Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
City staff recommend loosening ADU rules for nonconforming structures; caution about using Appendix 7f
Loading...
Summary
Planning Director Steph Dahl proposed a UDO text amendment to remove the Board of Adjustment variance requirement for converting nonconforming accessory structures to ADUs; staff cautioned against adopting the amendment via Appendix 7f because of administrative complexity and legal risk.
Planning and Urban Design Director Steph Dahl told the committee the city is considering a zoning text amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance that would allow owners of nonconforming accessory structures (garages, sheds, carriage houses) to convert them to accessory dwelling units without a Board of Adjustment variance. Dahl said the change would reduce a quasi‑judicial, costly and time‑consuming step she described as an added barrier for homeowners seeking small‑scale, lower‑cost ADUs.
"This change would remove the requirement that owners of nonconforming structures in residential areas must go and seek a variance from the city's board of adjustment," Dahl said, adding that ADUs support aging in place and small‑scale infill. Dahl noted existing rules already permit ADUs that meet setback lines and that roughly 333 ADUs had been permitted since earlier ordinances were adopted; less than 25% occurred in parcels listed in Appendix 7f.
Dahl described Planning & Zoning Commission deliberations that included a proposed amendment to exclude parcels identified in Appendix 7f (about 2,000 parcels identified as vulnerable to displacement). Staff recommended against using Appendix 7f to exclude parcels, citing four problems: the parcel list is impermanent (subdivision creates new parcel numbers), it is administratively confusing for owners and staff, it can paradoxically suppress generational wealth by limiting allowed uses, and it raises legal risk because it ties an administrative relief path to a judicial variances process.
During discussion, council members asked for clarification on displacement impacts and whether the change could encourage outside investment. Dahl said the variance fee (~$500) and quasi‑judicial process are less likely to deter well‑resourced investors but do deter homeowners with limited capital; staff urged more data and maps before council action. The item is scheduled for full council on Jan. 27; staff asked whether the committee considered the item ready for full council and indicated additional data and maps will be provided.
