the properties to develop to this potential density.
• Sections proposed for changed:
Section 1201.18 of the zoning regulations (R-3B zoning district). In this section, the permitted uses must
be amended to include fewer low -density uses (two-family, townhouses and quadraminiums) and
concentrate on higher -density uses (multifamily) without the requirement of a PUD. The minimum lot
area per dwelling must be amended to allow for development between 8 and 30 acres, (between 5,445
square feet per unit and 1,450 square feet per unit) as well as the lot width crafted to implement the
regulation on the parcels to be rezoned.
In order to encourage, but not require affordable housing, to be included in multiple family projects, the
proposed ordinance allows up to 24 units per acre for 100 percent market rate projects. Projects with
units that provide housing at 60% of area median income, would be allowed to develop with over 24 units
per acre not to exceed 30 units per acre.
Staff and the Planning Commission also reviewed standards for setbacks and building height to make sure
the height and bulk of any new buildings doesn't overwhelm the adjacent properties. Greater side -yard
setbacks were applied to taller buildings, for example.
Landscaping: The attached ordinance corrects references in landscaping section to income producing
properties as the previous language would have permitted apartments for rent to be treated differently
than apartments for sale (ie condos). Zoning requirements should be based on the type of use rather
than whether or not its rented or owned.
0
Page 2
Staff also found that
landscaping materia
and the related surfz
standards in Section
multiple -family prop
commercial propert
Staff notes that the
changes in storm w
two different maxis
Parkin : The Staff
an amendment to
section conflicts with the right-of-way ordinance in terms of setbacks of
from public streets.
commodate the larger footprint of multiple -family buildings
from e: public
order ac
e parking that is anticipated, staff and the Planning This section of the ord n nc1e allow
us surface).
I201.03 Subd. 2 u. (impervio
kties to be developed at 66 percent impervius surface coverage similar to
o
Elderl�si�R: Stan
allow such uses as Pe
density, senior -living
Recommendation:
changes to the pro
Next steps: City Cou
three affected prope
pose to entirely re -write the section as some updates are necessary due to
requirements and to correct a previous codification error that mistakenly allowed
i standards for commercial properties.
the Planning Commission has reviewed the parking requirements are propose only
guest parking spaces for townhouse developments.
and the Planning Commission reviewed the requirements for elderly housing and
mitted uses in the R-3B zoning district to encourage, rather than discourage high-
recommends discussion of the ordinance amendments and direction on any
code amendments.
review of the ordinance. After that, staff will advance proposal to rezoning the
•
•
0
�r4or=s -� Planning Commission Meeting Item
Title/Subject:
Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan
High Density Residential Category
Meeting Date:
September 17, 2024
Prepared by:
Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments:
Draft Ordinance
Metropolitan Council Information on affordability
Memo from April 2 and March 19, 2024 meetings
Minutes from April 2, 2024
APPLICANT: City of Shorewood
Item
58
BACKGROUND
Since April, staff have made the changes directed by the Commission at the April 2 discussion to the draft
ordinance. They include:
1. Removing townhouses as an allowed use from the R-38.
2. Allowing up to 24 units per acre without a conditional use
permit, requiring a developer provide affordable units to
develop property with between 24 units per acre and 30 units
per acre.
3. Increased the setbacks from side property lines for taller
buildings.
4. Remove townhouses and income -producing uses from the
screening requirements.
5. Require commercial developments to provide a minimum of 20
feet of screening rather than 50 feet of screening when located
adjacent of residential uses.
Staff added an amendment to the impervious surface regulations to
allow greater amounts of coverage for this district. What staff proposed
is a similar amount of allowed
coverage as a non-residential
property owing for the greater
`F amount of surface parking and
_ vehicle circulation on the site, plus
shared amenities like pools or
I<< I
patios. The aerial photo on the
a right is for the new apartment
complex in Tonka Bay (about 82
*I
Page 2
percent impervious
(6200 Penn Ave S) (
A small apartment bI
about seven units pe
percent impervious st
exclude the wetland
Landing, has 105 unit
assisted or memory c
differently and the d,
acre). This project IN
standards which allo
coverage. Staff mea
at very close to that
e coverage). Another new apartment building of the same era in Richfield
80 percent impervious coverage) to the left.
(ding like Shorewood Oaks with
acre (18 units total) is at about 31
rface coverage and this does not
(elopment
a. The Pillars at Shorewood
his building includes some
dwellings which are counted30 per
is at roughlyeviewed with the R-C district
66 percent impervious surface
ed the impervious surface coverage
ount (see aerial to the right).
Staff estimated impe
planting areas are dil
angle of the camera.
While expanding the
amended, staff (plan
modern references.
Regarding elderly
elderly housing in
a
111W jm . � —
surface coverage of the properties based on the aerial photos. Foundation
to estimate as they are frequently in shadow or otherwise obscured by the
npervious surface coverage restrictions to adequately apply to the are being
ng and engineering) took the opportunity to update the antiquated language to
)r example the NURP standards referenced are outdated.
cina. Staff tweaked the highlighted areas to remove impediments to constructing
zoning district.
s. the City Council asked that staff provide more examples of the
relationship betweenetoacR� and heights to aid in
making process. Staff reviewed
in nth communities and provide the following:
developments
This building is four and five
stories in height (over
garage levels) and located
50 feet from the west
property line and about 10
feet from the north
property line.
1
Page 3
•
These buildings are about 22 feet apart. The
building to the left is 2.5 stories above grade with
a hip roof and the home on the right is a 1.5 story
home above grade with a gable roof.
These structures are 20 feet apart. The townhouse on the left is 2.5
stories above grade (30 plus feet tall). The garage and home is one
story.
•
The building above and to the right is
seven stories above grade with parking
below. It is located about 80 feet from
the house to the south.
0
r"q
s_. '.i - - ---__
Page 4
Recommendation:
changes to the pro
recommends discussion of the ordinance amendments and direction on any
code amendments.
Next Steps: After the ommission's discussion, staff would finalize the ordinance for public hearing and
request the City Attor ey review it, and prepare for a public hearing at the October Planning Commission
meeting. Rezonings f r the three affected properties would follow in November.
The next two pages s w the three parcels likely to be rezoned to the R-313 zoning district. Each aerial
photo shows an estimpte of the net acres, the likely density range based on the eight acres and how the
setbacks affect the pc4ential development.
Aerial photos are coulesy of Hennepin County and other photos were taken by staff.
•
Net Acres:.7 Density Range 5-21 Dwellings
• Setbacks:
Front: 30 feet
Rear: 30 feet
Side: 15 feet
Wetland estimated near the OHWL of public water
Oe
10
A0
z
Ott
r ,e yr
. t � •w
t► `st
At
Net Acres- .86 Density Range 6-25 Dwellings
Setbacks:
Front: 30 feet
Rear: 30 feet
Side: 15 feet
Wetland estimated near the OHWL of public water
Metropolitan Coundl - metrocouncil.org
•METROPOLITAN
c o u e c I L
2024 OWNERSHIP AND RENT
AFFORDABILITY LIMITS
What is affordable housing?
The Met Councils 2040 Housing Policy Plan defines affordable housing as housing that Is affordable to low- and
moderate -Income families. The limits are based on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
area median income (AMI) calculations. Below, we provide context for these affordability measures and an
opportunity for comment through our survey.
Who qualifies for affordable housing?
For 2024. the rental affordability limit is 60% of the area median income for TBRA. LCDA and LCDA-TOD, ownership
Affordability limit Is 80%of the area median Income. In 2024, the area median income (AM]) for a family' of four is
$124,200. For details on how this Is calculated, see History of Median Income.
We will use the following amounts as the upper limits for affordable housing in regard to the Livable Communities
Act In 2024.
• Annual updates of this page occur each spring dependent on timely updates of HUD data this page relies on. If you
have questions about these values, please contact Mala Guemero-Combs at mala.guerrero ccmbs@
metc.state.mn.us
Rental housing
Rents Include tenant -paid utilities. We have not separated tenant -paid utilities from the remvalue because we want
to consider all housing costs to determine affordability, rather then just rent alone.
2024 Rental Housing
#Bedrooms
30%AMI
50%AMI 60%AMI
80%AMI
Efficiency
$652
$1,087
$1,304
$1,739
1 Bedroom
$699
$1,165
$1,398
$1,864
2 Bedrooms
$838
$1,397
$1,676
$2,235
3 Bedrooms
$969
$1,615
$1,938
$2.584
4 Bedroom
$1080
$1,801
$2,161
$2,881
Ownership housing
For owner -occupied housing, the Income limit Includes principal, Interest, property taxes and home Insurance.
Assumptions Include:
• Fixed -Interest, 30-year home loan
• Interest rate of 6.2501%
• A28%housing debt -to -family income ratio
• A 3.5%down payment
• A property tax rate of 1.00%of the property sales price
• Mortgage Insurance at 0.85% of unpaid principal
L]
• $117hnombler hazard Insurance •
2024 Home ..,^1,
deWe Hans PAce
Pomily Inoome level
$290,300
80% AMI ($97,8001
$217,400
60% AMI ($74,520)
$178,600
50% AM[($62,1D0)
$100.800
30% AMI ($37,250)
for 2024 and other standard Mortgage
kis an affordable purchase
an interest rate of 250%one 30-y ear fixed-rate home loan
family of four ($97,800)
APpiY'ny
assumptions listed above to
a 80%of AMI amount for a
e Interest rates from the low veWes of 2022, the affordable
of a Potential
price of $290,300. With rec
fmH ogf $3047()0 based on me limited purchasing power
202mortgage
tfro increases
ourchase price has decrees
buyer.
'faml us
here because that is how HUD calculates household Incomes, and we wish to be
other household Income calculations.
Note: The term N' is
as
UD's calculated family Incomes do differ than
munttl al code as
not defined P
consistent with language
recognizes
at many household units In the metro area are
when family status including marriage has
to
The Met Council
"family oohs; no that caicul
ing benefits by familial status is inequitable
me history of our nation.
not peen available to all rest
nts throughout
affordable?
Is affordable housi g and residents In our region have expressed their
For the past several years, v loos cities, hcusla advocates,
doubts about how well the .sure of Area Median Income (AMA and the tosubsequent rental limits match the
explore haw affordability i defined
g permission to explore yJith the release
realities of the households. I 2022 me Met Council eve staff Peof our
and the potential ways, If an It can be ., AMi,tl to
dbhe the upc flea Bite experiences release of the 2050 Housanq Policy Plan, Staff is •
of the 2023 & 2024 rental" s based on AMI,
exploring the issue of definin affordability.
What is area media income (AMIj? es metro changes
Area Median Income (AM4 is a measure of median income for family households In me Twin Cities metropolitan
Area. This measure is calcula d by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (H
each Year based on different actors In their formula such as average national income, average income in our
es of the regional AMI — for Instance, many
region, and interest rates. n sing units ere often classified into varying levels of affordeblltty, based on ow
rious
affordable h is to household ernlna5 affordable to households with making 30%of the AMI.
define `deeply affordable he sing'
set, standard in determining the affordability of their uAnit is
In order to receive funding in luding Low -Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to build low -Income housing,
MI
housing unit affordability. Unfortunately, me way
potential developers need t se the iedera households being able to afford
making this standard one of rental limits do nomain ways we t capture the realties of merry
calculated and the respe
housing.
that
How does AMI fall hort?
lordThe use of AMI as me mains ndard for affordability in new housingconstruction has led to a taw shortcomings
The
use
misrepresent the Beds of low -Income households in our region. A few that staff have identified include
par
rly
the following.
ically builds its assumptions of income off a family of tour. However, not all households
me •
Area Median Inco(AMI) ty many households of varying sizes, from households of one or two people to multi-
Iook like this — oa region h
generational households wit more man five people, households with3 6% of our reglon'schildren. and ehouseholds a d have the
households that fit the HUD efinition of family' four only make up
largest share at house t make incomes
fits a t 0% of the regional
AMI or higher. Use our tool below to see
where your household type
•
L
Select your household type
i Adult(s) and 0 kid(s)
31.g%292%
8.7% 7.0%
6.0%
�2�2tt,0%
I8% 1-7% 1.4% 0.0% 0.8% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% D.3% 0.3% 02%
2a.2%
Households in the Region of this Type
Households of this Type by Area Median Income (AMI)
Band
Lessthan 30%AMI
23.6f/a
31-50%AMI
17.30A
51-60%AMI
6.7%
61-80%AMI
12.8%
81-10096AMI
12.9%
Greater than 10096 AMI
24.8%
$44,598
Median Household Income of this Type
Households of this type that are Black
Indigenous and People of Color (BI POC)
19.8%
Median incomefor household type by race
irmrne
i housetalds
391
Our region has many households with only one income earner. The current way that AMI Is calculated means that a
certain number of Income earners Is assumed and dependents such as children, older family members and those
unable to earn wages can be counted equal to members of a household who are earning an Income.
Rental limits based on the HUD's definition of AMI considers housing as affordable if housing costs make up
30%of a household's Income before taxes, but this 30%threshold Is arbitrary and Ignores that many households
face different financial realities, including medical or student debt, childcare expenses, and disability. The chart lists
some typical household expenses that people In our region face.
The way it is currently calculated, AMI uses the entire region as a benchmark for comparison, which can mean that
AMI levels of do not necessarily reflect true affordability atthe neighborhood level. For Instance, building an
apartment building consisting solely of units affordable at 60%AMI in a community where many residents make 30%
AMI or less actually creates housing that is unaffordable to residents of that neighborhood.
Alternative measures to Area Median Income
We have been looking Into alternative measures of housing affordability that more accurately consider household
costs at a more local level, or in a more representative way of the households in our region and their expenses,
Some other measures of affordability include the MIT Living Wage Calculator. Shelter Poverty measures, and
Residual Income measures. hick incorporate varying household sizes and types, other costs of Wing beyond
housing, and more specific I ographies.
tan income ad homes based on what a family of
History of area me purchase price celang for owner octuq
Through 2010. the Council 1 endfled a
four with an Income at or be Ho amAMI ble for iemllies at 50%AMI in9lnterest rates. For affordable rental units, the limit
was maximum monthly
From 2011 through 20ta, th et Council used 60%AMI as the Income limit for both rental and ownership costs.
This level was consistent the funding criteria preference adopted by the Metropoltten Housing Implementation
Group el was in 200t end s a commonly.used threshold for affordability In federal, state, and local housing
IG)
programs. the U.S.
area
an Income. 05
The table below lists the fa ty Incomes at previous I UUs Please notelthat due to constraints ddjustments used
by
Department of Housing an Urban Development M 1
to HUD's calculations, the In me limits shown here do not necessarily equal the area median Income multiplied
the given percentage.
Median Inco a fora family of tour for
the Mlnneapolls-Ssfnt Paul -Bloomington Metropolitan
HUDa Area Statisdcal Area
2023 2o22
AMI
2024
$124,200 $124,900 $718,200
$89'4r
Area Median Income
$97,800' $94,650-
$70,380
0%of Area Median Income
$74,520 $74,520
$58,650
60%of Area Median Income
$62,100 $62,100
$35,200
S0%of Area Median Income
$37,250 $37,250
30%of Area Median Income
median (amity income, so this figure is
Note: The 8o% of Area Medl
n Income limit is capped at the U.S. national
MSP:s median family income. The large Increase from
an
of the Minn"Minnea
less than 8096come
dls-Seim Paul-8loomington as well as
and national Increase In median family
Is the result of
s,bMndal regional
2021 to 2022
Increase In inflation.
•
•
0
c;t'y.fs= Planning Commission Meeting Item
Title/Subject: Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Item
High Density Residential Category 5B
Meeting Date: April 2, 2024
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments: Current R-38 regulations
Memo from March 19, 2024 meeting
APPLICANT: City of Shorewood
BACKGROUND
The Comprehensive Plan guided two existing apartment buildings (zoned PLID) and three other parcels in
Shorewood to High -Density Residential land use classification (8-30 units per acre). None of the current
zoning districts are designed to allow for that level of density.
• The three parcels include:
o 23445 Smithtown Road
o 23425 Smithtown Road
o 23400 Smithtown Road
Staff proposes to use the R-3B zoning district to
be the associated zoning district with this level
of density as it is the only district that allows
multiple family buildings containing more than
four units. Also, as no current properties are
zoned the R-313, there are no existing multiple -
family buildings that would be made non-
conforming by the changes. However, staff
notes that when the three parcels above are
rezoned to this district, the commercial uses
currently operating on the properties will be
made nonconforming.
0
C0
Page 2
Draft Amendments:
Attached is the first
topics of discussion
• Definitions that r
of the amendments for discussion. Below are the amendment highlights with
to be amended:
The apartment and m Itiple family dwelling definitions are interchangeable. Staff recommends removing
the apartment definition and using "multiple family dwelling' in lieu. Shorewood's code uses "multiple -
family" though most If the code and has separate definitions for "efficiency apartment" and "accessory
apartment", so minirnfal changes would be required to correct references in other areas.
• Amendments to tie uses permitted in the district:
Staff proposes to rem ve the following uses from the district as they are typically unable to provide the
density level of 8-30 its: Two-family dwellings and quadraminiums.
Of the two remaining se types (townhouses and multiple -family dwellings), staff notes that townhouse
developments may nc t be able to accommodate anything but the lowest end of the allowed density
range. Additionally, t iwnhouses have a large footprint which may not be suitable to achieve the density
range on the two parc Rls on the southside of Smithtown Road. The Commission may want to consider if
they wish to remove t iat use as well and keep the discussion of townhouse uses below for the zoning
districts needed to im lement the medium -density land use classification, which will be discussed later
this year.
If no townhouses are illowed in this district, discussions and amendments related to the related
townhouse definition guest parking requirements, and the need for a PUD to review townhouse
developments may b postponed to a later date.
• Should the setbacks and/or height of the district be amended?
At the last meeting, t re was a good point made by a commissioner regarding the conflict between
trying to increase den ity but limiting the impact to the adjacent properties.
Staff drafted the amer
dments to increase the side setback just for buildings that are over 35 feet and
abutting residential p
perty but kept the maximum height at 40 feet. The Commission may want to
consider if the 40-foot
height limitation is adequate to achieve the city's goals or if a taller building should
be permitted either bN
right or by conditional use permit subject to increased setbacks.
Staff also propose redi
icing the lot width requirement to reflect the parcels proposed to be rezoned to
this district. The lot w
dth is measured at the front setback, so that doesn't mean the property won't be
wider further back intl
the site. This amendment would allow all three lots proposed to be used for high
density housing to be #onforming properties.
•
L�
0
Page 3
• • Density/minimum lot area per unit
Staff drafted the ordinance amendments to require a property to contain at least 25,000 square feet
instead of the 20,000 square feet that was previously required to acknowledge the greater demand on a
property with a larger apartment building, namely on -site parking, amenity areas, and the building itself.
However, staff wants to ensure that the three parcels that would be used for high density housing would
be able to meet the minimum parcel size. They range from about 34,800 square feet to 72,000 square
feet.
Considering the amount of area the parcel must have per unit, staff reduced the lot area per unit from
3,500 square feet per unit to 1,800 square feet. That would allow for about 24 units to the acre.
The Commission may also want to consider: 1) reducing the lot area per unit to allow for 30 units per acre
by right or 2) allowing density bonuses through a conditional use permit or by -right for structures that
fulfill other community goals such as providing sustainable green building designs or affordable housing.
(up to a maximum of 30 units per acre). The city could also reduce the required parking for multiple -
family dwellings under this bonus when affordable units are provided.
Other Sections needed to be changed:
Section 1201.02 (Definitions). In this section, the Commission must review the definitions for apartments,
dwelling— multiple -family (apartments), quadraminium, and townhouses to ensure that the definitions
• don't conflict with the wording of this district to contradict the density permitted. For example, the
townhouse definition implies all units must be row -style with front and back doors. This style of
townhouses produces a lower density than back-to-back townhouses and may be appropriate in lower
density districts, but not in the R-3B zoning district.
Other sections of code that also must be amended:
Section 1201.02 Subd. g (required screening and landscaping). A paragraph in the landscaping
requirements refers to income generating properties, which would apply to rental properties but not
condominium -style apartments. Staff finds the regulations should apply to the type of use, rather than
the ownership style of a building and has drafted the amendment accordingly.
This ordinance currently requires a 50-foot landscaped buffer area between commercial and residential.
Staff propose reducing the buffer area to 25 feet as 50 seems surprisingly deep for a community with
small commercial parcels.
Section 1201.03 Subd. 5 h. (Off-street parking requirements). Staff recommends some cleanup in this
section as there is a typo in the apartments requirements and added guest parking spaces to the
townhouse requirements.
House -keeping edits are also proposed to elderly housing and two spots in the PUD zoning district to
reflect the changes in definitions from apartment to multiple -family dwellings.
0
Page 4
Recommendation:
changes to the pro
Next Steps: After
request the City A
The state legislature i
regulations but could
public hearing, staff I
conflicts between thi
Once the district is
would need to be i
recommends discussion of the ordinance amendments and direction on any
I code amendments.
discussion, staff would finalize the ordinance for public hearing and
ey review it.
currently considering additional
requirements
Should ouldlegisl not only preio po the zoning
,[so preempt the city,s comp
ould review the proposed language against the language proposed to avoid
proposed ordinance amendments and the new statutes.
(rafted and the ordinance adopted, the three properties guided for high density
•
•
0
1201.18 R-3B, MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
Subd. 1. Purpose. The R-3B District is intended to provide a greater variety in the type of housing units available within the
community by allowing construction of two-family, towhnouse, quadraminium and apartment dwellings at a density ranging
• up to ten units per acre.
Subd. 2. Permitted uses.
a. Two-family dwellings.
b. Townhouses and quadraminiums, as defined by § 1201.02, subject to the regulations and requirements of §1201.06.
c. Multiple -family dwellings.
Subd. 3. Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in an R-38 District: all accessory uses
allowed in an R-3A District.
Subd. 4. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses allowed in an R-3B District: all conditional uses, subject to
the same conditions, as allowed in the R-3A District. (Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in
and regulated by § 1201.04.)
Subd. 5. Lot requirements and setbacks The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an R-38 District,
subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter:
a. Lot area:
(1) Two-family dwelling: Not less than 15,000 square feet;
(2) All other: Not less than 20,000 square feet;
b. Lot width:
(1) Two-family dwelling: Not less than 75feet;
(2) All other. Not less than 100 feet;
c. Lot depth: Not less than 100 feel;
d. Setbacks:
is
(1) Front yard: Not less than 30 feet;
(2) Rear yard: Not less than 30 feet;
(3) Side yard: Not less than 15 feet on each side nor less than 30 feet on a side yard abutting a street.
Subd. 6. Building requirements. Height: no structure shall exceed three stories, or 40 feet, whichever is least.
Subd. 7. Lot area per unit requirement The following minimum lot area per unit requirements shall be calculated on the
basis of the total net area in the project and as controlled by an individual or joint ownership:
a. Two-family dwellings: Not less than 7,500 square feet;
b. All other dwellings: Not less than 3,500 square feet.
(1987 Code, § 1201.18)
0
dti erene...vea Plan--
Title/Subject:
ng Commission Meeting Item
to Implement the Comprehensive Plan
Igh Density Residential Category
Meeting Date: March 19, 2024
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments: urrent R-3B regulations
and Use Map
APPLICANT: City of
BACKGROUND
Item
5B
The Comprehensive P n guided two existing apartment buildings (zoned PUD) and three new parcels in
the High -Density Resi lential land use classification (8-30 units per acre) in order to provide potential
property to reclevelop1with densities to create some of the 55 new high density housing units the city is
required by the state provide.
Sections needed to be
Section 1201.18 of the zoning regulations (R-3B zoning district). In this section, —the permitted uses must
be amended to includo fewer low -density uses (two-family and quadraminiums) and more higher -density
uses (townhouses, api rtments, and multifamily) without the requirement of a PUD. The minimum lot
area per dwelling mus be amended to allow for development between 8 and 30 acres, (between 5,445
square feet per unit ar d 1,452 square feet per unit) as well as the lot width crafted to implement the
regulation on the
The building height
property and the se
overwhelm the adi:
Section 1201.02 (Defir
dwelling — multiple-fai
don't conflict with the
townhouse definition
townhouses produces
density districts, but n
Other sections of
to be rezoned.
Id also be examined to make sure the number of units may be constructed on the
:s may need to be adjusted to make sure the height and bulk of the building don't
properties.
ons). In this section, the Commission must review the definitions for apartments,
ly (apartments), quadraminium, and townhouses to ensure that the definitions
ording of this district to contradict the density permitted. For example, the
plies all units must be row -style with front and back doors. This style of
lower density than back-to-back townhouses and may be appropriate in lower
in the R-38 zoning district.
also must be amended:
Section 1201.02 Subd. (required screening and landscaping). A few of the requirements in required
screening and landscalfing refer to apartment uses as income generating properties, which would apply to
•
0
Page 2
• rental properties but not condominium -style apartments. Staff finds the regulations should blindly apply
to the impact of the building rather than the ownership of a building.
Section 1201.03 Subd. 5 h. (Off-street parking requirements). Staff would recommend some cleanup in
this section as there is a typo in the apartments requirements and the townhouse section should require
any guest parking spaces, which would be helpful.
Next Steps: Staff will place the ordinance in standard ordinance format. The state legislature is currently
considering additional requirements that would not only preempt zoning regulations but could also
preempt the city's Comprehensive Plan. Should that occur, staff would review the language in City Code
against that legislation and we may have to redraft all the zoning districts to comply.
Once the district is redrafted, the three properties guided for high density would need to be rezoned.
Recommendation: Staff recommend that you review the existing code language and discuss the potential
impacts:
• Should townhouses be permitted in this zoning district and if so, how the design of
townhouses would impact density?
• Should the setbacks and/or height of the district be amended?
• Should guest parking be required for townhouses?
• Should townhouses continue to be allowed only by PUD?
•
9