Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-130 Council Resolution• ATTACHMENT 1 Council MemberReinert introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 08-130 DETERMINING INTENT OF ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO SPORT COURT REGULATIONS WHEREAS, the City Council acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments has received an application for appeal regarding interpretation of intent of provisions of the Zoning Ordinance relating to Sport Court regulations; and. WHEREAS, the Council finds that Sport Courts are regulated as an accessory use under Section 3, Subdivision 4, subpart D.2 of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the intent of regulation under said section are intended to regulate exterior detached recreation facilities, and WHEREAS, the Council finds that areas used for recreational activities constructed within a dwelling are consistent with the intended principal use of said dwelling. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. That a "Sport Court" enclosed within the principal structure of a dwelling is considered part of the principal use and not accessory to the principal use. 2. That the requirements of Section 3, Subdivision 4 of the zoning ordinance related to "Sport Courts" are construed to apply to exterior detached facilities accessory to a principal use. an e Bartell, Ci C erk J. Be eso Mayor Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 10th day of November, 2008. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Membero' Donnelland upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Reinert, O'Donnell, Stoltz, Gallup, Bergeson The following voted against same: none Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: TOPIC: VOTE REQUIRED: BACKGROUND: AGENDA ITEM 6A Michael Grochala November 10, 2008 Consider of Resolution No. 08 -130, Determining Intent of Zoning Ordinance Relating to Sport Court Regulations Simple Majority The City has received a building permit application from Mr. Mark Smith for a home addition for his property located at 2120 Otter Lake Drive. The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,955 sq.ft. addition to the residence and a 1,607 sq.ft. addition to the attached garage. The total square footage of the garage with the addition will be 3,597 sq.ft. The maximum allowable accessory building square footage for the property is 3,600 square feet. Construction of an in ground swimming pool is also proposed under a separate permit. The home addition includes an exercise area and a recreation area identified as "sport court" on the plans. Over the past several months staff has discussed zoning and building code requirements with Mr. Smith as well as related inquiries from the neighboring property owners Paul and Julie Schwartz, located at 2140 Otter Lake Drive. Mr. Smith has provided revised plans and the City is prepared to issue the building permit. As part of the review process staff made a determination that the addition to the principal building, labeled as "Sport Court", was not subject to the provisions of Section 3, Subdivision 4.D of the zoning ordinance regulating "Sport Courts ". This determination was based on 1) that the sport court is enclosed entirely within the principal building and consistent with the permitted use of such building and 2) the intent of the ordinance requirement to regulate free - standing exterior recreational facilities. The Schwartz's have submitted an appeal of this determination based on the literal interpretations of the Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to "Sport Courts" 1. All residential and rural districts include "Sport Courts" as an accessory use. 2. The ordinance defines "Accessory Use" as a use of land or of a building or portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with such principal use. • 3. The ordinance defines "Accessory Building" as a portion of the principal building or a detached structure on the same lot which is used for an accessory use. 4. Section 3, Subdivision 4.D Accessory Buildings and Structures, Subpart 2 establishes standards for "Sport Courts ". 5. Section 3, Subdivision 4.D Accessory Buildings and Structures, Subpart 9 establishes standards for the maximum number, size, and height of accessory buildings allowed in an individual parcel according to lot size and residential district. The maximum accessory building square footage allowed within the R -X district is 3,600 square feet. The Schwartz's argue that based on the literal interpretation of the ordinance that with the addition of the proposed "Sport Court" Mr. Smiths addition would exceed the accessory building square footage allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. In accordance with Section 2, Subdivision 4, subpart B of the zoning ordinance the City Council acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals shall consider the application for appeal and render a decision by resolution. Additionally, the permit application has been stayed, in accordance with the ordinance provisions until a decision has been reached by the council. 110 ANALYSIS • As discussed by the Schwartz's, the literal interpretation of the ordinance requirements would suggest that the Sport Court, as proposed, is an accessory use and by definition an accessory building subject to the accessory building size limitations of the zoning ordinance. However, staff is of the opinion that the literal interpretation does not reflect the intent of the ordinance requirements. The intent of the ordinance requirements was to regulate the placement of outdoor recreation facilities such as tennis courts, basketball courts and similar uses. Additionally, no consideration was given to regulating the use of recreational areas within the principal structure. Single family detached dwellings are a permitted use within the R -X, Rural Executive Zoning District. The term dwelling is defined in the ordinance as follows: Dwelling. A structure or portion thereof which is used exclusively for human habitation. The proposed recreational area is a habitable part of the existing residence and is not considered any different from other primary uses of the residence. Staff finds it difficult to differentiate the sport court from other room designations common within dwellings such as a billiards room, office /den or home theatre. The Schwartz's argue that "Having this significant mass of structure with accessory use next to our property, running several hundred feet along our side yard, is an obtrusive use that the spirit of • the zoning ordinance does not purposefully allow ". However it should be noted that 1) length of the structure is not due solely to the proposed sport court addition but also includes the attached garage; 2) the proposed building is in conformance with dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance including setbacks and 3) a similar sized addition comprised of other designations such as bedrooms and /or family room would be also allowable under the ordinance requirements. • • The term "Sport Court" was introduced into the zoning ordinance as part a comprehensive update of the ordinance completed in 2003 (Ord. 08 -03). Prior to 2003 the zoning ordinance contained provisions regulating the placement of "Tennis Courts ". The tennis court provisions, within the zoning ordinance, date back to at least 1982. Historically, these provisions were applied to exterior backyard facilities. No comparable provisions were in place for similar uses such as basketball courts. The extent of changes from the pre 2003 code to the update was limited to the replacement of the word "tennis" with the word "sport" where applicable within the ordinance. Additionally, the definition of "Sport Court" was added and reads as follows: Sport Court. A facility that typically includes a paved playing surface for one or more sport activities such as, but not limited to, tennis, basketball, or volleyball. The changes included in the 2003 update were simply intended to expand the regulatory requirements for "tennis" courts to cover similar exterior uses. The ordinance requirements themselves infer the intent to regulate an outdoor facility and remain unchanged from the prior requirements for tennis courts. The ordinance requirements include but are not limited to: 1. provisions for permits; 2. landscaping and turf protection, 3. setbacks including the prohibition from locating within required front and side yards 4. prohibitions from locating within public and private easements 5. requirements for the height of practice walls 6. chain link fencing requirements 7. lighting requirements. These requirements, in their inclusiveness, demonstrate that they are intended to regulate an exterior detached use rather than a principal or accessory structure regulated elsewhere in the ordinance. Finally, to staffs knowledge this interpretation of the ordinance requirements for sport courts and tennis courts, for that matter, is not contrary to what has been historically, applied to uses constructed as part of the principal building. • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 08 -130. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 08 -130 2. Appeal request from Schwartz 3. Letter from Larkin Hoffman representing Smith 4. Site and Building Plans 5. Zoning Ordinance Provisions • • • ATTACHMENT 2 October 24, 2008 Board of Appeal and Adjustments, care of: Mr. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director The City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 RE: Appeal to Board of Appeals and Adjustments related to interpretation of accessory structure definition 2120 Otter Lake Drive, Lino Lakes Dear Members of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments: Thank you for your time to make a decision related to an interpretation of what is an accessory building in the city code. We believe we are negatively impacted by staffs gray interpretation of what is and what is not an accessory building related to the addition plans of our next -door neighbor. For ease of understanding this issue, we are asking staff to attach a copy of the proposed addition. It includes not only a garage addition which would make the total garage area 3,597 s.f., only 3 s.f. smaller than the maximum accessory building size allowed by zoning code, but also a large indoor sport court addition and outside swimming pool. All the mass of the additions and swimming pool are located just about as close to our side yard as legally allowed in the side yard setback requirements. Both our lot and our neighbor's lot range from 3.5 to 4.5 acres in size. We believe that the zoning code prevents a large amount of accessory buildings and structures for a reason, and that is to insure that a significant amount of the lot is not used for uses other than principal uses and also for preservation of development conformity on lots, as well as preservation of related real estate value. Simply put, the zoning ordinance would not limit the size of accessory buildings and structures unless there was a valid reason. We will detail sections of the zoning ordinance which staff has viewed and has administratively determined that the indoor sport court is not an accessory building, and we will show how we feel that the literal interpretation of the zoning ordinance is contrary to staffs opinion. • • • Section 1, Subdivision 2, item B (Definitions): This is a section of the general zoning code which has various definitions. Two definitions which apply in this instance are accessory building and accessory use. Accessory building: A portion of the principal building or a detached structure on the same lot which is used for an accessory use. Accessory use: A use of land or of a building or portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with such principal use. The following section of the zoning ordinance addresses accessory buildings and structures, and specifically cites sport courts as an accessory building or structure or such use would not be under the section entitled Accessory Buildings and Structures. Section 1, Subdivision 4 (entitled Accessory Buildings and Structures), item D2 (entitled Sport Courts): This item defines standards which shall apply to sports courts. Per staff, these address a sport court which is outside. As such, by placing the sport court inside, staff deems the sport court use as not an accessory use. This appears to be in conflict with the definition of accessory use and accessory building. Specifically, sport courts are listed under a section entitled Accessory Buildings and Structures, and the use as a sports court is an accessory use per the definition of the zoning code which states "a use of land or of a building or portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with such principal use." Therefore, the portion of the addition used as a sport court by its literal definition is an accessory use and per the literal definition of accessory building, is indeed an accessory building and therefore is subject to the minimum amount and total size of accessory buildings as listed in Section 1, Subdivision 4, item 8d, which states that the combination of accessory buildings and garages shall not exceed three thousand six hundred (3,600) square feet. Supporting the interpretation of the sport court as an accessory use, another portion of the zoning code is referenced: Section 1, Subdivision 2 (entitled Accessory Uses under the RX zoning), item F9 (entitled swimming pools, sport courts and other recreational facilities which are operated for the enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the principal use and their guests). This portion of the ordinance clearly shows that the sport court is an accessory use. The sport court is listed therefore not only under a section entitled "Accessory Buildings and Structures ", but also "Accessory uses ". It is noted that a sports court is listed as an 1 • • accessory use in all residential districts. Per the definition of accessory building, again, it is 'A portion of the principal building (emphasis added) or a detached structure on the same lot which is used for an accessory use." Again, sport courts are by definition, an accessory use (Section 1, Subdivision 2, item F9). By placing an accessory use into "a portion of the principal building" it becomes by definition, an accessory building. We are having trouble construing any meaning other than the indoor sport court is an accessory building per the definitions and ordinance citations. The zoning code limits the size of accessory structures and buildings to avoid a significant use of the land which is not principal in its use. Zoning codes protect property and values, and we believe that allowing this accessory sport court use and building, especially so close to our lot line, will negatively devalue our lakefront home. We implore upon you members of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to interpret the zoning ordinance literally, as we believe would so be done by a court of law, to avoid irreparable harm to our property and its value. Again, attached, per the request we made of staff, is a copy of the proposed addition, showing it is near as close to our property as can be placed by minimum setback requirements. Having this significant mass of structure with accessory use next to our property, running several hundred feet along our side yard, is an obtrusive use that the spirit of the zoning ordinance does not purposefully allow. We kindly ask for your careful consideration of our request to avoid irreparable harm to the value of our lakefront home. Thank you for your consideration in this request. Respectfully submittedr, / f Paul and Julie Schwartz 2140 Otter Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN Larkin Hoffman 11/5/2008 10:55 PAGE 002/004 Fax Server ATTACHMENT 3 Larkin Homan ATTOINET5 November 4, 2008 Board of Appeals and Adjustments Mr. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director The City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 554314194 GENERAL: 952 -835 -3800 FAX: 952-896-3333 WEI: WWW.1arrkinhOfnaf.COIII Via Facsimile & U.S. Mail Re: Appeal by Paul and Julie Schwartz regarding 2120 Otter Lake Drive Our File #28,825 -03 Dear Members of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments: This firm represents Mark and Kathleen Smith in connection with their response to the appeal by Paul and Julie Schwartz (the "Schwartz") of the Smiths' request for a building permit. As a result of this appeal, the City has stayed the decision as to whether to grant a building permit to Mr. and Mrs. Smith. We submit this letter in support of the City Staff's interpretation of the City's Ordinances and in support of the City granting the building permit. In their submission, the Schwartz make certain admissions regarding the legality of Mr. and Mrs. Smith's proposed addition. First, the Schwartz admit that the proposed garage addition would be within the maximum accessory building size allowed by the City's Zoning Ordinance. Second, the Schwartz admit that the proposed addition to the house is within the legally allowed side yard set back requirements. Therefore, the Schwartz's question is solely with how the City defines that portion of the proposed addition that will be used by Mr. and Mrs. Smith and their children for recreational purposes. To be clear, this space is an expansion of the lower and main level living areas including a larger recreation and family room. It is our understanding that the City has issued building permits for similar uses, defining these uses as part of the home and not as an "accessory use." Mr..and Mrs. Smith simply request that the City provide them the same treatment. Discussion It is understandable that the City has not considered such uses accessory uses. A city has accessory use laws to prevent uses that detract from the property as a truly residential use (i.e., hobby farms, barns, home businesses, etc.). However, when a use is attached, fully enclosed and not distinguishable in appearance from the remainder of the home, the rationale to prohibit the use as accessory no longer exists. The attachment, enclosure and appearance of the structure mitigates the normal problems associated with an accessory use. Larkin Hoffman 11/5/2008 10:55 PAGE 003/004 Fax Server • Mr. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director November 4, 2008 Page 2 In addition, the categorization of a recreational room for Mr. and Mrs. Smith and their children as a use accessory to the home does not comport with the definitions contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance. The following definitions are instructive: accessory use - "a use of land or of a building or portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with such principal use." incidental use - "a use of land or of a building or portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with such principal use." principal use - "the primary or predominant use of any lot and/or building." dwelling - "a structure or portion thereof which is used exclusively for human habitation." Under the City's definitions, a particular use cannot be both a principal use and an accessory use. The principal use of Mr. and Mrs. Smith's home is as a dwelling, a structure for human habitation. Habitation is commonly defined as "a dwelling place; a domicile." Black's Law Dictionary (ab. 8th ed.) 590. Clearly, Mr. and Mrs. Smith's home is their domicile. The proposed addition will be a location within the home where Mr. and Mrs. Smith and their children recreate. Having a room within a home for recreation, no matter how large or small, is consistent with the use of a home as a dwelling. It cannot be said that such a use is "customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use," it is an integral part of the principal use. Therefore, the proposed addition will be inhabited and occupied as Mr. and Mrs. Smith's domicile to the same extent as the rest of the home. The Minnesota Supreme Court has also expounded on the definition of an accessory use. In Lowry v. City of Mankato, 42 N.W.2d 553 (Minn. 1950), the Court determined: Ordinarily, the word `accessory' when applied to a building denotes that it is used as an adjunct of and in subordination to another building.... A thing is `subordinate' when it is a n c i l l a r y or auxiliary to a p r i n c i p a l thing ... . `Incidental' has much the same meaning as `accessory' and `subordinate' and is used to convey the idea of a thing being subordinate to, dependent on, and pertaining to another thing which is the principal one. Id at 558. Applying the Lowry definition, the proposed addition is not ancillary or auxiliary to • the principal thing; the addition constitutes the principal use of the lot as a dwelling. Further, while the proposed addition may be used by Mr. and Mrs. Smith and their family to play basketball, it is only about half the size of an actual basketball court. Due to its size, intended use for the family and design that makes it indistinguishable from the remainder of the home, the Larkin Hoffman 11/5/2008 10:55 PAGE 004/004 Fax Server 40 Mr. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director November 4, 2008 Page 3 proposed addition does not meet the definition of "sport court" as set forth in the City's Ordinance. The City's Ordinance defines sport court as "a facility that typically includes a paved playing surface for one or more sport activities such as, but not limited to, tennis, basketball, or volleybalL" A facility is "something created to serve a particular function." Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary 460. The proposed addition, however, is not a facility. First, it will be a room in Mr. and Mrs. Smith's home. Second, it is not being constructed to serve one particular function; rather, it will serve numerous functions, including exercise and relaxation purposes for the family. Additionally, the proposed addition is not intended for sport activities. It will be used for exercise by residents of the household not for organized, competitive sports activities. In addition, the proposed addition will also not have a paved playing surface. It will have hardwood floors consistent with the finish of the remainder of the home. Inclusion of reference to a paved playing surface indicates that a sport court was intended to be an outdoor, detached sport court. Several provisions in the Ordinance regulating sport courts also lead to this same determination. For example, the Ordinance imposes requirements regarding the height of • practice walls and chain link fencing and the direction of lighting. Such requirements are not applicable to a room fully connected as an integrated part of a residence. • Conclusion Clearly, the addition proposed by Mr. and Mrs. Smith is not an accessory use to Mr. and Mrs. Smith's home. While the Schwartz may not be happy with Mr. and Mrs. Smith increasing the size of their home, that is all the proposed addition does, increase the size of the home. As the City has recognized in the past, the proposed addition and its proposed use is not an accessory use, it is part of the principal use of the property as a home. Mr. and Mrs. Smith simply requests that they receive like treatment and that their building permit be issued. Thank you for your consideration. C. Crri ' for kin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. Direct Dial: Direct Fax: Email: 952- 896 -3290 952- 842 -1729 wgriffith@larldnhoffman.com cc: Mark Smith Tamara O'Neill Moreland, Esq. 1226023.1 • • v' 91.27 - - -- ---- / j / / /// - - -_ - - - / -r/ / h \ / / / \ \ \\ \ �/ \ t9_.'' i1g707 Y AA :19 et/ '-.. %/ • I 930 932 /7 0 CROW* MTV DETAIL 3 (No Scale) TEMPORARY ACCESS ROAD I 14 FEET I F< >1 I I. I I I I. 11.x!11. X11. -11. X11 ,�11.�11.�11.- 11.�11.��.11.�11 REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL REPLACE WITH SUITABLE SOIL DE' (Nc • • • Attachment 5 — Zoning Ordinance Provisions Section 1, Subdivision 2. Definitions Accessory Building. A portion of the principal building or a detached structure on the same lot which is used for an accessory use. Accessory Use. A use of land or of a building or portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building and located on the same lot with such principal use. Building. Any structure having a roof supported by columns or walls and intended for the shelter, housing or enclosure of any individual, animal, process, equipment, goods or materials of any kind or nature. Building, Principal. A building in which is conducted the principal use of the lot on which it is located. Dwelling. A structure or portion thereof which is used exclusively for human habitation. Dwelling, Single Family Detached. A dwelling which is designed for and occupied by not more than one family and surrounded by open space or yards and which is not attached to any other dwelling by any means. Principal Use. The primary or predominant use of any lot and /or building. Sport Court. A facility that typically includes a paved playing surface for one or more sport activities such as, but not limited to, tennis, basketball, or volleyball. Section 2, Subdivision 4. Administration: Variances and Appeals B. Appeal Procedure. An appeal shall only be applicable to an administrative permit, order, requirement or interpretation of intent of provisions of this Ordinance. Opinions and evaluations as they pertain to the impact or result of a request are not subject to the appeal procedure. The City Council shall be the Board of Appeals and Adjustments with powers listed in Minnesota Statutes 462.357, subdivision 6. 1. Appeal Procedures. a. An appeal from an administrative action shall be filed by the property owner or their agent with the Zoning Administrator within ten (10) days after the making of the order, requirement, or interpretation being appealed. • • • b. The property owner or their agent shall file with the Zoning Administrator an application for appeal stating the specific grounds upon which the appeal is made. Said application shall be accompanied by a fee as established by City Council ordinance. In cases where the application is judged to be incomplete, the Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant, in writing, within ten (10) days of the date of submission. c. An appeal stays all proceedings and the furtherance of the action being appealed unless it is certified to the Board of Adjustment Appeals, after the notice of appeal is filed, that by reason of facts stated in the certificate a stay would cause imminent peril to life and property. d. The Zoning Administrator shall instruct the appropriate staff persons to prepare technical reports when appropriate and shall provide general assistance in preparing a recommendation on the action to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. e. The Board of Appeals and Adjustment shall consider the application for appeal at a public meeting and consider testimony of the property owner and City staff. f. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 15.99, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals shall make its decision by resolution within sixty (60) days from the date on which a completed application is filed, unless the review is extended as allowed by MN Stat. 15.99. g. The Zoning Administrator shall serve a copy of the final order of the Board upon the applicant by mail. Section 3, Subdivision 4.D Accessory Buildings and Structures 2. Sport Courts. In all districts, the following standards shall apply to sport courts: a. A building permit shall be required for all private residential and commercial sport courts. b. A conditional use permit shall be required for all commercial sport courts. • • • c. An application for a building permit or a conditional use permit shall include a site plan showing the following along with all required information: 1) The size, shape, pavement and sub - pavement materials. 2) The location of the court. 3) The location of the house, garage, fencing, septic systems and any other structural improvements on the lot. 4) The location of structures on all adjacent lots. 5) A grading plan showing all revised drainage patterns and finished elevations at the four corners of the court. 6) Landscaping and turf protection around the court. 7) Location of existing and proposed wiring and lighting facilities. d. Sport courts shall not be located closer than ten (10) feet to any side and rear lot line. Sport courts shall not be located within any required front yard or side yard abutting a street. e. Sport courts shall not be located over under - ground utility lines of any type, nor shall any court be located within any private or public utility, walkway, drainage or other easement. f. Solid sport court practice walls shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height. A building permit shall be required for said walls. Said walls shall be set back a minimum of thirty (30) feet from any lot line. g. Chain link fencing surrounding the sport court may extend up to twelve (12) feet in height above the sport court surface elevation. h. Lighting for the sport court shall be directed toward the sport court and not toward adjacent property. 9. Rural and Residential Zoning District Accessory Buildings. The following summarizes the maximum number, size, and height of accessory buildings allowed in an individual parcel according to lot size and residential district. • d. Two and One -Half (2 1/2) Acres to Less Than Five (5) Acres. (R, R -X, R -BR, R -1, R -1X, R -EC, and PSP Districts) • • 1) The combination of accessory buildings and garages shall not exceed three thousand six hundred (3,600) square feet. 2) Total allowable accessory building space shall be limited to the following: a) One (1) attached garage and b) Two (2) detached accessory structures. 3) Attached garages shall not exceed one thousand one hundred twenty (1,120) square feet or equal to ninety (90) percent of the size of the house foundation, whichever is greater. 4) No metal sheet/panel siding with vertical orientation except upon tool sheds less than four hundred (400) square feet in area. Metal horizontal lap siding is acceptable. 5) Twenty -four (24) feet maximum height. 6) Roof and exterior color and material compatible with home (except manufactured metal tool shed). Section 5, Subdivision 2. R -X Rural Executive F. Accessory Uses. Subject to applicable provisions of this Ordinance, the following are permitted accessory uses in the R -X District: 1. Accessory apartments as regulated by Section 3, Subdivision 10 of this Ordinance. 2. Accessory buildings including garages, tool houses, sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic and farm supplies, and non - commercial recreational equipment, as regulated by Section 3, Subd. 4.D of this Ordinance. 3. Fences, as regulated by Section 3, Subd. 4.R of this Ordinance. 4. Home occupations as regulated by Section 3, Subd. 8 of this Ordinance. • • • 5. Operation, parking, or storage of such vehicles, equipment and machinery which are incidental and customary to permitted or conditional uses allowed in this district. 6. Radio and television receiving antennas, satellite dishes, TVROs three (3) meters or less in diameter, short-wave radio dispatching antennas, or those necessary for the operation of electronic equipment including radio receivers, ham radio transmitters and television receivers as regulated by Section 3, Subd. 15 of this Ordinance. 7. Recreational vehicles and equipment per Section 3, Subd. 4.P of this Ordinance. 8. Signs as regulated by the city sign ordinance, Ord. No. 12 -97, as amended, of the City Code. 9. Swimming pools, sport courts and other recreational facilities which are operated for the enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the principal use and their guests, as regulated by Section 3, Subd. 4.D of this Ordinance.