5. AccessoryHousingInfoHousingPolicy.org I Policy - Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity
HOME
housing diversity: overview > introduction » as -of -right development » accessory dwelling
units
Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity
Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units are self-contained residential units that are either:
• Set aside within a larger single-family home, such as a separate basement or
attic apartment;
• Attached to a primary residence, such as an apartment above an attached
garage; or
• Smaller separate units built on the same lot as single-family homes.
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) - also called secondary units, granny flats, carriage
houses and in-law apartments - can be an important source of low-cost rental
housing for small households in many communities. They can provide an
opportunity for renters to enjoy the advantages of living in established
homeownership communities, including good schools and safe and quiet
neighborhoods. In addition, they can provide affordable options for older adults to
live in certain communities in which they have better access to amenities and
transit. They can also allow people who have lost their homes to foreclosure to stay
in their community as an ADU renter.
ADUs may also be a boon to owners of the primary home, who collect extraincome
from the rental unit that can be used to help cover mortgage payments, property
taxes andother costs. This extra income could prove especially helpful during
economic downturns, and could help some families avoid foreclosure.
Page 1 of 3
glossary I a to z search I about us
.ao
Quick Links
Learn More About the Policy Toolbox
All Roles & Policies
Key State Roles
Outline Of This Policy
Capital TIoIgh6On homs,5t. Pmd n(n —rhOTT, Nit Iosy on.nB, lac
In some cases, the lease may include an agreement that renters help with household chores and basic maintenance, an arrangement
that can help aging homeowners remain in their homes when they are no longer able to perform these tasks. Older adults and empty
nesters may eventually choose to move into the ADU and rent out the main house, an adaptation that further helps them age in place.
ADUs are generally built and financed entirely by the homeowner, so no public subsidy is required to make them available.
Communities interested in using ADUs as an affordable housing option should comprehensively review their zoning policies to ensure
they facilitate, rather than hinder, development of ADUs.
Solutions in Action
Addressing community concerns:01bjections to
ADUs are most often based on concerns about
In 1982 the state of California passed the Second Unit Law- overcrowding, traffic congestion and parking shortages,
legislation intended to promote the development of accessory dwelling and a loss of neighborhood character. However, the
units by codifying a state standard for ADU approval. Under the law, experience of many communities has been that when
http://housingpolicy.org/toolbox/strategy/policies/diverse housing types.html?tierid=42 12/23/2014
HousingPolicy.org I Policy - Ensure Zoning. Policies Allow Housing Diversity Page 2 of 3
communities that had not already adopted a local ADU ordinance were ADUs are approved, units tend to "trickle in" rather than
given considerable discretion in setting the terms of their own overwhelm entire neighborhoods overnight. [1] Because
approvals procedure and development standards. However, those that they are often incorporated into or next to existing
chose not to adopt an ADU ordinance were required to approve all homes, ADUs have minimal impact on neighborhood
proposals that met state standards. density and can blend in seamlessly with the
community.
While the purpose of this legislation was to facilitate creation of
additional units, implementation hit a snag when all of the jurisdictions
that adoptedan ordinance approved ADUs as a conditional use only.
Rather than allowing development as of right, applicants had to
undergo a lengthy and potentially contentious review and public
hearing process that made creation of new units difficult at best. With
development falling far short of expectations, in 2003 the state
legislature passed Assembly Bill 1866, which amends the original law
by requiring local communities to allow ADUs as of right (provided they
are otherwise in compliance with the zoning code) by prohibiting local
ordinances that mandate discretionary review of ADU applications.
Some critics of the law point out that it only facilitates the
administrative approvals process, and does not address structural
conditions that localities may choose to apply, such as size and design
requirements, parking regulations and other restrictive standards that
can constrain development of ADUs or make them cost -prohibitive.
More at Accessory Dwelling Units. 2004. Instant Advocate. Oakland,
CA: Transportation and Land Use Coalition, Section 2: Is. this the Right
Tool for You?
Obstacles to development:Some communities
prohibit ADUs entirely, while others have regulatory
requirements (often unintentional) that severely limit
opportunities for this development or make the
development process so long and costly that private
homeowners opt out. These include zoning policies that:
• Allow only one residential unit per lot
• Increase the minimum lot size for units with
ADUs to twice the minimum lot size specified in
the underlying zoning code
• Limit the proximity of ADUs to property lines,
making it difficult to develop above -garage units
adjacent to back alleys
• Require an excessive number of parking spaces
per unit
• Impose excessive permit fees or impact fees
that make development of ADUs too costly
Click on the links below to learn more about other types of housing that can help communities meet the needs of
households with a range of preferences and budgets:
Multifamily/attached homes, which may include apartment buildings, condominiums, town homes, row houses and duplexes.
"Factory -built" homes, from manufactured homes built entirely in production facilities to modular housing that is assembled on-
site.
Accessory dwelling units within or attached to a larger single-family home, or on the same lot.
Mixed-use housing, where residential units co -exist with commercial and retail enterprises.
Single -room occupancies, also called efficiency apartments and residential studio units.
You are currently reading:
Revise zoning policies to allow development of a range of housing types "as of right"
Greater housing diversity and affordability may be achieved by revising zoning policies to eliminate both direct and 'back door"
prohibitions and explicitly allow a range of housing types, rather than requiring a special review process or disallowing certain types
of structures entirely.
http:/ honsingpolicy.org/toolboxstrategy/policies/diverse_housing_types.html?tierid=42 12/23/2014
StarTribune - Print Page
*StarTr1bune
'Accessory' dwellings head to Mpls.
Council
Article by: Eric Roper
Star Tribune
November 11. 2014 - 7:36 PM
Minneapolis officials are closer to approving a new breed of
housing that would allow homeowners to build and rent out a
separated residence on their property.
The so-called accessory dwelling units could one day become a
new, affordable living option for renters or aging family members in
some of the city's many residential neighborhoods. They would
simultaneously provide a steady source of income for homeowners
struggling to pay for and maintain a larger house.
"I believe it will provide affordability for families, flexibility for
shifting demographics in the city of Minneapolis and better land
use," said Craig Wilson, a principal at sustainable development
firm Sustolcgy, at a city planning commission meeting Monday.
/V[4 IV IV4 YV 61 `2
The planning board voted to approve the ordinance change, Three examples of accessory dwelling units, presented in City
authored by Council Member Lisa Bender. The measure has or Minneapolis drawings.
already been the subject of five public open houses and now goes Feed Loader,
to the council's zoning and planning committee.
Accessory dwelling units generally have their own cooking, sleeping and bathroom facilities. The proposed changes would
allow a homeowner to renovate an attic, basement or build an addition to become a rental unit. Homeowners could also
create the so-called "granny flats" over garages or build stand-alone cottage -like living spaces.
The proposal would require attached structures to match the exterior look of the existing house, and detached ones to be
solidly built with durable materials. They would not require an additional parking space.
Planning commission members decided to raise the maximum height to 20 feet, but detached structures cannot exceed the
height of the existing house. They also tweaked the maximum floor area for the detached units to add flexibility.
Planning Commissioners tried to strike a balance between allowing usable spaces without permitting giant, separate
structures on urban lots.
"We're trying to get to a habitable unit, one that will actually get built," said planning commission president Ted Tucker. "But
we don't want to dominate neighborhoods with second houses in the back."
The ordinance would also require that one of the two residences be occupied by the owner, making the accessory dwelling
units distinct from duplexes scattered around the city.
Many other cities across the country already allow similar units, including Seattle, Portland, Denver and even Bloomington.
Everyone who attended Monday's meeting testified in support of the change. Most of the nearly 200 residents who answered
a city survey on the issue were supportive.
"It will provide hundreds if not thousands of units of affordable housing seamlessly integrated into our neighborhoods, into the
walkable areas where people are wanting to live," said Max Musicant, who runs a firm that seeks to better utilize public
spaces. "And it will also save countless numbers of historic homes by making them economically more viable and preventing
teardowns by accommodating changing preferences."
Eric Roper • 612-673-1732
Twitter. @StribRoper
m 2014 Star Tribune
AIN
t71—
The planning board voted to approve the ordinance change, Three examples of accessory dwelling units, presented in City
authored by Council Member Lisa Bender. The measure has or Minneapolis drawings.
already been the subject of five public open houses and now goes Feed Loader,
to the council's zoning and planning committee.
Accessory dwelling units generally have their own cooking, sleeping and bathroom facilities. The proposed changes would
allow a homeowner to renovate an attic, basement or build an addition to become a rental unit. Homeowners could also
create the so-called "granny flats" over garages or build stand-alone cottage -like living spaces.
The proposal would require attached structures to match the exterior look of the existing house, and detached ones to be
solidly built with durable materials. They would not require an additional parking space.
Planning commission members decided to raise the maximum height to 20 feet, but detached structures cannot exceed the
height of the existing house. They also tweaked the maximum floor area for the detached units to add flexibility.
Planning Commissioners tried to strike a balance between allowing usable spaces without permitting giant, separate
structures on urban lots.
"We're trying to get to a habitable unit, one that will actually get built," said planning commission president Ted Tucker. "But
we don't want to dominate neighborhoods with second houses in the back."
The ordinance would also require that one of the two residences be occupied by the owner, making the accessory dwelling
units distinct from duplexes scattered around the city.
Many other cities across the country already allow similar units, including Seattle, Portland, Denver and even Bloomington.
Everyone who attended Monday's meeting testified in support of the change. Most of the nearly 200 residents who answered
a city survey on the issue were supportive.
"It will provide hundreds if not thousands of units of affordable housing seamlessly integrated into our neighborhoods, into the
walkable areas where people are wanting to live," said Max Musicant, who runs a firm that seeks to better utilize public
spaces. "And it will also save countless numbers of historic homes by making them economically more viable and preventing
teardowns by accommodating changing preferences."
Eric Roper • 612-673-1732
Twitter. @StribRoper
m 2014 Star Tribune
City, District 12 continue to study accessory dwelling units I Park Bugle
Page 1 of 2
I • ittv f -p► w
Recwnrend Kinde beq Hill! w ysy mx m. nouwi[
(http://www.kinderberrvhill.com/) p
(https://Www.facebook.com/pages/Park-
Bhungle//303070786132) ep.
HOME(/) OPINION (HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.ORG/CATEGORY/OPINION/) CITY FILES (HTTP://WWtN.PARKBUGLE.OR(�7rxrtG7lS1��ILf7 le)
(ttr feedq
NNEII�,GHBORSS((HffP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.ORG/CA,TIE,GORR,Y//,N�EIIIGHBORS/) SCHOOL NEWWS(HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.QRG/CA
4Y1iy� QR3t�/WlBvriUlgNlUB�iQIaVIYUB$s0O11iYI�RINHftLEffijj�j%%IsingQpage id=87) SUbmissii�BxBoMEL%r.e P7fftNnl/✓u�roamarhbual�a/.aumckaeef-heraaryanfaWJ-MUR�§IA IP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.'RESOURCES/)
Aproposed residential zoning changealong the Central Corridorwould affectthe
southern portion of St. Anthony Park, but there are some residents who think it ought to -
apply to the entirety of District 12.
(http://give mn,org/organization/Pa rk-Bugle)
City planners, at the direction of the St. Paul City Council, are studying the feasibility of
allowing what are called accessory dwelling units on single-family lots within a half -mile
of University Avenue.
These units would be separate living quarters added to the back of a house, over a
garage or built as freestanding structures.
"Accessory dwelling units areonly one of the many housing options that could be
provided along the corridor," according to planner Sarah Zorn, of the citys Planning
and Economic Development Department. "They might appeal to seniors, renters or
family members. They'd also allow current residents to stay in their homes or
neighborhood, while generating income to supplement housing costs."
It's a concept with considerable appeal for the District 12 Land Use Efficiency action
group, one of several working toward the Community Council's goal of reducing the
neighborhood's carbon footprint and strengthening the community overall.
In addition to the Central Corridor, the group sees the accessory units as potentially
helping stabilize the broader community, enabling houses and property to stay in the
same hands longer, said its chair, Phil Broussard.
"We have a lot of residents who, over the course of the next five to 10 years, will either
have to figure out how to remain in their homes or move out of the neighborhood," he
said.
To provide information and assess support for accessory dwellings, Land Use
Efficiency group members met, one-on-one, with several dozen area residents. The
group also conducted two public meetings, one in November and most recently on Jan.
28.
The Park Bugle checked with two nearby suburbs that permit accessory dwelling units,
but neither experience would seem predictive of what St. Paul could expect.
Roseville's city code has permitted accessory dwelling units, both attached and
freestanding, for the pastthree years,_ according to Bryan Lloyd, associate city planner.
However, none have yet been built and- Lloyd_theorized it was because of stipulations
built into the code, such as a requirement for separate entrances and walkways and
maximum heights for detached structures.
Since the early 1990s, Shoreview has allowed what it calls accessory apartments, but
only when they are incorporated into existing homes, according to Rob Warwick, senior
planner.
"Over 20 years, there have been fewer than 20 permits issued and only one of those
has been contentious," he said. "That was due to an increase in vehicle traffic over a
private easement serving the property,"
The Land Use Efficiency group's Broussard noted that of the 50 or so residents who
attended its November meeting, only about five expressed reservations or were
outright opposed to the accessory dwelling concept.
'IOHonstic Health
and Natural Wellness
„_YOU!
0®
(http://www. psi nergy. i nfo/)
T
c
a
TechWarrfor St. Paul
(http://www.StPau]VirusRemoval.com/)
(ht1p://GarIock-
French.com/) WJxigl;a '
French.com/)�
r
(hUps://www.sunriseba nks.com/)
EVENTS CALENDAR
RECENT COMMENTS
kate trevorrow on Perfect pies
(http://www. parkb ugle.o rg/perfect-
ples/#comment 367 21)
Tom gibsan on That morning latte just became
a little easier to get
(http://www.parkbugle.org/that-moming-latte
City, District 12 continue to study accessory dwelling units I Park Bugle
"People are cautious about change and some worry about how accessory units might
alter the appearance of the neighborhood," he said. "Two-thirds of north St. Anthony
Park currently is zoned for single-family residences only, but that restriction became
part of the code in 1975. Prior to that, two-family homes or duplexes had been
permitted. Many of these were built and fit in very well"
For now, it is only in the Central Corridor that accessory dwellings are being considered
and City Council action would be required to change that. But Broussard thinks that
such units eventually will be permitted citywide and feels that zoning will need to be
tailored to the needs of individual neighborhoods, with lot size and house size being
among the variables.
City planner Zorn said that Planning and Economic Development staff would update
the City Council soon on the study's progress, and then meet with the district councils
along the Central Corridor. Next, the matter will be considered by the City Planning
Commission, probably in the spring, and ultimately brought back to the City Council for
a final determination.
Como Park writer Roger Bergerson is a regular contributor to the Park Bugle.
unit
lNuww. arkbu le.or /cat LaN9ms b 'h9 b
Comments are closed.
ABOUTTHE BUGLE (11111
ADVERTISING (HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.BMAH9WI%NGYV (1111 P://W
BUSINESS DIRECTORY(HTTP://WWW.P#W. tAOMWy 1jQCy/A
BUGLEARCHIVES(HTTP://WVVW.PARKBUOMQRGPOATK-MgB IDWAY
CONTACT US (HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.ORG/CONTACT-US/)
DEADLINES (HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.ORG/DEADLINES/)
DELIVERY (HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.DRG/DELIVERY/)
SUBMISSIONS (HTTP://WWW.PARKBUGLE.ORG/SUBMISSIONS/)
Page 2 of 2
just -beta me -a -I ittle-easier-to-get/#cam ment-
367611)
Georgia Walesheckon Salsa Lisa happy in new
home at Meridian Industrial Center
(http://www.parkbugle.org/salsa-lisa-happy-
in-new home-at-meri d lan-m d ustri a (-
center/#comment-367601)
Kristal Leebrick on Commentary: You are
invited to envision a roadmap to the year 2040
(http://www. pa rkb ugl e.orgPo m menta ry-you-
a re -I nvlted-to-envision-a-road map -to -the -yea r
-2040/#comment-367571)
David Fan on Commentary: You are invited to
envision a roadmap to the year 2040
(http://www. pa rkb ugle.org/commentary-you-
a re -invited -to -envision -a -road ma p -to -the -yea r
-2040/#comment-367561)
ARCHIVES
Select Month
Copyright 02014 Po* Press Inc.
htti)://www.i)arkbuvle.orvlcity-district-l2-continue-to-study-accessory-dwelling-units/ 12/23/2014
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Cecile Belo} Director
CITY OF SAINT PAUL 25 West Fourth Street Telephone: 651-266-6655
Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor Saint Paul, MN 55102 Facsimile: 651-266-6559
DATE: July 9, 2013
TO: Comprehensive Planning Committee
FROM: Sarah Zorn
RE: Central Corridor/TN Zoning Study Follow Up: Accessory Dwelling Units and Density Bonuses
Introduction
The Central Corridor/Traditional Neighborhood Zoning Study Follow Up study considers provisions for
accessory dwelling units (ADU) and density bonuses to encourage affordable housing and sustainable
development. We would like to spend the JUly 9th meeting discussing the background for the study, the
logic behind the proposed ordinance language, an d release the study for public hearing in September.
Background
The direction for the study came out of the Central Corridor/Traditional Neighborhood (CCTN) Zoning
Study that began in 2010 and was adopted on April 20, 2011. The CCTN study resulted in the rezoning of
hundreds of parcels along the Green Line to ensure consistency with adopted city plans. In addition, the
study resulted in the creation of the T4 Traditional Neighborhood zoning district, a high density, mixed
use district, intended for use in fixed rail corridors. The majority of the property included in the study
area was rezoned to T2, T3 or T4 Traditional Neighborhood or IR Light Industrial Restricted.
During the course of the CCTN study there was significant interest in including measures for affordable
housing and ways to ensure that a mixture of incomes and housing types remained and were expanded
upon in the corridor. Staff recommended the use of accessory dwelling units (a concept that has been
included in the most recent Comprehensive Plan and more recently the Central Corridor Development
Strategy, adopted in 2010) and density bonuses as tools to add to the housing mix in the corridor and
exchange density for the inclusion of affordable units. The resolution adopting the CCTN study
recommendations (Ordinance #11-27) directed further study of the use of accessory dwelling units,
density bonuses and regulations around liner retail. Staff worked with a consultant to research the
topics and come up with recommendations as a starting point for discussion. After reviewingthe
consultant report and discussion with Councilmembers, it was determined that there was no interest in
pursuing requirements for liner retail at this time.
Comprehensive Planning Committee memo
July 9, 2013
Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are a tool that can be used to produce and maintain affordable housing
options that may appeal to residents looking to downsize but stay in the neighborhood, generate some
additional income or create life cycle housing options for family members. In 2004, city-wide ADU
provisions were proposed alongside the creation of the Traditional Neighborhood zoning districts. The
ADU provisions were removed by the City Council in response to public testimony, particularly from
residents in areas where large lots would have allowed for ADUs, such as along Summit Avenue and
Mississippi River Boulevard, and the City Council asked for additional study. The concept of and interest
in ADUs has since been included in the Housing and Transportation Chapters of the Comprehensive Plan
and adopted city plans covering the Green Line corridor. ADUs can be used as a means to achieve infill
housing goals', particularly in an area with improved transportation, increasing density and housing
investment.
From the perspective of a law or moderate -income person, ADUs can provide an alternative to renting
an apartment in a multifamily building or buying (or renting) a single family home (both of which can be
cost prohibitive). An ADU would give a renter direct access to privately -owned green space, a benefit
typically associated with homeownership. Owner -occupancy in one unit (either the ADU or the principal
structure) would support family-oriented housing options. In addition, the income from an ADU would
provide existing homeowners some insurance against the anticipated increase in property taxes from
rising home values.'
Key recommendations of the proposed ordinance include:
® Size would be a minimum of 300 and a maximum of 800 square feet.
® Requiring that one unit be owner -occupied, evidenced by a deed restriction.
® Limiting the use of ADUs to lots that are at least 5,000 square feet and within % mile of
University Avenue; only one principal dwelling unit and one accessory unit would be permitted
on a property.
® The parking requirement would be the number of spaces required by the principal dwelling
unit.
Density Bonuses
Density bonuses are a tool that allows a developer to build additional units or square footage in
exchange for a public benefit. A report from the consultant suggested that bonuses are most effective
when they focus on specific goals, are limited to only a few priority items and are simple to adhere to
and administer. The use of several potential bonus items including affordable housing, structured
parking, historic preservation, open space, and green building standards were explored. Proposed new
bonuses to encourage affordable housing and sustainable development satisfy larger goals and policy
objectives, and are based on public hearing testimony from the CCTN study.
The use of an affordable housing bonus item is in line with the goals of the Big Picture Project, which is
an attempt to study the distribution of affordable housing along the Green Line and advocate for
' Housing policy 2.17 in the Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan calls for a zoning study to explore the use
of ADUs in existing neighborhoods. Policy 2.3 in the Transportation Chapter calls for creative infill housing in transit
corridors in order to increase transit -supportive density and housing choices; ADUs are listed as one type of infill
housing.
' Language taken from the Central Corridor Accessory Dwelling Units Study proposal— HUD Community Challenge
Grant application. The application was made in 2010/2011 and was not accepted.
Comprehensive Planning Committee memo
July 9, 2013