Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Living Quarters topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission weighs allowing accessory living quarters in R-18 and R-35 zones
Summary
At its April 16 workshop, Cave Creek planning staff proposed amending the zoning text to permit accessory living quarters (ADUs) in R-18 and R-35 districts under existing ADU standards; commissioners asked for inventory data and alternatives to the 50% size cap before deciding whether to advance the change.
Cave Creek planning staff told the Planning Commission on April 16 that they plan to propose a text amendment to allow accessory living quarters (ADUs) in the town’s R-18 and R-35 zoning districts, reversing current prohibitions and applying the town’s existing ADU standards to those districts.
The Zoning Administrator said the draft change would not create new standards but would change the rule from “prohibited” to “allowed,” making ADUs subject to the ordinance’s existing requirements: an ADU may be no more than 50% of the gross floor area of the primary residence, must be served by the same driveway, and must use a single water and electric meter. The staff presentation noted that ADUs must still meet bulk regulations (setbacks and lot coverage).
Commissioners pressed staff for more data before sending a recommendation to the Town Council. Staff estimated roughly 600 parcels in the R-18/R-35 categories (plus about 48 in Hidden Canyon) but said many are already developed or are subject to subdivision restrictions, CC&Rs or HOA rules that could prevent ADU construction. Commissioners asked staff to return with an inventory of vacant versus developed lots, maps showing parcel locations, and calculations showing likely ADU sizes under different lot-coverage scenarios.
Several commissioners questioned whether the longstanding 50% cap is appropriate on smaller lots. One commissioner suggested smaller proportional caps (for example, 30% or 20%), or a rule limiting ADUs to attached units or a maximum distance from the main residence, citing examples from other municipalities. Staff agreed to research comparable rules from nearby towns and show graphic examples that illustrate how ADU size interacts with existing lot-coverage limits.
Next steps: staff will prepare the requested inventory and comparative analysis and return to the commission. No formal recommendation was forwarded at the workshop; the Zoning Administrator emphasized that the May items were currently scheduled as public hearings but that staff can pause or amend the public notice if the commission wants more work sessions first.
