02-19-2008 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

_ .. FILE#08-3345 � 12 February 2008 Page 2 of 4 density of dwelling units per lot as well as have a negative affect on the surrounding neighborhood. The intent of the conditional use permit requirement, as referenced in the minutes from the 1986 Planning Commission meeting (attached as Exhibit C) was not to consider the finished basement with kitchen as a guest apartment, even when there was a grade level egress, this is still the intent. Today's homes have changed in that there may be several areas with kitchens, guest bedrooms and additional living quarters. These spaces are often accessed only from within the home (on a top floor, above an attached garage, etc) and have negligible potential to turn into a separate � dwelling unit; rather may serve any number purposed including occasional guests, adult children or domestic employees. Unless there is a strong potential for the apartment to be utilized as a separate, rental apartment Staff feels that there should be discretion to allow these spaces as a permitted use. There will still be a conditional use permit requirement for those apartments with direct access to the outside or to the garage as it is more likely that with minor changes on the interior can. become stand alone, rental apartments. Along with the conditional use permit, a restrictive covenant will still be required as well. P/umbinp within an Accessorv Structure The establishment of language allowing installation of a sink and a toilet in an accessory building as an allowed use is second part of the proposed amendment to the residential district � Codes. Currently, homeowners are permitted a sink in a detached accessory building without conditional use permit approval, but a toilet, bathtub or shower triggers the conditional use permit requirement. The reasoning behind this was that a utility sink or other means to wash hands within a garage was reasonable, but the addition of a toilet was either unnecessary or should trigger a higher level of review. Because the way in which property owners are utilizing their detached accessory structures, Staff no longer feels that a toilet should trigger the conditional use permit process. There are a .number of accessory buildings containing a sink and toilet, such as stables, workshops, and pool houses where a conditional use permit is required, but may not be necessary. The purpose for this is to prohibit the creation of an illegal 2"a dwelling on the property. Staff feels that by continuing to require the conditional use permit in the situation where a shower or bathtub is proposed is the appropriate method of assuring compliance with the intent of the code. Additionally, plumbing within an accessory structure (toilet, bathtub or shower) currently requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres. Staff is suggesting the removal of the 2 acre minimum as it is one of the standards in this code provision that is most frequently varied. Also it is the requirement that seems to have no direct relationship to the plumbing within an accessory structure. As long as there is adequate septic treatment/sewer provisions for the home the issue of waste treatment is covered. Also, if the property is of such a size that an accessory structure is allowed, the•toilet and sink within the structure are incidental. Staff still feels that the addition of a bathtub or shower should meet higher standards and a higher level of review. Therefore we are proposing to remove the "toilet" from the CUP requirement and include it as an allowed use. The bathtub and shower will still trigger the CUP. Along with the toilet, bathtub or shower, a covenant will still be required, prohibiting the use of the accessory structure as a guest house, dwelling, or for a home occupation. Finally, the code regarding the CUP for toilets within the RR-1 B-1 District currently allows toilets, 2