Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission tables proposed ADU ordinance changes after debate over impervious-surface rules
Summary
The Planning Commission postponed action on proposed revisions to ADU rules after commissioners debated whether driveways and other access areas should count toward rear-yard impervious-surface limits, and after staff summarized state law changes that limit local regulation of some detached ADU design elements.
The Clinton City Planning Commission on June 4 discussed proposed amendments to the city's Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) standards but voted to table the item until the June 18 meeting for further review.
Community Development Director Peter Matson told the Commission that recent state legislation "may no longer regulate certain detached ADU design elements, including entrance placement and roof pitch," and staff recommended removing those provisions from the local ordinance while keeping setback and height requirements. Staff also reviewed revisions to the preliminary site-plan review process that give applicants an opportunity to determine feasibility before submitting engineered plans and permit applications.
Commissioners spent most of the discussion on how the city's rear-yard impervious-surface limitation should apply to ADU properties. Commissioner Trent Williams said that "driveways serving detached ADUs should count toward the maximum coverage requirement" but voiced concern about counting recreational improvements like patios, sports courts and pools. Commissioner Chad Hansen suggested that properties exceeding a specific impervious-surface threshold could be subject to additional drainage review. Commissioner Gregory Allen said runoff concerns might be better handled at the building-permit stage rather than through broad zoning restrictions.
Commissioner Hansen moved to table the ADU ordinance amendments to the June 18 meeting; Commissioner Dave Jones seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Earlier in the meeting Commissioner Trent Williams disclosed he intends to submit an ADU application for his residence; staff advised the ordinance discussion did not create a direct financial benefit and the Commission agreed Williams' participation in the legislative discussion was appropriate.
The Commission requested additional review and language refinement on impervious-surface calculations, how driveways and access areas should be counted, and whether recreational surfaces should be excluded before making a recommendation to the City Council. No formal ordinance change was adopted at the June 4 meeting.
