HomeMy WebLinkAbout4B Temporary Dwellings Report
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: AUGUST 1, 2016
AGENDA #: 4B
PREPARED BY: DAN ROGNESS, COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
PRESENTED BY:
DAN ROGNESS
AGENDA ITEM: AFTER CONDUCTING A PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDER RECOMMENDING
AN ORDINANCE OPTING-OUT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF MINNESOTA
STATUTES 462.3593 REGARDING TEMPORARY FAMILY HEALTH CARE
DWELLINGS
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to consider whether to opt-out of recently
passed legislation (Chapter 111, 2016 Minnesota Session Laws) requiring cit-
ies to permit temporary family health care dwelling units.
History
A bill was recently passed by the Minnesota legislature that requires cities to
allow temporary mobile accessory dwelling units for mentally or physically im-
paired persons. Temporary units would be allowed on a relative’s or caregiver’s
property. The law exempts applications for these units from typical zoning au-
thority and requires cities to approve them within 15 days. The law provides that
cities and counties may opt-out of the law by ordinance.
Current Circumstances
The zoning ordinance for Prior Lake currently allows Accessory Apartments in
the residential use districts. Stated purposes for these apartments include al-
lowing privacy and independence for older family members, and providing
housing for persons employed for medical/domestic reasons on the premises.
Therefore, Prior Lake has an option already available that meets the intent of
Minnesota Statutes 462.3593.
In addition, there are a number of concerns regarding the new State law allow-
ing Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings including:
1. A second detached dwelling unit is permitted in zones that allow only
one primary dwelling unit. Does this mean every dwelling unit on the
property may have its own accessory structure?
2. No survey is required, so the actual unit location may not be correct and
exacerbate setback or easement issues.
3. There is no reference to compliance with shoreland, floodplain or wet-
land requirements.
4. A public review process is absent, and permits can be automatically ex-
tended with no criteria to extend.
5. People can reside in a dwelling that does not have to meet state build-
ing, plumbing or electrical permit requirements. For example there are
2
specific concerns about people living in substandard dwellings through-
out the winter and exposed extension cords running electricity to the
dwelling for extended periods of time.
6. A $100 permit fee does not cover city administration costs.
7. The law is unclear regarding the status of such structures with respect
to SAC units (both MCES and city). Since the city is legally required to
collect and transmit such amounts to the MCES, the city could have
some liability. If there is a proliferation of such structures, what will the
impact be on the city’s water and sewer system capacity?
8. The law does not identify what happens once the dwelling has served
its intended purpose. Consequently, there is a possibility that it be-
comes a permanent part of the parcel to be used for short or long term
rental purposes. On and off street parking are likely to be issues.
Conclusion
City staff believes that the City zoning ordinance currently has options with the
allowance of Accessory Apartments that address the purpose of Minnesota
Statutes 462.3593. Furthermore, staff has identified various concerns related
to allowing Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings. Staff recommends opt-
ing-out based on these factors.
ISSUES: This legislation, while well-meaning, was not given sufficient consideration to
address the important questions enumerated above. And even if it had, there are
a number of additional issues. Historically cities and counties have been dele-
gated the responsibility for zoning.
If Prior Lake were predominated by small dwelling units with minimal capacity to
house an average family of 2.5 persons, then one might conclude that there is a
need for this legislation here. It is apparent that this is not the case. Dwelling
units in Prior Lake have sufficient capacity to fulfill the contemplated function
given their size, and the fact that when such facilities are needed, the occupants
are most often empty nesters.
Staff has identified specific concerns previously in this report. Unless the City
opts-out of this state law, it will automatically become effective on September 1st.
ALTERNATIVE
MOTIONS:
1. Motion and a second to recommend adoption of the ordinance opting-
out of the requirements of Minnesota Statutes 462.3593 regarding Tem-
porary Family Health Care Dwellings.
2. Motion and a second to recommend not opting-out of Minnesota Stat-
utes 462.3593.
3. Motion and a second to table action and request further information
from City staff.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Alternative #1
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary from the League of Minnesota Cities
2. Accessory Apartments (R-1, Permitted with Conditions) in the Prior Lake
Zoning Ordinance