Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-05 ' A Date: April 5th, 2002 To: Groton Town Board cc.: Planning Board (M. Carey) ; G. Senter, CEO ; Fran Casullo, Town Attorney From: Zoning Board of Appeals (L. Raymond, J. Pachai , P. Gaines , S . Thane, L. McElroy) Subject: Elder Cottage Housing. Opportunity (ECHO) Units ECHO unit siting is governed by Section 320 of the Groton Land Use & Development Code. The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) has had two recent variance requests for ECHO units to exceed the 750 sq. ft. maximum size in Section 320. 3a. A review of Section 320 in deciding upon these variance requests suggests a -number of changes the Town -Board -may wish -to consider. These changes would make ECHO unit siting more adaptable to_current._housing, markets and conditions , as well as reducing the need for variance requests. Suggested changes include: * Lot coverage • Size and Dimensions • Accessory Apartments , Detached Rooms , and ECHO Units • Age and Disability Eligibility • Owner Occupancy .of-ECHO Units • ECHO Unit and Primary Dwelling Occupant Relationships Submitted on behalf of the Zoning Board of Appeals by Lyle Raymond, Chairperson n r • p • w Pooposed changes in Section 320 foo ECHO units : 1. ECHO units are not listed in Sections 342-346 (Zoning Districts) in regard to maximum lot coverage for dwellings. Section 120 (befinitions) indicates that a "Dwelling" is a permanent fixture, whereas an ECHO unit is defined as temporary, which may be why it is omitted front the listings in Sections 342-346: ZBA Conclusion: Since an ECHO unit may be located on the site foo an extended pegdod of time, it should be included in the dwellings listed foo maximum lot coveoage in Sections 342-346. This could be significant wheme dwellings aee clusteved close togethevA on small lots, as in the hamlets of McLean oo Peoaville, foe instance. 2. it was brought to the attention of the ZBA that sufficient space for .possible modifications inside an ECHO unit to provide mobility for handicapped persons is strongly related to the size and dimensions of the unit. Long and narrow units (such as single-wide mobile homes) typically do not have sufficient interior space that can be modified to provide clearances for wheel-chair mobility, for example. ZBA Conclusion: The length of-ECHO -units should­ not exceed4.754imes-the width of the unit. The dimensions of the modulm ECHO- units fWm Better Housing of Tompkins County aoe within this length/width .oange. This would, of couose, poevent the use of single-wides, which may also be mooe acceptable in built-up housing aoeas that aoe not chaoactemized by the poesence of single-wide mobile homes. An exception would need to be made wheoe the p.*unaoy dwelling is aloeady a single-wide mobile home , in that case, otheo poovisions of the Code would still be applicable such as being . suboodinate to the pad naoy dwelling in size (Section 320Sa), and foe maximum lot covewage (if ECHO units aloe included). Of couose, a vaoiance can always be eequested foo special ciocumstances. 3. The variance requests clearly indicate that the 750 'sq. ft size limitation in the Code for ECHO units is too limited. Dryden has increased ECHO unit maximum size to 850 sq. ft. , and Lansing has no size limitation at all (new and apparently untested) . Better Housing of Tompkins County ECHO units are not readily available for lease due to long waiting lists, and the income eligibility limits for using them is too low for even moderate income applicants. The alternative is to purchase an ECHO unit. Unfortunately, the ZBA found that the choices available are to either to (a) have a custom-designed modular unit constructed at high costs ($50,000 range) or (b) to use a mobile home in the 900 sq. ft. plus size range (priced at around $30435,000). Smaller mobile homes are single-wades with the limitations noted in item #2 above, as well as being more difficult to find and to sell afterwards. ZBA Conclusion: The maximum allowable size of an ECHO unit should be mcmased to 1,000 sq. f1. Howeveo, Section 320Sa also states that it must' be suboodinate in size to thep.W*mmy dwelling and maximum lot coveoage (if extended to ECHO units) would still apply, which could oequke that the ECHO unit be smalleo than 1,000 sq. fts in some instances. 4. Accessory Apartments and Detached Rooms, as defined in Section 120 of the Code, do not appear to mesh with Section 320 on ECHO units. ZBA Conclusion: It is suggested that the definitions of Accessooy Apaotments and Detached Rooms be Devised to make them compatible with ECHO units. r S. Better Housing of Tompkins County Inc. has set a miminum age of 60 to be eligible for an ECHO unit. The 62 year age eligibility requirement in Section 320.2b of the Groton Code may- have been derived from the Social Security system . Section 120 of the Groton Code also uses the term "disabled" to define who is to use an ECHO unit, but this term does not appear in Section 320.2 on who is eligible to use one of these units. ZBA Conclusion: The eligible age fom ECHO units should be changed to 60 in the Gooton Code to make it compatible with the Betted Housing of Tompkins County Inc. eligible age. In addition, the definition of "disabled" needs to be clan dfied and included in Section 320.2. 6. A Review of Zoning Issues and Other Considerations by the HARP draws attention to the possibility of the owner of the primary dwelling moving into an ECHO unit in some instances, with the primary dwelling being occupied by children, other relatives, or other closely associated people. ZBA Conclusion: The Gooton Code should include a p..ovision allowing the ownerr(s) of the p..vdm wy dwelling to occupy the ECHO unit, with othem family members oni closely associated people using the pWmwq dwelling, who aye also legally designated to poovide assistance to the peuson(s) in the ECHO unit. The ECHO unit occupant(s) would continue ownemship of the pwimaoxy dwelling. Eligibility sequiviements of the Code as to age, unit size, etc. must be met as well, of cou4se. 7. Section 320.2c of the Code in regard to the relationships between an ECHO unit occupant and those in the primary dwelling may need updating. ZBA Conclusion : Section 320.2c should be aevised to make it compatible with the definitions used in contempomavy planning and zoning mefewnces.