Commission begins rewriting ADU ordinance; assigns sections, flags parking, septic and rental‑term issues

The River Heights Planning Commission spent the majority of its March 24 meeting reviewing a rough draft of a proposed accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance and assigned commissioners to redraft specific sections ahead of forthcoming state changes.

Chair Keenan Ryan said he consolidated an Excel tally and a prior draft into a SharePoint draft and asked the commission to identify major gaps. Commissioners focused on whether the code should separately address detached ADUs (DADUs) and internal ADUs (IADUs), how to treat setbacks and lot‑size thresholds (a proposed 11,000‑square‑foot benchmark was debated), and whether occupancy or bedroom limits should be specified locally given state constraints.

Parking, utilities and rental‑term rules prompted sustained discussion. Commissioners noted state guidance tying parking requirements to ADU square footage (for example, one parking space if a detached unit is under 650 sq. ft.) and flagged issues for properties on septic systems. On rental terms, the commission discussed a tally‑sheet preference for a 30‑day minimum rental, while acknowledging the state allows up to 90 days and the city’s short‑term rental definition treats stays of 28 days or less as short‑term rentals that may require separate approval.

Commissioners also debated objective design standards versus subjective compatibility language (for example, how to prevent shipping‑container conversions from undermining residential character) and whether the code should allow flexibility for unique lots (flag lots, corner lots) without creating loopholes that skirt health and fire codes.

Assignments were distributed to expedite revisions: Annalisa Davidson will review sections a–e; Noel Cooley will review f–h; Troy Wakefield will review parking, utilities and rental/leasing (i, j, k); the chair will edit remaining sections (l–o); and staff (Sheila Lindt) will post drafts and distribute printed copies. Commissioners asked to return edits ahead of the next agenda; the chair emphasized the city should avoid drafting rules that meet only the letter of state law while making ADUs impractically difficult for residents.

The commission did not adopt the draft; it instructed members to refine language, clarify setbacks, occupancy and utilities, and reconcile local goals with state requirements before the next meeting.