Laserfiche WebLink
83 side of the home because the window well will be within the 10' setback area. <br />84 <br />85 Lastly, beyond outreach to AET, staff attempted to seek input from another source through <br />86 contacting the Builders Association (or Housing First) for a recommendation. After being <br />87 directed to the appropriate staff person, emails and phone calls were not returned, so staff <br />88 was unable to get input from a second party. <br />89 <br />90 Example code language, a map of residential homes at or within 10' of one another, the <br />91 completed Equity & Inclusion Toolkit, and the September 8th presentation slides are <br />92 provided in Attachment 1. <br />93 <br />94 Policy Objectives <br />95 Regulations governing the construction of structures are to ensure the public health, safety, <br />96 and welfare insofar as they are affected by the continued occupancy and maintenance of <br />97 structures and premises. <br />98 <br />99 Equity Impact Summary <br />100 The proposed ordinance is the product of a request from residents who reside in a 20-unit <br />101 detached town home development that is under construction and results in homes having <br />102 10' setbacks. These residents have concerns their homes will not be adequately protected <br />103 from excavation activities of future homes in the development. The ordinance would <br />104 impose close-proximity building regulations to ensure vertical and/or lateral support for <br />105 existing foundations is provided during excavation activities that occur within 10' of another <br />106 structure/building, as the existing Residential Building Code does not require such <br />107 protections when on-site threats are not obvious or apparent. The impact of the ordinance <br />108 has the possibility to be widespread given the interior side yard setback requirement in the <br />109 LDR, LMDR and MDR zoning districts is 5', however the actual impacts would be <br />110 dependent on the conditions under which the ordinance would be applied, the specific <br />111 characteristics of individual projects, the surrounding landscape, and legal property <br />112 boundary considerations. Given the specificity of the ordinance, its purpose or impact <br />113 cannot be directly connected to a Community Aspiration but could be loosely tied to the <br />114 aspiration that speaks to a community with quality housing. <br />115 <br />116 Budget Implications <br />117 Cost implications of this ordinance would be the responsibility of the party seeking a <br />118 building permit to excavate in close proximity of an existing foundation. <br />119 <br />120 Staff Recommendations <br />121 Forgo adoption of this ordinance and wait for the State of Minnesota to adopt a new <br />122 residential building code. <br />123 <br />124 Requested Council Action <br />125 Review the information provided by staff and give direction on next steps. <br />126 <br />127 <br />Janice Gundlach, Community Development Director <br />Prepared by: <br />David Englund, Building Official <br />1.September 8 Packet Materials <br />Attachments: <br />2.September 8 Meeting Minutes <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Qbhf!5!pg!:29 <br /> <br />