Planning staff proposes citywide ADU changes to comply with state law, cap sizes and remove appeals

City planning staff presented Jan. 14 draft amendments to the Unified Development Code to revise how accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are permitted across the city, align the rules with recent state legislation, and address implementation problems identified since the ordinance was adopted in 2020.

Sexton, the planning manager leading the update, said the 2020 ADU rules had produced a small number of permits — fewer than 30 per year in most years and about 60 ADUs total since 2020 — and staff proposes changes to make the rules clearer and administrative. State law requires decisions on ADU approvals to remain at the administrative level and prohibits appeal rights in most circumstances; Sexton told council that change limits the avenues for appeal and that staff is proposing to process ADU approvals at the building-permit level.

Key provisions in the draft include allowing one ADU on lots where single-family is permitted (citywide), treating ADUs as accessory to a principal dwelling, setting a proposed size cap at 75% of the primary structure with a 1,000-square-foot maximum (whichever is greater), limiting ADU placement (generally rear yard or integrated/attached), capping detached ADU height at 28 feet, and removing routine parking requirements for ADUs unless a property already has a driveway/garage requirement that would trigger additional parking rules.

Sexton said special rules will continue to apply in local historic-preservation overlay districts (the Historic Preservation Board retains jurisdiction for locally designated properties), while staff will retain administrative design review for properties listed only on state or national registers. The draft also addresses short-term-rental (STR) uses: staff proposed that an ADU not be used as an STR and that converting an existing STR to an ADU would be subject to additional review.

The proposed changes drew extensive public comment at planning commission and during earlier outreach. Council members asked for more time to review, asked for a full redline of the draft ordinance and pressed on specific items — including the proposed no-appeal administrative structure, size limits and the possible impacts on homeowners associations. Staff noted two state-law deadlines embedded in the recent bills: one statute is already effective and makes the city noncompliant unless code is adjusted, while other provisions create a report-and-adjust timeline around July 1, 2025. Several council members asked to slow the schedule and seek additional stakeholder meetings; staff said it would continue outreach and return with ordinance readings per the city’s timeline.