Dunn County PR&D ready to move forward with ADUs out of R-1
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By LeAnn R. Ralph
MENOMONIE — The Dunn County Planning, Resources and Development Committee is ready to send the proposed zoning ordinance amendment for Accessory Dwelling Units to the Dunn County Board with ADUs removed from Residential-1 zoning.
The PR&D Committee at the May 15 meeting approved sending the proposed ordinance to the Dunn County Board for consideration as a first reading at the June meeting.
According to the proposed ordinance, in Residential-2 zoning, an attached ADU will be a permitted principal use, and a detached ADU will be a permitted accessory use.
In General Agriculture, an attached ADU will be a permitted use, and a detached ADU will be a permitted accessory structure.
During the public comments portion of the meeting, Mark Dietsche, chair of the Town of Grant, talked about concerns regarding ADUs in General Ag zoning.
The Town of Grant is zoned primarily Intensive Agriculture with some General Agriculture, he said.
The concern is how to handle the ADUs on the smaller parcels that are zoned GA when “things change in the future,” Dietsche said.
When the owners of the parcels with ADUs die, then it is likely the children who inherit the parcels will want to divide the ADU from the primary dwelling and sell the property as two parcels because two parcels would be worth more money, he said.
The next generation will want to divide out the parcels, “and that is where the problem will come,” Dietsche said.
Dietsche said while he does not want to limit people’s choices, in the future, the ADUs in General Ag could become contentious.
If the property owner wants to separate an ADU from the primary dwelling, forming two parcels must still meet the land division requirements of the county, said Tom Quinn, county board supervisor from Downing and chair of the PR&D committee.
According to the proposed ordinance, “The separate sale of the ADU shall not occur unless the portion of the subject property is legally subdivided in accordance with Dunn County’s land division, condominium and surveying regulations.”
Density
Gary Bjork, county board supervisor from the Town of Colfax and a member of the Colfax Town Board, said the Town of Colfax also was concerned about ADUs in General Agriculture.
The proposed ADU ordinance would not change the existing zoning that is already in place, said Anne Wodarczyk, Dunn County zoning administrator.
The density is still 1:8, and that cannot be changed in General Agriculture, she said.
A density of 1:8 does not mean a minimum eight-acre parcel, but rather, one split per eight acres in the parent tract.
For a 40-acre parcel, for example, there could be five splits, but four of the parcels could be one acre, and the fifth parcel could be 36 acres. For a 16-acre parcel, there could be two splits — either both eight acres, or one four-acre parcel and one 12-acre parcel, or one five-acre parcel and one 11-acre parcel and so forth.
Second dwelling
In General Ag, property owners can already build a second dwelling on the property if the property meets farm requirements, which includes a minimum of $6,000 per year from farm income, Wodarczyk said.
There are rules for being considered a farm. The second dwelling could be for a family member, or a farm worker, and later on, it could be rented out to someone not associated with the farm, and Dunn County zoning would likely never know that, she said.
The proposed ADU ordinance would open up housing options to more people, but the 1:8 density in General Ag would still apply, Wodarczyk said.
Duplexes are acceptable in GA and require administrative approval from Dunn County zoning as long the farm family requirements are met, she said.
Bjork said he would still like to see ADUs to be allowed in General Ag by special exception with final approval coming from the township to maintain local control.
The county’s legislative agenda asks for local control concerning Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and yet for housing, the control will be on the county level, Bjork said.
The towns “will know things differently” than the county, but for towns under county zoning, the zoning decision comes from the county, Wodarczyk said.
Ultimately, the county zoning ordinance is up to the Dunn County Board, and the towns are using the zoning ordinance to enforce zoning, she said.
Requests for ADUs
Bjork said it seemed as if the impetus for the ADUs was coming from the county’s housing study and not from the townships.
The concept of adding ADUs to the county’s zoning ordinance came from Bob Colson, former Dunn County zoning administrator, Wodarczyk said.
Colson was receiving many calls about ADUs, and since they are not included in the current ordinance, he had to turn down the requests, she said.
The zoning office is still getting calls about ADUs from people who want it as an option and who would use it if the option was available, Wodarczyk said.
The housing study proved there is a need for additional housing options, but the housing study is not driving the decision, she said.
People have taken the time to come to the PR&D committee meetings to speak during public comments because they want ADUs, Quinn said.
The PR&D committee has asked for the positions of town government. Members of the PR&D committee have done their best to address those concerns, but there will always be differences of opinion, he said.
Removing ADUs from R-1 in rural areas followed after objections from various townships.
One concern is that doubling residential density would increase opportunities for septic system contamination of the groundwater, especially in areas where R-1 lots are less than one acre.
More info
Dietsche asked for clarification on how the ADU ordinance amendment would work in the Town of Grant with parcels of eight acres or less in General Ag zoning.
Someone has called to inquire about purchasing five acres for a house and an ADU, which would not work at all in Intensive Agriculture because of the state regulations, he said.
If the proposed zoning amendment is approved by the Dunn County Board, in General Ag, the house and ADU would have to follow the standards for a septic and setbacks, and if there is enough room on the parcel, the house and ADU can be approved with a zoning permit, Wodarczyk said.
A detached ADU must be smaller than the primary dwelling, and in all cases, it must be less than 1,200 square feet, she noted.
The towns will still have to approve driveway permits and make decisions on whether to allow shared driveways, Wodarczyk said.
The zoning process for building an ADU in General Agriculture would be the same as for building a first house but with more restrictions, she said.
The proposed ordinance also stipulates that a deed restriction must be recorded for the ADU that states the property cannot be subdivided unless the subdivision follows the county’s land division ordinance, Wodarczyk said.
Readers should note that while the towns do have the authority to issue driveway permits, the towns’ authority extends to the towns’ right-of-way and the access onto the town road.
A shared driveway would have to be governed by an agreement between two property owners, and the township would be able to weigh in on whether the increased traffic for a shared driveway would be acceptable on that particular section of town road.
Two acres?
Since the county’s minimum lot size is one acre, would it be a good idea to require a minimum of two acres if an ADU is going to be built? Bjork asked.
If the property could be split into two parcels now, it would not be an ADU, Wodarczyk said.
Because the county does not currently have an ADU provision in the zoning ordinance, when people inquire about ADUs, if there is enough to land to split into two parcels with room for a house on each parcel, the zoning office has been advising people of that option, she said.
The proposed zoning amendment also requires an ADU to be within 300 feet of the primary dwelling, Wodarczyk said.
If someone wanted an ADU to be farther away than 300 feet, then the property owner should consider splitting the land into separate parcels, she said.
Two acres would not solve the issue of splitting off the properties because a split would require following other regulations, Wodarczyk said.
The property would need room for a separate well and septic to be able to build an ADU, she said.
Hardship
Bjork said that he, too, could envision problems in the future when someone wants to split off an ADU and sell it as a separate property.
If the property owner decided to build an ADU on a one-acre property with a primary dwelling, and then later on decided to split the property into two half-acre lots, which would not be allowed under current zoning because the minimum lot size is one acre, then the landowner would have created a hardship for himself or herself that would not be a hardship created by the county, Wodarczyk said.
The ADU zoning ordinance amendment allows people to create a different kind of housing unit, but it is not creating a new form of development, Quinn said.
There are clear and understandable standards in the ordinance, said Diane Morehouse, county board supervisor from Menomonie and a member of the PR&D committee.
Moving forward
Accessory dwelling units would be included in the county’s zoning ordinance under Chapter 13.3.17.
The purpose and intent of adding ADUs is “to allow more efficient use of existing housing stock and infrastructure, providing a broader range of housing opportunities that responds to changing family needs and offering a means for residents to remain in their homes and neighborhoods and obtain security, services and companionship.”
The Dunn County Planning, Resources and Development Committee unanimously approved sending the proposed zoning ordinance amendment for ADUs to the Dunn County Board for consideration, with ADUs removed from Residential-1 zoning.
The county board will consider the zoning ordinance amendment at the June meeting for a first reading and will consider it for approval on a second reading at the July meeting.
PR&D committee members and Dunn County residents will still have opportunities to discuss the proposed zoning amendment, and there will still be opportunities to amend the proposed zoning ordinance change, Quinn noted.
