HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFD - 19-00276 - 669 S 12th W - CUP Accessory Apartment in RR11 | Page
#19 00276
Conditional Use Permit: Accessory Apartment
669 S 12th W
1. May 13, 2019, An application was received for a Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory
Apartment in a Rural Residential 1 zone by Susan Hyde.
2. May 28, 2019, Notice was sent to the newspaper to be published on June 4, 2019, and June
18, 2019.
3. May 29, 2019, an official notice of the hearing and public hearing instructions were mailed to
all adjacent property owners within 350’ of the parcel. The Staff Review Summary was sent
to Susan Hyde. Additional information was required.
4. May 30, 2019, Susan Hyde responded via email to the Staff Review Summary comments.
5. Jun 11, 2019, Notice was posted on the property at 669 S. 12th W.
6. June 17, 2019, the Staff Report was completed and all documents were sent to the
Commissioners.
7. June 20, 2019, Tawnya Grover and Natalie Powell presented the application before the
Planning & Zoning Commission.
6:35PM (19-00276) – 669 S 12th W - Conditional Use Permit to allow an Accessory
Apartment in a Rural Residential 1 zone. The applicant is proposing using a shed-sized
tiny home for her parents to live in. The home has been moved from the Mill Hollow
Community Trailer Park, here in Rexburg. (action) – Susan Hyde
Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any conflicts of interest or had
been approached by any parties relative to this particular subject. If you believe your prior
contact with respect to this subject has created a bias, you should recuse yourself, otherwise
at this time please indicate the nature of your conversation or contact.
Chairman Rory Kunz reviewed the public hearing procedures.
Susan Hyde – 669 S 12th W – Susan has applied for the Conditional Use Permit. Before
she purchased the home, she visited with the city to learn if it was possible to put the tiny
home on her property. This is one of the few places in the city that does allow accessory
apartments. Susan Hyde showed pictures of the tiny home.
35 North 1st East
Rexburg, ID 83440
Phone: 208.359.3020
Fax: 208.359.3022
www.rexburg.org
Reason for Decision
City of Rexburg
2 | Page
Susan has moved the home to her property, but has not done anything else. She doesn’t
want to spend any money if the permit does not go through. The home is built to the
current safety standards. Susan showed the Occupancy Permit. The home was built at Mill
Hollow trailer park.
Greg Blacker asked who would occupy the home. Susan is putting the home in for her
parents. She identified where her sister lives; this is the current residence of Susan’s parents.
Her parents help with her sister’s children and when they are not helping, her parents would
have their own space. When the parents move out of the tiny home, Greg Blacker asked
who would stay in the home. Susan said she would stay in the tiny home. Susan works in
Island Park long-term. When she visits from Island Park for the next three years, she would
stay in the tiny home with her children and spouse. Susan said she would rent out the
property’s main home. Steve Oakey asked about neighborhood covenants. Susan does not
know of a Home Owners’ Association. Vince Haley asked about the comment Susan
made, “this is one of the few places in the city where a tiny home would be allowed.” The
Rural Residential 1 zone is one of the places an accessory apartment is allowed. The tiny
home is not real property and will not stay at this location permanently. The bank would
not loan on the tiny home. There are other places in the neighborhood that have bully
barns. The size of the tiny home is 14’ x 40’. The main home has never had a proper yard
and has been a rental most of its existence. The city has an easement clear into the yard to
widen the road. Susan intends to beautify the yard. She does not intend to rent to anyone
that is not family. Susan would like to hook on to city water and sewer, but it is $75 just for
a permit: $700 each for water and septic. She will have to hook-up to the well and septic
currently existing for the main home. District 7 Health has told Susan if the septic is big
enough, she will be able to hook-in to the existing septic. Otherwise, she would have to add
on to the septic system. Todd Marx asked about the setbacks. Rural Residential 1 requires
10’ for the side yard and 40’ for the front yard and 30’ for the rear yard setbacks are needed.
Staff Report: Tawnya Grover - The home is located near Burton Elementary and the High
School. There are residential uses and open fields around the home. Summerfield
Subdivision is nearby. Recently, the Commission recommended two divisions in
Summerfield, but these have not been completed yet. Public Works identified that sewer
and water lines in front of the property that could serve the property. If District 7 Health
can verify that the well and septic can handle the extra occupancy, Public Works felt this
would be sufficient. The zone, Rural Residential 1 allows for the use called “accessory
3 | Page
apartment.” However, the Development Code does not define what is meant by this term,
which leads us to believe the apartment can either be attached to the home or in a separate
building. There is a Comprehensive Plan objective that supports the request: 11.1.6 “Allow
for the development of senior housing, including accessory dwelling units in appropriate areas, so that housing
for all phases of the life cycle will be available within the City (p.123).” Rural Residential 1 and Rural
Residential 2 both allow an “accessory apartment” with a Conditional Use Permit. Staff
recommends conditions be placed on this request. There is a possibility this tiny home
could turn into an Air B&B use. The Conditional Use Permit will stay with the property
when the property is sold. The Conditional Use Permit would be in effect regardless of the
change of ownership unless a sunset clause is put in place.
Natalie Powell explained, the neighborhood is a single-family, stable neighborhood
that was once in the county. The neighborhood was then annexed into the city and many of
the neighbors feel some of their rights have been taken away. Rory Kunz clarified the
request is for a Conditional Use Permit. Natalie Powell stated, the conditions protect the
neighborhood and the property owner.
Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any clarification
questions for staff. Greg Blacker clarified there are no rules for tiny homes. Tawnya
responded, tiny homes are not regulated right now. The closest requirements that are in
place is the Mobile Home chapter. The Mobile Home chapter identifies a permanent
foundation outside of a Mobile Home Park. Within the zoning requirements for Rural
Residential 1, listed under uses, a mobile home is listed as a permitted use if placed on a
permanent foundation. Kristi Anderson wanted condition 1 from the Staff Report clarified,
“1. Occupancy is limited to non-rental, same family use.” The Rural Residential 1 zone
requires “One (1) single-family dwelling may be places on a lot or parcel of land in the RR1 zone
(4.01.070).” Susan made a comment she may rent out the home in the future. The board
would have to specify this condition to be compliant with the zoning.
City Staff recommends:
1. Occupancy is limited to non-rental, same family use.
2. D.E.Q. & the Health Department can determine an adequate solution for water and
sewer services to the accessory tiny home.
3. Setbacks for the tiny home comply to the zone.
4. The tiny home be placed on a permanent foundation. In the RR1 zone, a
manufactured home is not allowed without a permanent foundation.
5. Applicant will provide internal paved walkways for access to the accessory tiny
home.
6. There should be a buffer be placed between the tiny home and the neighbor to the
South. Staff recommends at minimum a fence or landscaping. The requirement is
not designated in the Development Code, but the Commission can place additional
conditions on the request.
Chairman Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 6:54p.m.
Favor:
Linda Lovejoy – 646 Willow Brook Way – Linda is the grandmother who hopes to live in
the tiny home. She is in favor of the application.
Neutral: None
Opposed:
Azell Jacobsen – 641 S 12th W – Lot 11 Willow Brook Subdivision – Azell has been living
at the location for some time; her and her husband built the home she is living in. She is
against the proposal no matter who would want to put the home there. When she bought
her lot, it said single-family dwelling. She is concerned about the well and the 1-acre size;
4 | Page
she knows the area would stay cleaner if not more than 1 well or septic per acre. Another
concern is the potential trash that blows on to her property. Azell bought the 1-acre lot to
have more space between the homes. This request diminishes her privacy. She is wondering
if this use would diminish the value of her property. She feels the request would lessen the
integrity of the neighborhood. The covenants for the Willow Brook subdivision identifies
each lot as a single-family dwelling. What is there to stop another accessory apartment on
the other side of the property? Will the Conditional Use Permit stay with the property? In
the future if the land changes hands, she worries about the noise potential.
Written Input:
Written Response #1
5 | Page
Question from the audience, how will the city track the requirement that the occupants be in
the same family if the home changes hands? Rory Kunz answered the neighbors would be
integral in reporting this occurrence.
Chairman Rory Kunz asked if anyone else would like to speak? He closed the public input
portion of the hearing at 7:03p.m.
Rebuttal: Susan Hyde – She appreciates she has such kind neighbors. Right now, her son,
her husband and she will live in the yellow house. If she rents out the yellow house, she will
stay in the tiny home. No one can get a mortgage on the property to cover the mini home.
The home will need to be sold separately, off of the lot. The bank will loan only what the
yellow house is worth. The tiny home is like a car title. The neighbor does have a fence to
the south. Susan would like to fence the entire property and put in some trees and make the
home a nice place. The suggested permanent foundation would make it hard, because she
hopes this is more of a temporary place. She understands the concern of trash, but with
trees and fences as intended, this will lessen this issue. The home has changed; it is now in
the middle of the city. The water tower is visible from the front door of the yellow house.
12th is a busy street and she has a private entrance onto 12th. The traffic will not increase due
to the conditional use.
Kristi Anderson read Written Response #1, the neighborhood mass letter.
Steve Oakey asked Susan to address some of her neighbors’ concerns. The city is asking
for approval by DEQ and District 7 Health. In the letter that was read, the neighbors refer
6 | Page
to covenants. Are there neighborhood covenants? Susan was not provided covenants when
she purchased the property. Home Owner Covenants are private agreements that do not
involve the government. If in the covenants, certain structures are identified that cannot be
built in the subdivision, the Commission would excuse themselves of this requirement and
Susan would have to resolve the issues with the neighbors. The letter identifies no other
buildings to be erected in the neighborhood besides garages. Steve asked Susan if she was
aware of additional buildings to the primary residences. Several of the neighbors run
businesses out of their homes and have shops on their properties for this purpose. Tawnya
was asked to display the subdivisions and their boundaries for this area. Commissioners
looked at the properties in the subdivisions and identified detached shops and garages and
sheds. Susan’s sister has the same bully barn as Susan, but Susan’s has been built as a tiny
home. The neighbor to the north has a beauty salon connected to her home. Susan made a
comment on the permanent foundation. Steve asked, was the need for a permanent
foundation identified when communicated was begun with the city? No, it was not.
Chairman Rory Kunz identified the environmental impact of the request is determined by
District 7 Health. He asked for the requirement for “accessory use” be read for the zone.
“Accessory uses and structures are permitted provided they are incidental to, and do not substantially alter the
character of, the permitted principal use or structure (4.014.020.a.).” “Accessory buildings shall: 1) Have
a building footprint and height less than the main dwelling. 2) Comply with all lot coverage requirements in
the existing zone. 3) Comply with the latest and most current Building Code of Rexburg, ID.” The
accessory building can “not be placed in the front yard. The building must “meet the same side yard
requirements as a principal building when the accessory building is: 1) (Residential) larger than two hundred
(200) square feet or taller than ten (10’) feet in height. Such permitted accessory uses and structures include,
but are not limited to the following: accessory buildings such as garages, carports, equipment storage buildings,
and supply storage buildings, which are customarily used in conjunction with and incidental to a principal use
or structure, shall be permitted (3.02.070.)”
Chairman Rory Kunz requested the definition of “accessory apartment.” “Accessory
apartment” is not defined, the zoning identified the use as permitted. Keith Esplin asked
for the Comprehensive Plan goal for senior housing be repeated. 11.1.6 “Allow for the
development of senior housing, including accessory dwelling units in appropriate areas, so that housing for all
phases of the life cycle will be available within the City (p.123).” Vince Haley asked if trailers in
trailer parks require a permanent foundation. Chairman Rory Kunz answered. Homes in
trailer parks do not require permanent foundations, but hurricane straps. Kristi Anderson
asked if any other place in the city allows an accessory apartment. Natalie Powell
responded in the Development Code there is a chapter for Mobile Home parks. Mobile
Home parks have their own set of rules. A trailer located outside a trailer park is required to
be a certain square footage and needs to be placed on a permanent foundation. The
Commission cannot trump the building codes. When a site plan and building plan are
submitted to the building inspectors, notes and revisions may be required by the Building
Official. The State Building Code and Building Official will identify the requirement for a
permanent foundation. Steve Oakey identified that Susan will have to review the State Law
and neighborhood covenants. David Pulsipher asks about accessory apartments; help me
understand why the accessory apartment is required to be within the same family. How does
this request become an accessory apartment vs. a second house? The difference is in the
use. If the unit is occupied by family, it is an accessory apartment, if it is rented to non-
family, it would be a second home. Rory Kunz identified by real estate terms, an “accessory
apartment” would be like a mother-in-law suite. Tawnya clarified, 4.01.070. Lot Configuration
and Density in the Rural Residential 1 zoning requirements states, “One (1) single-family dwelling
may be placed on a lot or parcel of land in the RR1 zone.” David Pulsipher clarified, when Susan
said she would live in the bully barn and rent out the main home, this would not actually be
7 | Page
allowed. Chairman Rory Kunz believes under the permitted uses this is correct. Without
stipulations, it can be used however she wants. David Pulsipher says this makes two living
dwellings on the property. There is a lot of gray area. Kristi Anderson also wondered
about the paved walkways. Susan responded she has no intention of putting in a walkway.
There is currently a gravel walkway. During site review, it may be required to provide
walkways. Steve Oakey pointed out a complication if we follow staff recommendation 1.
If you limit the use to same family use, you will then need to define a single-family. Natalie
Powell read Definitions: Family – p.33 – “Family is described as a group of one or more persons,
occupying a dwelling unit and living as a single, nonprofit housekeeping unit, provided that at least one of the
following situations exist:
a. At least one of the group is related to all of the other members of the group within the third degree of
kinship;
b. The group is divisible into two subgroups, each composed of at least one person who is related to all
other members of the subgroup within the third degree of kinship; or
c. All such persons are handicapped persons as defined by the Idaho Code Section 67-6531 or in Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988,
or any subsequent amendment to the foregoing regulations.”
Natalie Powell clarified, this definition means, whether the accessory structure is attached
or detached, need to be related within the third degree of kinship and not for profit. Vince
Haley says the house cannot be rented outside of family. John Bowen cannot see a
problem with the request. Keith Esplin says we are not in charge of septic and well. He
believes having additional housing for senior family members is important. He thinks sun
setting the Conditional Use Permit upon sale of the home would make sense. Someone
could come in and pay cash. He does not think that they allow both homes to be rented.
The covenants would have to be dealt with privately. Anything increases traffic, and growth
in this area will increase the traffic exponentially. Senior housing trumps the other concerns
for him, but he does understand putting limitations on it. Vince Haley believes sidewalks
will be required. Permanent foundation is outside of us. He believes the Commissions
should stipulate a privacy fence. He believes a sunset clause should be placed on the sale of
the land. The applicant would like to stay in the home if she rents out the main house. The
house has been a rental for the last 20 years. If we make some requirements, we can make
this work. Some of these items will have to be defined to get out of the gray area. Kristi
Anderson says how can there be two separate families? The ordinance says the property has
to remain a single-family home property. David Pulsipher identified both units have to be
occupied by family, a single-family. Keith Esplin believes the family clause does not have
to be enforced if a condition is placed on the use.
MOTION: Recommend to City Council the acceptance of the request for a
Conditional Use Permit because it conforms to the regulations of the Comprehensive
Plan and other recommendations with the following condition:
1. Occupancy is limited to non-rental, same family use.
Action: Approve, Moved by Steve Oakey, Seconded by John Bowen.
Commission Discusses the Motion:
Steve Oakey started with Staff recommendation #2: DEQ and the Health Department
Anything tonight can still be overridden by an H.O.A. Kristi Anderson proposed to add
the same family staff recommendation #1. Steve Oakey added #1 to the motion. Vince
Haley does not believe DEQ needs to be part of the motion, this is part of the process and
outside of the city’s jurisdiction. Steve Oakey removed staff recommendation #2. Vince
Haley recommends privacy fence and sunset clause that the permitted use only be used for
8 | Page
family ownership of the property. He also recommends the bully barn can be occupied by
the family, but the main dwelling may be rented out. Steve Oakey says this complicates his
motion and provides undue cost. Unless there is a stipulation of the landscaping and
fencing in the covenants, he doesn’t believe the landscaping requirement should be part of
this motion without safety issue. Keith Esplin agrees, in his neighborhood, fences are
prohibited. Greg Blacker says this could be a regulation nightmare. John Bowen says we
are putting too many regulations on this motion. Bruce Sutherland says, does this meet
our code? If it meets our code, is it good planning? City Council can put stipulations on the
request and are elected for this purpose. The Commission is looking at this proposal most
specifically as a land use and Bruce feels this request meets our Code. David Pulsipher is
sympathetic to accessory dwellings for parents and family members. Rural Residential 1 only
allows a single-family dwelling. The code itself already restricts this, and he would only be in
favor if this request is for a single-family. He is concerned this may open up a future
situation to become a duplex property. The zoning does not allow this, but he is concerned
this potentially goes against the zoning. Kristi Anderson says neighbors report and we have
an enforcement officer. David Pulsipher know there are very little teeth and the difficulty
of enforcement. Vince Haley says the family has to be added here. We can assume this can
be a family and then, the applicant can turn around and have duplex use.
VOTE: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 8, No = 2, Abstain = 0).
Yes: Bruce Sutherland, John Bowen, Keith Esplin, Kristi Anderson, Rory Kunz, Steve
Oakey, Todd Marx, Vince Haley.
No: David Pulsipher, Greg Blacker.
7. June 24, 2019, Susan Hyde communicated the request for the tiny home is against her
subdivision covenants. The issue will have to be worked out privately with her neighbors and
she in her subdivision.