02-23-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

W4-2976 February 20,2004 Pages If the intended use of a guest house is for residence purposes, that seems to infer a long-term use as a permanent place to live, which suggests the need for complete living facilities. The Building Code indicates that a dwelling is characterized by containing facilities for "sleeping , eating , cooking and sanitation." The building code also indicates a number of other features of a habitable dwelling: a separate closet, a kitchen sink, refrigeration, a cooking appliance, and plumbing to include as a minimum a toilet, a tub or shower, and a lavatory. One could also argue that in Minnesota, a source of heat is also necessary during a portion of the year. I believe Council will agree with staff that other than the bathroom fixtures, heating equipment and kitchen sink, virtually all other elements that make up the four characteristics of a dwelling are 'plug-in* items that can be purchased and installed without City permits. Need for 'Full F>*^ilities. Limited Use* Option? The Zoning Code distinguishes between an accessory building that doesn*t have the complete facilities rrecessary for permanent dwelling status, and one that does have such facilities, via the 'accessory building with plumbing CUP and the 'guest house CUP' regulations. Perhaps there should be an additional CUP option, based on the intended length or intensity of use as a dwelling vs. the occasional guest. For example, a covenant could be required that allows only infrequent, short-time residence use, say up to 2 weeks, only 4 times per year, or similar. This type of limitation is, unfortunately, difficult to monitor. We would ultimately rely on the neighborhood to let us know when a problem occurs. Ultimately, the question comes down to enforceability. If a current owner uses a full-facility accessory building for occasional guests, it is not a problem for the neighborhood. If the next owner buys it with the idea of renting it out as a source of income, or merely has his caretaker live there, it can have an impact on the neighborhood. Conditional Use Permits go with the property, not with the applicant. Despite the existence of a covenant in the chain of title, a new property owner might change the use horn a benign one to one that has greater impacts. The covenant gives the City an enforcement tool, but it requires City action, whereas not allowing the creation of a full-facility accessory building would potentially avoid the need for enforcement. Options for Pierpont Situation The primary issue we ate dealing with in the Pierpont application is vt^iether retention of the kitchen, or even just the sink, will be allowed. It has been staff s contention that, absent any clear direction in the Zoning Code, the existence of the kitchen is what functionally differentiates a 'guest house’ from an 'accessory building with plumbing ’, and is what gives the guest house the ability to function as a dwelling. While it may be attractive to merely require that the owner execute a covenant stating the accessory building with full plumbing, heating equipment and a kitchen sink won’t be used as aguest house, Mr. Pierpont has described its past use and projected use as a place for guests to stay overnight. That is in fact a guest house use under the current interpretation of the code. If you wish to conclude that the intended use should be the defining factor, then staff believes a code amendment would be prudent.