Loading...
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.