CC_Minutes_2011_0523 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, May 23, 2011 Page 12 dation, noting that it was a fluid process and was constantly being tweaked and updated. Mayor Roe thanked staff for their work, and great job with recommended process revisions. b. Discuss Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's) Community Development Director Trudgeon introduced the discussion of the City's newly-adopted ADU process as previously requested by Councilmember Willmus, and as detailed in the RCA dated May 23, 2011; with two (2) applica- tions received to-date since implementation of the code. Mr. Trudgeon noted that there were two (2) errors on the RCA; that items d and e should have been deleted from the text as indicated in the proposed amendment; and noted that the actual revised criteria had been provided as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof highlighting specific standards and criteria (Section D). Mr. Trudgeon noted another bench handout had been provided, Ordinance No. 1361 as currently in force; also attached hereto and made a part hereof Mr. Trudgeon provided comparison information on ADU's for the Cities of Bloomington and Shoreview; and following review of that comparison informa- tion, noted that staff was suggesting amendment of the City's code regarding ADU's as detailed on pages 3 and 4 of the RCA. Mr. Trudgeon noted that a major policy discussion by the City Council was whether ADU's should only be allowed when attached to the principal building or if ADU's should also be permitted in detached structures. Councilmember Willmus noted that his concerns with ADU's under the Condi- tional Use (CU) process had been that the City would have been powerless to re- visit issues or enforce conditions if ongoing problems or changes or ownership created additional concerns. Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of staffs recommended amendments, particularly the need for reapplication for the ADU license at the point of sale, and several other amendments taken from the other comparable samples that hadn't been considered initially. Councilmember McGehee noted, and staff confirmed, the recommended revisions indicated that one unit could be rented, but not both structures on the property. Councilmember McGehee questioned potential impacts for contiguous neighbors with the thirty foot (30') minimal height and setback requirements for accessory structures, and her preference that an ADU be attached rather than separate if a thirty foot high structure was that close to the lot line. Councilmember McGehee further questioned if the renewal license was an annual process; and what re- course the City had if an ADU was found to be a problematic rental. Mr. Trudgeon advised that there had been no firm determination at this point on whether to have the license renewed annually, and expressed his lack of support