ROCK SPRINGS – A public hearing on several changes to the city’s residential zoning ordinances will take place on Tuesday night at the Rock Springs City Council meeting. While many of the changes are small, one big change will be the addition of accessory dwellings in the R-2 district.

At the council meeting, there will be a public hearing on these changes. The ordinance will also go through first reading Tuesday night. After the ordinance goes through three readings, the council will then vote to accept or deny these changes. Throughout the readings, amendments can be added by the council if the council votes to accept the proposed amendments.

The changes have went through one public hearing at the most recent Rock Springs Planning and Zoning meeting. At that meeting, City Planner Jennifer Shields explained throughout the year, there are often issues which arise during requests. Staff makes notes of these issues and each year makes changes necessary from the notes.

Shields said there are three reasons why they do this. The first reason is to make the zoning ordinance more user friendly. They have done this by reducing the section of the ordinance from 17 pages down to 10 but most importantly have included user friendly tables. They also changed the format from two columns to one.

The second change is to make zoning ordinances more consistent, to eliminate errors and to make more adjustments as needed. The third reason for the changes is to meet the goals of the 2012 Master Plan Project. Shields said this also includes regulations for accessory dwelling units and allows them where they are existing or practicable.

Some of the minor amendments being proposed include:

•:• In R-E zoning districts, change the listed accessory use from “animals accessory to

residential use” to “horses” for clarification.

•:• Eliminate the requirement for R-E zoning districts to have two sides adjoining the city

limits boundary line to allow for flexibility in development.

•!• Eliminate the requirement for R-E zoning districts to be a Planned Unit Development to

allow for simplification in regulation and flexibility in development (PUD still optional if

desired).

•:• Allow public parks in R-5 and R-6 zoning districts – while not likely to be proposed since these zones typically provide their own outdoor recreational space, staff does not see a reason to prohibit public parks in any residential zoning district.

•:• Add setbacks for other uses in R-6 zoning districts for clarity.

•:• Eliminate text requiring R-6 zoning districts to have a minimum district size of 5 acres –

inconsistent with the R-6 minimum zoning district size of 9 acres listed in §13-902.G.

•:• Eliminate crematory as a permitted use in B-R Zoning Districts – staff does not feel this

type of use would be compatible next to residential uses.

•:• Eliminate design specific requirements for adult day care centers accessory to a church

in B-1 Zoning Districts.

Accessory Dwellings

The addition of accessory dwellings to the list of permitted uses in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) zoning district is the most notable of all the proposed amendments. The following text is taken directly from the city of Rock Springs 2012 Master Plan.

“Multiple Dwelling Units. Another way for the City to increase the affordability of its housing stock is to change its ordinances pertaining to accessory dwelling units, duplexes and other existing, non-conforming housing types typically located in older neighborhoods. While an exact number is not available, a representative sample of three of the City’s subdivisions platted prior to 1950 indicates 19.2 percent of the lots with residential uses contain two or more dwelling units while single-family detached housing – one house per lot – predominates, there are a significant number of lots that contain accessory dwelling units (13.4 percent). If this percentage is applied to the total number of dwelling units constructed prior to 1950, planning staff estimates that there may be as many as 281 accessory dwelling units in the City.

In some cases, there is a larger unit situated at the front of the property with a smaller unit in the rear. However, there are many properties that have a larger rear unit and some where both units are approximately the same size. The primary zoning for these lots is R-2 (single-family}, however, some such lots are zoned B-3 (Central Business) and a handful are zoned B-R (Business Residential). Only the B-R zone would allow for more than one unit on a lot. Because most of these units are considered non-conforming, they cannot be expanded. And, by ordinance, if the secondary unit is not occupied for a period of one year, it can no longer be used for housing.

There are also some lots that contain houses that have been converted to apartments, duplex housing and other housing types with 2 or more units per lot. These existing multi-unit properties make a valuable contribution toward fulfilling affordable housing needs of the city. Therefore, this plan calls for revising the zoning ordinance to recognize existing units as conforming, wherever feasible. In addition, Implementation Plan Project recommends adopting regulations allowing for additional, accessory dwelling units where setbacks, lot coverage and off-street parking requirements can be met.”

Accessory Dwellings may also be known as secondary dwelling units, granny flats, elder cottages, garden suites or guest houses and, as a conservative approach, are only proposed for the R-2 (Low Density Residential) zoning district at this time. These zones are primarily the older areas of Rock Springs where secondary units already exist, so the amendments would potentially bring a majority of them into conformance with the Zoning Ordinance.

Staff said there are several benefits to allowing accessory dwellings. They allow more efficient use of existing housing stock and infrastructure. They also preserve neighborhood character and promote stability for established neighborhood. These dwellings provide a broader range of accessible and more affordable house while also providing a mix of housing that responds to changing family needs and household sizes.

Staff added they provide a means for residents, particularly the elderly, single parents and couples with grown children to remain in their homes and neighborhoods and also provides supplemental income, security, companionship and assistance. Finally, they increase the housing stock of existing neighborhoods in a manner that is less intense than alternative.

During the Planning and Zoning hearing,  there were several items and concerns about accessory dwellings brought forward. Recently there was an issue about height requirements on secondary building such as unattached garages. Board member Paul Legerski asked about the height requirements. Shield said they would be the same as the height requirements for any other type of accessory structure.

Planning and zoning commissioner Taylor Jones asked about the language of the exterior of a home being “compatible” with an accessory dwelling since people might have different opinions of compatibility. Shields said it is somewhat vague and staff does want the ordinances that are crystal clear and recommended revising the language to say only “newly constructed” accessory dwellings. Accessory dwellings which are already in the city would be grandfathered in.

One of the requirements for the accessory dwellings is the owner must live in the main structure or accessory structure. There was a lot of debate on this, not so much for accessory dwellings which would be newly constructed but ones already existing. Again, staff said those already in existence would be grandfathered in.

Other items which were brought up included access ways to the accessory dwellings and people living above garages.