Owner Occupancy Accessory Dwelling Units Public Comment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
From: Weinmann, Karlee To: Frenz, Andrew Subject: FW: ADUs Date: Monday, January 25, 2021 8:57:24 AM Hi Andrew, Council Member Schroeder received the below comment on the ADU provision coming forward at CPC today. I’m passing along to you for inclusion in the public record. Thanks, Karlee Karlee Weinmann Policy Aide Council Member Jeremy Schroeder, Ward 11 City of Minneapolis – City Council 350 S. Fifth St. -- Room 307 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Office: (612) 673-2211 Cell: (612) 240-2129 [email protected] she/her/hers Subscribe to the Ward 11 email newsletter here. From: Erin Krebs <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2021 9:24 PM To: Schroeder, Jeremy <[email protected]> Subject: ADUs Jeremy, I support eliminating the owner-occupancy requirement for accessory dwelling units. We have a shortage of homes in Minneapolis and especially small, affordable homes in our neighborhood; eliminating the owner-occupancy requirement will result in more homes. ADUs do not require demolishing existing homes and they blend right in (unlike the huge new houses that are increasingly replacing small older homes). Thank you for your housing advocacy! Erin Krebs 5216 Park Ave January 21, 2021 City of Minneapolis 350 S. 5th St. Minneapolis, MN 55415 RE: REALTORS® Support Accessory Dwelling Units ‘Owner Occupancy’ Requirement Elimination Dear Mr. Mayor, President and Members of the City Council: The Minneapolis Area REALTORS® (“MAR”) is a professional association representing more than 9,000 REALTORS® who live and work throughout the Twin Cities. Many of our members are residents of Minneapolis, and many more work with clients who buy and sell homes in the community. Our overall goal is to support the healthy growth of the Twin Cities’ real estate market and help consumers make informed real estate decisions. Minneapolis Area REALTORS® recognizes current conditions in both the for sale and rental housing markets. Both markets are being impacted by issues of Affordability, Availability, and Access. Demand is outpacing supply of homes especially in the first two starter home price brackets. The lack of supply is creating imbalance in the marketplace and decreasing affordability. Innovative solutions are required, and periodic review of housing ordinances are timely and prudent. Minneapolis Area REALTORS® has supported Accessory Dwelling Unit (“ADU”) ordinances in Minneapolis and elsewhere. We recently supported the ADU Height change. Minneapolis Area REALTORS® supports the elimination of provisions that require ‘owner-occupancy’ in one unit or the other on a property where an ADU exists and operates. Minneapolis Area REALTORS® supports an Accessory Dwelling Unit policy that promotes and effectuates the development of these units. ADU benefits include: 1. Provides much needed affordable housing options. 2. Provides owners with additional flexibility. 3. Gives renters more stability and access. 4. Appeals to energy-conscious tenants. Thank you for your attention to this important housing issue. Please feel free to reach out to us regarding other Minneapolis real estate and housing issues. Sincerely, Eric J. Myers, Director of Government Affairs Minneapolis Area Association of REALTORS® 5750 Lincoln Drive Edina, MN 55436 p. 952.988.3124 [email protected] CPED STAFF REPORT Prepared for the City Planning Commission CPC Agenda Item #9 January 25, 2021 ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT Initiator: Council Member Gordon Introduction Date: November 8, 2019 Prepared By: Andrew Frenz, Senior City Planner, (612) 673-3790 Specific Site: N/A Ward: All Neighborhood: All Intent: To remove the owner-occupancy requirement for certain accessory dwelling units. APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING CODE • Chapter 537, Accessory Uses and Structures The following chapter was also introduced: Chapter 525, Administration and Enforcement. However, staff is not recommending changes to this chapter as part of this amendment and is therefore recommending returning it to the author. Department of Community Planning and Economic Development BACKGROUND On November 8, 2019, Council Member Gordon introduced a text amendment to remove the owner-occupancy requirement for accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The zoning code currently allows for the establishment of ADUs accessory to conforming owner-occupied single- and two-family dwellings. This requirement is implemented and enforced through the recording of a covenant of owner-occupancy prior to the issuance of a building permit. The intent of the proposed amendment is to remove the owner-occupancy requirement for detached and attached ADUs, allowing their establishment accessory to non-owner-occupied single- and two-family dwellings. Internal ADUs would remain subject to the existing owner- occupancy requirement under the proposed amendment, where not established as a separate unit under the building code. ANALYSIS What is the reason for the amendment and what public purpose will be served? The purpose of the amendment is to allow a greater number of properties in the city the opportunity to establish an ADU. Allowing the establishment of detached and attached ADUs accessory to non-owner-occupied single- and two-family dwellings will increase the number of properties which are eligible to establish an ADU. The public purpose of the proposed amendment is to increase housing supply and choice throughout the city. ADUs have proven to be a successful strategy to incrementally increase housing supply in low- and medium- density residential neighborhoods while keeping within the scale of existing development. In addition, ADUs are also a successful strategy to increase the variety of housing options available in certain neighborhoods. For example, a neighborhood composed largely of single-family dwellings likely includes very few studio or one bedroom units, and a household looking for a smaller home may have few, if any, options available in the neighborhood. ADUs are typically smaller units and can serve to increase the variety of available housing in neighborhoods where housing is more homogenous. In addition, ADUs can also serve as unique solutions to certain living situations that may not be well-accommodated by traditional dwelling units, such as multi- generational households or a person with disabilities desiring a semi-independent space close to family members or a caregiver. The proposed amendment would allow for greater opportunity to establish ADUs to provide these public benefits. How is the amendment consistent with the purpose of the zoning district(s) or ordinance chapter(s) being amended? The amendment is consistent with the purpose of the accessory uses and structures chapter of the zoning ordinance. The proposed amendment is narrow in scope, eliminating the current owner-occupancy requirement for detached and attached ADUs. Existing regulations which allow ADUs only where accessory to a conforming single- or two-family dwelling, and which limit the size of ADUs to ensure that they remain subordinate in size, character, and purpose to the principal dwellings to which they are accessory, would remain. These regulations include requiring that the floor area of ADUs remains less than the floor area of the principal dwelling; limiting the footprint of detached ADUs to the same limits that garages and other accessory structures are held to, 676 square feet or ten percent of the lot area, whichever is greater, not to exceed 1,000 square feet; limiting the total floor area of detached ADUs to 1,300 square feet or 16 percent of the lot area, whichever is greater, not to exceed 1,600 square feet; and limiting the height of detached ADUs to 21 feet. Are there consequences in denying this amendment? 2 Department of Community Planning and Economic Development Denial of the proposed amendment would continue to limit the establishment of ADUs to owner-occupied single- and two-family dwellings. This would very likely result in fewer ADUs being established than if the amendment were adopted, contributing to a persistent lack of housing supply and choice, particularly in neighborhoods which today have relatively homogenous housing types and which have fewer opportunities to add housing supply due to zoning limitations, land value, or other factors. What adverse effects may result with the adoption of this amendment? The proposed amendment could increase the cost of establishing detached and attached ADUs. Today, due to a building code interpretation made possible by the current owner-occupancy requirement, ADUs in Minneapolis are not regulated as separate dwelling units under the building code, but rather as habitable spaces accessory to and part of the primary dwelling unit to which they are accessory. With the elimination of the owner-occupancy requirement under the proposed amendment, new detached and attached ADUs would be regulated as full dwelling units under the building code. These ADU types will no longer be able to take advantage of certain accommodations in the building code related to nonconformities currently afforded to ADUs. Because the vast majority of detached and attached ADUs are new construction, staff does not anticipate that this change will have an appreciable impact on the number of ADUs established in the future. Staff and the amendment’s sponsor studied and considered the possibility of removing the current owner- occupancy requirement for internal ADUs as part of the proposed amendment. Because the vast majority of internal ADUs established in Minneapolis are located within