Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission directs staff to research RPUD changes to enable 55+ single-level housing

3382459 · March 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commission members asked staff to analyze other municipalities' code language and recommended edits to River Heights' RPUD provisions to enable senior (55+) single-level housing, while excluding townhouses.

River Heights Planning Commission members directed staff on March 25, 2025 to research amendments to the city’s RPUD (Residential Planned Unit Development) code that would facilitate senior-oriented housing (described in discussion as 55+ or senior housing), with an emphasis on single-level, detached homes or attached units designed to appear single-story.

Commissioners asked that staff review how nearby cities structure minimum lot sizes, height and unit-type restrictions for senior housing and return recommended language. The commission discussed examples in Cache Valley and other nearby municipalities cited in the meeting; staff and commissioners were assigned specific research tasks: Heather Leggett and Cindy Schwab were asked to look at small-city codes and lot-size guidance, and Tori (Wakefield) and Ryan were directed to review the general plan and RPUD implementation details.

The stated objective is to create RPUD language that would allow a developer to propose a senior-oriented development without enabling townhomes or multi-level buildings that the commission does not wish to permit under the senior designation. Commissioners noted only a small number of existing city parcels (the Westin property and possibly an area near Riverdale) appear suitable for that type of development under current conditions.

No ordinance amendment was adopted at the meeting; commissioners requested staff return with proposed code language and examples from comparable cities for further consideration.