Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning Code Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council sets June 2 hearing for proposed code changes on ADUs, design standards and stormwater rules
Summary
Planning staff presented a package of municipal‑code amendments covering nuisances, frontage standards, building code clarifications, single‑family/duplex design standards, accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rules (including allowing up to two ADUs), and updates required by the city’s NPDES stormwater permit; council set a June 2 public hearing.
Planning staff presented a bundle of proposed municipal‑code amendments May 5 and the council set a public hearing for June 2 to accept testimony.
Planning staff said proposals include changes across multiple titles: nuisance language for overgrown vegetation in Title 8; removing detailed construction specifications from Title 12 and referencing current standard details instead; clarifications to building code conflict rules and plan expiration language in Title 15; updates to single‑family and duplex exterior design standards and a package of accessory dwelling unit (ADU) changes in Title 17; and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)‑related updates to clearing, grading and stormwater code in Title 18.
The nut graf: several amendments respond to state law and permit requirements (for example NPDES and recent ADU/ housing bills) and to planning commission recommendations; council scheduled a public hearing June 2 so the public can comment on the consolidated package.
Key planning details presented: the ADU draft would allow up to two ADUs on a single lot (one detached plus one internal or attached unit, but not two detached accessory structures), cap ADU size at 1,200 square feet (planning commission preference) and allow reduced rear setbacks (up to 5 feet) where an ADU is proposed. Planning staff said the city will check sewer and utility capacity through routine downstream modeling; if infrastructure lacks capacity, developers may be required to complete downstream improvements before building.
On single‑family and duplex design standards, staff proposed replacing vague language requiring homes to be “substantially different” with objective examples (façade articulation, roofline variation, material changes) and explicit treatment of mirrored‑unit duplexes so staff can apply the rule consistently.
Action: council unanimously voted to set a June 2 public hearing on the proposed municipal‑code amendments so public testimony can be received. Planning staff noted that the package has already been recommended by the Planning Commission (April 23).
Ending: staff requested public comment at the hearing and said they will bring final ordinance language back after public testimony and any recommended edits.
