Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda AGENDA Planning & Development Committee Regular Meeting 4:00 PM - Monday, October 28, 2019 Council Conference Room, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way 1. Docket #14 a) #D-165: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Review 2. Multi-family Property Tax Exemption Update 3. Emerging Issues in CED CITY OF RENTON Community and Economic Development Department #D-165 ADU Review Staff: Katie Buchl-Morales Date: October 10, 2019 Applicant or Requestor: Staff SUMMARY: Review of existing procedures and design and development regulations for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). This docket item aims to streamline the application process and remove barriers that may impede property owners from pursuing ADU construction. This supplemental Staff report is intended to provide a summary of revisions to proposed code amendments and additional code amendments not previously discussed at the briefing and public hearing. ADU Location Current code contains prescriptive language for general ADU location; accessory structures shall be 6’ from any residential structure and shall not be located between the primary structure and a street (RMC 4-2-110B), which essentially limits ADU location to the rear yard. Housing advocates boast that ADUs provide the opportunity to create flexible housing for adult children, aging parents, small families, and those looking to minimize their environmental footprint. For those with mobility impairments, locating ADUs in the rear yard creates challenges related to access and safety. Permitting ADUs in the front yard would create new housing opportunities that are functional for all bodies. Under the existing ADU regulations, property owners must sacrifice what is typically the primary outdoor recreational and gathering space, the backyard, in order to accommodate the ADU. Permitting ADUs in the front yard would give property owners the option to construct an ADU and maintain the rear yard for outdoor activities. Recently, Current Planning Staff has received a request to consider allowing ADUs in the front yard as part of a subdivision project. As shown in the attached images, this allowance can be done in such a way that results in high quality design while maintaining a character that is compatible with a single family residential neighborhood. AGENDA ITEM #1. a) Staff recommendation: Amend code to allow ADUs in the front yard between the primary structure and the street; applicants shall be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit and meet front yard setback standards for the respective zone. Rear Yard Setback for Accessory Buildings As noted in the initial briefing, Staff recommends amending code to establish a 5’ rear yard setback applicable to ADUs in all residential zones. The Planning Commission expressed concern for the proposed 5’ minimum rear yard setback, noting that it would allow ADUs to span almost the entire distance of the rear property line, with only 5’ of separation at the sides and rear. If this scenario is replicated, Planning Commission fears that the ADUs proximity would adversely impact the privacy and aesthetic for the rear yard neighbor. To address Planning Commission’s concern, Staff proposed adding a provision that would limit the lineal buildable width that the ADU can occupy along the rear property line to 75%. As indicated in RMC 4-11-010, the definition for accessory buildings excludes accessory dwelling units; “A subordinate building located upon the same lot occupied by a principal use or building with which it is customarily associated, but clearly incidental to. This definition excludes accessory dwelling units.” Accessory buildings and accessory dwellings have distinct development regulations, such as rear yard setback standards. For example, a 3’ rear yard setback is applied to accessory buildings located in residential zones R-1 – R-14. Given the concerns shared by Planning Commission for ADU rear yard setbacks, Staff recommends applying a provision that would also limit the lineal buildable width that accessory buildings can occupy along the rear property line to 75%. Staff Recommendation Text amendments to the City’s ADU regulations as described. Impact Analysis Effect on rate of growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Plan Increased ADU construction may have the potential re-direct growth from greenfield development to infill development, possibly delaying conversion of land to accommodate new residential development. Source: Quadrant Homes AGENDA ITEM #1. a) Effect on the City’s capacity to provide adequate public facilities Incentivizing ADU construction may result in a more efficient use of the City’s resources and ability to provide adequate public facilities. Effect on the rate of population and employment growth Not applicable. There are no anticipated effects on the rate of population and employment growth created by the proposed changes. Whether Plan objectives are being met as specified or remain valid and desirable The Housing element of the Comprehensive Plan intends to create policies that meet the Growth Management Act’s housing goal: “Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock.” The intention of the proposed code amendments is to incentivize new ADU construction, creating new and diverse housing opportunities for a changing population while preserving existing housing stock. Effect on general land values or housing costs As with any onsite improvements, new construction would increase land value for individual lots, therefore increasing the cost of housing on lots where an ADU is present. However, the additional housing supply created by new ADUs will create unique rental housing opportunities while also generating income for the property owner. Finally, Staff’s proposal to eliminate the owner occupancy requirement (subject to the conditions described above), would guarantee the creation of an affordable unit for every new ADU built in conjunction with a new primary dwelling. Whether capital improvements or expenditures are being made or completed as expected Not applicable. Consistency with GMA, the Plan, and Countywide Planning Policies The proposed amendments are consistent with GMA, the Plan, and Countywide Policies. Effect on critical areas and natural resource lands Not applicable. There are no anticipated effects on critical areas and natural resource lands. AGENDA ITEM #1. a)