Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs staff to research special‑use permit options for ADUs, manufactured homes and RV parks after extended public comment
Summary
After extended public comment on Feb. 27, Taylor City Council asked staff to study whether accessory dwelling units, manufactured homes, recreational vehicle parks or multifamily developments should be handled through special‑use permits rather than allowed automatically under the city’s land development code.
The Taylor City Council on Feb. 27 heard a staff briefing and extensive public comment about whether certain housing categories should require a special‑use permit rather than being allowed “by‑right” through the existing land development code.
Planner Carly Pearson told the council that staff were not proposing immediate code changes but were seeking direction to research options. The categories under consideration were accessory dwelling units (ADUs), manufactured homes, recreational vehicle (RV) parks and certain multifamily developments. Pearson said any future proposal would include statutory required notifications and public hearings and that staff planned to mail notice to every property owner in the city if council directs a formal approach.
The bulk of the meeting that followed was public comment. Residents and stakeholders were sharply divided. Supporters of allowing those housing types by right said ADUs, duplexes and small multifamily buildings increase the taxable base and provide housing options for families and aging residents. “If we are only allowed with infill to do single family homes, that generates only about…$1,400 in city tax revenue,” developer Alex Alridge said, arguing that duplexes and small multifamily increase revenue per lot.
Speakers raising concerns warned that a move to require council approval for by‑right housing could insert political judgment into routine land use decisions and slow or deter homeowners and small investors. Multiple speakers said they bought property specifically to build ADUs for family use and worry that a special‑use process would create delay, extra cost and potential neighborhood opposition. “If city council blocks the investments that could bring real money for our road repairs, aren’t we just staying stuck in the same infrastructure problems we all want to fix?” resident Marie Blomer asked.
Several commenters referenced the city’s recently adopted comprehensive plan, arguing the plan and its public process already reflected community choices about neighborhood character and infill. Others urged the council to use more targeted measures — for example pre‑approved ADU models — rather than a blanket special‑use requirement.
Council members debated scope. Several councilmembers said the original focus that staff and council discussed in closed sessions was to prevent so‑called housing finance company (HFC) maneuvers that could remove property from the tax rolls through long leases and tax‑exempt arrangements, not to broadly restrict ADUs, manufactured homes or RV parks. Council members asked staff to analyze state law implications and to return with options that would safeguard the city from HFC schemes while limiting unintended impacts on homeowners and small investors.
At the end of the discussion, Councilman Garcia moved to receive the report; the motion passed by voice vote with no recorded opposition. Staff said they will prepare formal analysis, draft language if warranted, and stakeholder notices for any proposed amendments so the public will have full opportunity to respond before any code change.
