Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ADU Size topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends larger ADUs and relaxed pitch rule, urges council to adopt parking and definition changes
Summary
The commission voted to recommend changes to Hooper’s accessory‑structure and ADU rules, raising allowed ADU living space to about 1,260 sq ft, removing a roof‑pitch mandate, and asking council to define parking surfaces and align ADU terminology with state law.
The Hooper Planning Commission on April 9 voted to forward revised language to city council that would allow larger detached accessory dwelling units and increase the thresholds for oversized accessory structures.
Staff told commissioners the aim is to speed permit processing and reduce repetitive conditional‑use hearings for common accessory structures. The proposed change would raise living‑space limits for detached ADUs (previously generous at 960 sq ft) and increase size thresholds for accessory structures by lot size; staff initially proposed 1,250 sq ft for detached ADU living space.
Public commenters supported the change as a tool to increase housing options and to help the city comply with state affordable‑housing expectations. Ray Hacar, a resident, said the change “would enable us as a city to stay in more compliance with this affordable housing statute,” and Gerald Gaddis urged the city to allow existing buildings to be used more flexibly.
Commissioners debated exact caps, sewer and utility implications, parking‑surface definitions, and roof pitch rules. Commissioner comments noted that sewer capacity and connection fees are the primary utility concern because water, power and trash are typically metered; staff said sewer connections remain a city planning issue for larger ADUs.
After discussion, the commission moved, by recorded motion, to recommend the ordinance changes to city council with the following instructions: set the ADU living‑space cap to 1,260 sq ft, remove the roof‑pitch requirement and instead require ADU design be “consistent and complementary” to the principal dwelling, add a definition for parking surface, and align city ADU terminology with state definitions. The motion passed. The commission recommended council have discretion to set final numeric caps (e.g., 1,260 vs. 1,500) during ordinance adoption.
