So does staff's ready we'll get started.

I call to order the meeting of the housing health and education committee.

First, we will say the pledge allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation.

Indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

So we we recognize that the impact of those was lesser than maybe a separate unit, and um and and created flexibility there.

So most of our conversation today is about detached accessory dwelling units, uh, not those integrated um accessory apartments.

The um the main hurdles that we've seen, uh, and there are several several itemized in the in the backup, um, are parking, the potential square footage of an ADU, the um requirement for one of the units, either the principal dwelling unit or the um accessory dwelling unit to be owner-occupied, which also has a requirement for um a deed restriction to state that on the property.

Uh and then we also did include just a summary of the fees if that's something that the council wants to explore that may see that as an impediment.

Um, that is not something that has specifically been expressed as a staff, but I think is a valuable part of the conversation.

So I'm gonna start with parking.

Um we have a requirement that if the parking on the site is less than or equal to the amount of parking that's required for the principal dwelling unit.

So if you have a single family house, you have to have two parking spaces on your lot.

If you only have two currently, we're asking that you another be provided for the ADU.

So we didn't want to make someone just have to provide an extra space for an ADU if they had space to park already three cars on their property, but we were trying to get that additional space for the ADU.

So some options for creating flexibility there, um, kind of from the from you know, one spectrum to the other, we could eliminate that requirement altogether and say that the ADU does not need to have its own separate parking space.

We could eliminate the kind of moving on to the next less extreme maybe um option, uh eliminate the parking requirements in areas where we have other transportation options available.

We have precedent for that in our code.

Yeah, keep it.

No, go ahead.

No, go ahead, because these would be a hundred point question after you just finish your point, MASA.

Yeah.

So um we could you know we have precedent in our code where we look at different areas of the city a little differently based on the ability for somebody to move around in other ways, right?

That aren't maybe so car-centric.

Uh so in our parking regulations for the downtown, for example, we allow reductions in certain zoning districts with when you're within a proximity of a transit station.

So we could take that idea and transfer it to our ADUs and say maybe there's an area, and we we would work to define these things with the council.

Um, maybe there's an area in and around downtown, um, maybe it's a proximity to a bus stop anywhere throughout the city that we eliminate that parking requirement.

Say if you were within a thousand feet or 1,300 feet um quarter of a mile of a transit stop, then there's no parking requirements.

So I think what I want to impress and get your feedback on is an option to tie to we can we can talk about the specific mechanics of what that might look like, what's the appropriate measure?

But is there a desire to tie the parking requirement to or or absence of to access to other transportation alternatives?

I think is kind of the big policy decision.

Well, that was kind of the question I was gonna ask.

Like what would be a good approximation of square footage or how long these word mileage, one mile or sure, we use a quarter mile in other sections of the code, 1,300 feet approximately in other sections of the code related to transit.

So quarter mile, half a mile, um, you know, kind of a reasonable walking distance from either we I mean we have the obviously the mark station downtown, but we also have transit stops throughout the city, so it might not be just a downtown approach, but maybe look wherever we have bus stops throughout the city.

Um we also how often do those bus stops change?

That's a great question.

Um I think that we would probably you know want to confirm the the relatively static nature of those stations.

I don't know how often transit takes one away.

Um I would hope they're adding more, but I I know they also we all would.

I know they also um you know, I'm sure evaluate um heard part of their presentation, and we've talked with them in the past about kind of their methodology for how they approach the need for stations.

So that would definitely be a factor to consider.

When you're considering different um lengths, how does that come about?

So is it half a mile in some places, 1,300 feet in other places?

What places?

There may be a transit stop on the other side of 270 from me.

And that maybe that's within a thousand feet, but obviously I'm not running across 270.

So we would want to define metrics that we have language in the code that would serve as a good foundation for it, you know, connected by a continuous system of sidewalks.

So it's 1,300 feet on a route accessible by sidewalk.

So then you're making the connection not only the distance that people are relatively willing to walk, but also assuring that it's a path that is walkable and not um like I said, crossing a major highway or a river.

I wasn't worried about the 1300 feet so much as the half mile.

I'm sorry.

I wasn't worried about the 1300 feet so much as the half mile.

The half mile.

And that's a quarter mile is we have we have that used in other areas of the code as that approximate walkability.

So less than okay, you're not answering the question.

Or I'm not answering asking the question properly.

You're you're talking about different lengths.

Would those different lengths be in different areas of the city?

Kind of stratified depending on the area.