Council sends ADU ordinance back to planning after fire‑safety concerns

Council debated Ordinance No. 343, a code change to allow accessory dwelling units in General Commercial (GC) and Light Industrial (LI1) zones. Staff explained the amendment increases where sleeping/living space could be located in some buildings and noted that building‑inspector and fire‑chief comments had been included in council packets. Several council members worried that converting former storage or manufacturing spaces to sleeping areas could create dangerous egress and fire‑safety conditions.

Council member Bill Kate pressed the point: he described scenarios in which occupied living space above an active work area could leave residents with a single exit and said, “The fire chief... has real concern about that; it’s not a question if somebody’s gonna die, it’s just when.” Other council members discussed whether egress windows, building permits, or fire‑suppression systems (sprinklers) would be required and whether the city could or should go beyond state minimums.

Staff (Craig) explained that when these structures were originally built for storage they often did not require fire suppression and that the critical change in the amendment is allowing living spaces on both floors, increasing potential overnight occupancy. Council members suggested asking planning to draft explicit language addressing the fire chief’s concerns and a possible registration or permitting requirement for occupied units. By roll call, the council voted to remand the ordinance to the planning commission for revision and analysis, with some members urging the planning commission to include specific fire‑suppression or registration language for occupied units.

The council did not adopt the ordinance at this meeting; next steps are for the planning commission to review the fire‑safety comments and return recommendations to council.