Good morning.

We'll call today's housing urban development and zoning committee meeting to order.

Madam Clerk, please file the role.

Audiment Cone.

Present.

Auto Woman Sweitzer.

Present.

Auto Woman Keys.

Here.

Vice Chair Sonier.

Present.

Autumn and Browning.

Present.

Autumn and Aldrich.

Chair Clark Hubbard.

Here.

We have six present.

We have a quorum.

With that, I'll accept an approval for the minutes from Tuesday, August 25th, 25.

So moved.

Second.

It was moved by Vice Chair Sany and segmented by Audder Woman Keys that we approve the minutes for Tuesday, August 25th, 2025.

Madam Clerk, please call the role.

Autumn and Cone.

Aye.

Audible woman sweitzer?

Aye.

Audio Woman Keys.

Aye.

Vice Chair Sonier.

Aye.

Autumn and Browning.

Aye.

Autumn and Aldrich.

Chair Clark Hubbard?

Aye.

We have six aye votes.

All right.

With that, I will turn it over to Vice Chair Sainye.

Honorable Woman Hubbard, you are recognized to speak to Board Bill No.

60.

Thank you, Vice Chair Steingey.

Madam Clerk, would you please read the summary for Board Bill 60?

Board Bill 60, sponsored by Alder Woman Clark Hubbard, co-sponsors, President Megan Green, Alder Woman Danielle Velasquez.

Rasheen Aldrich, an ordinance recommended by the Planning Commission amending chapter 26 of the zoning code, defining, permitting, and regulating the cessory dwelling units and containing a severability and emergency calls.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

With that, I'm looking forward to our conversation today.

If one of the things I mentioned when we were in planning commission with this, is that the wheels of government here in our beloved city will definitely teach you how to be patient and manage your expectations.

And so while I very aggressively introduced this and was very excited in 2023, I'm very quickly learned about some additional steps that I needed to take.

And I'm so glad and grateful now for that time that we took because I learned so much more, grateful for the work that I was able to do with the planning division with the zoning uh department and with our allies and people that were advocates for this in community.

And so they are here today.

The planning commission, uh I'm sorry, department is here today.

Um we will first start off with this presentation and then get into hopefully um questions uh from you all in support um from people in the room.

So thank you.

With that, I'll turn it over to Miss Miriam Keller.

Thank you.

Um Ms.

Keller, please introduce yourself.

Um and do I can get you sworn in?

Okay, you can just introduce yourself because you're city staff, so that's right.

Okay, great.

Uh good morning, Miriam Keller, City Planning Executive for General Planning and Design, and I'll be providing um a version of the presentation we provided to the planning commission, and then joining me here this morning are Evan Winkler and Mary Hartburton from the Zenic Secretary of the Building Division.

So with that, I will jump in.

You may have to turn it on.

Okay.

Okay.

Um so I think um members of the committee are are very familiar with providing this overview for members of the public who may be just what is an accessory dwelling unit.

It's a smaller independent residential dwelling on the same lot as a single family home or or duplex.

Sometimes people call these granny flats or um mother-in-law suite, and then in St.

Louis, they are really part of our historic fabric.

People refer to them in many cases as carriage houses.

They can be detached, meaning they are kind of not connected to the primary structure.

They can be uh detached from the primary structure but above a garage, they can be attached to the primary structure.

They come in all shapes and sizes.

And I know this committee is very aware of ADUs and their role in facilitating multi-general generation living and supporting extended families.

They do by kind of creating a new type of housing option, but also just by expanding the housing supply, contribute to attainability of housing in the forperty owners that build an ADU on their property.

They provide an option for new rental income that can help with maintenance andor generational wealth building.

And they, I think, do play a role in tornado recovery and long-term rebuilding by giving just giving people more options for how to provide housing and how to live in their neighborhoods and neighborhoods impacted by the tornado.

The issue with our current regulation stems from the fact that you know, this is kind of, even though it's a traditional use, it is not one recognized by our 1950 zoning code.

And without a definition, they're treated just as another single family dwelling, and they need none of the area or kind of dimensional standards for a single dwelling.

And so we see them very frequently at the Board of Adjustment requesting a variance for approval.

This can add time, costs.

Some people we've spoken to who have been interested in doing this, you know, just like knowing that the time would be involved, just simply don't even opt to pursue the idea because of the hassle.

So at the end of the day, fewer ADUs are likely being constructed in the city, and those that are are being constructed at greater expense due to the fees, but also just due to the lost time in the Board of Adjustment process.

So the proposed approach and the approach reflected in the regulations in Board Bill 60 is to reduce barriers and the need for any special approval to facilitate the construction of ADUs and facilitate kind of all the benefits they can and do bring to our community.

So that looks like a specific definition, specific area or dimensional standards that apply to and kind of make sense for ADUs, and to permit them by right in all residential districts where a single family or duplex home sits today.

Evan Winkler with the zoning section.

We threw a couple of slides in here just to kind of illustrate what are some of those key issues of a current example of an appeal that literally went through the Board of Adjustment to get a so this is in a B two-family dwelling district.

It's a pretty traditional single-family home.

It has a detached garage sitting on a lot that's approximately 5,000 square feet.

These were their plans.

The before you can see on the left, the after is they just simply added their dwelling unit to the garage.

This was a family that wanted to have their parents move from out of state to live nearby to help with the cost of child care.

Also so that the parents could age in place.

So they wanted a single like a single level ADU.

They applied actually in April.

They were denied because we treated like a primary structure, a single family dwelling.

It was denied because of the front yard setback, uh rear yard setback.

And at the time of this application, it was still 4,000 square feet of land per dwelling.

So they were denied for density of population.

They were just approved in August.

So this shows the kind of time lapse that is created and the additional cost of materials and so forth with this additional approvals process.

And I will say we actually had two ADU-related appeals tomorrow at the Board of Adjustment.

So it's a common occurrence, and this is the kind of scenario that we see often.

So with that, I'll I think quickly spin through the specific regulations, more details available when we can look back as questions arise.

Did want to note that this is an action explicitly supported by the newly adopted strategic land use plan, so is very much in keeping with what that document and the role plays in guiding land use.

So there are four things that Board Bill 60 does, and all of them together trying to address but also prevent uh variance issues so things don't end up at the Board of Adjustment to incorporate best practices that we see from around the country, but to tailor those things to St.

Louis's unique build environment and kind of where homes tend to sit on a lot and common setbacks and things like that, and then to of course fit regulations into St.

Louis's existing, albeit aged zoning code structure.

So quickly, first thing is to have clear, distinct definitions for both attached and detached ADUs.

The reason we're having separate definitions is though they can have separate appropriate area standards.

So tying to the dwelling unit definition, which would require a kitchen and bathroom.

Um trying to kind of address the full universe of ADUs that folks tend to seek to build in St.

Louis and kept the full universe of these proposals so they don't end up at the Board of Adjustment.

Um we did not address like internal basement or attic ADUs because those can be kind of addressed as additional dwelling units within the existing regulations.

These definitions then are added by Board Bill 60 as a permitted use in the A district, and what that means is then they become permitted uses in any district that allows residential uses.

So it just kind of waterfalls through the structure of our code currently.

So parking, um the planning commission recommendation was not to require any additional parking for an accessory dwelling unit.

However, um, if in the creation of an accessory dwelling unit a required space is removed, the recommended regulations would require a replacement of that parking.

Um this is actually more I'll say liberal than the approach a lot of other cities have taken and is in keeping with some of the sort of national best practice recommendation coming out of uh ARP, which is a really great resource for this work.

Height, limited to 25 feet.

There's some details about how height is specifically defined and administered.

We can get into that if need area, trying to kind of allow people flexibility to build at least a 750 uh square feet ADU, or if they're have a very large home on a very large lot, this would allow a somewhat larger ADU up to 1200 square feet.

Per sense of comparison, 750 square feet is like a little bit bigger than your standard two-car garage.

Then two more site requirements, um, density of population, allowing one ADU per parcel, but clarifying that adding an ADU changes nothing about kind of the other types of housing that somebody to build, and then setbacks, uh the recommendations to be pretty flexible with how and where ADUs can sit on a lot, not requiring them to be at the back of the parcel, but requiring them not to come in front of kind of the front of the primary building.

So to prevent kind of ADUs being built in somebody's front yard.

Here are just a couple of examples of the types of structures that people could build under the proposed regulations.

So 750 square foot home or ADU with a kind of smaller primary structure, similar size ADU with a kind of typical duplex.

And then for a very large home on a very large lot, allowing a larger accessory dwelling unit.

And finally, here creating additional site requirements for attached ADUs, or excuse me, detached ADUs.

So those would be not attached to the primary structure, but sitting separately on the lot and having a sort of 10-foot distance requirement, which is consistent with kind of fire separation and safety standards in the building code, and then to allow ADUs to be built kind of on the foundation of an old garage or something like that, again to just allow people to build these flexibly within the existing built environment.

And here's just a quick example of why that's helpful.

Um here is just an example um garage there on what will be the future Hodomont tracks and the we collab neighborhood plan for this part of the city specifically promoted ADUs as kind of a way to add housing and vibrancy and activity along the Hotemon Keyway.

And so this existing garage is an example of where, you know, structure that could be converted to an ADU, but it has a zero foot side yard setback.

So if we apply kind of the standard, you know, setback standards to uh this garage, this this type of project would need a variance that we're back at the board of adjustments.

So allowing that ADUs to be built on um foundations or within non-conforming accessory structures takes care of this problem.

So garages like this could easily be converted to an ADU um without that trouble.

I believe that is the close of the presentation.

Is are there any other speakers?

We can go through the committee in questions then if that works.

Okay.

Okay.

Um we can I think there might be some speakers signed up to speak, so we can go ahead and do that and then go through the we have one person signed up, Charlie Hinderleiter.

Good morning.

My name is Charlie Hinderleiter.

I'm with St.

Louis Realtors at live 63143.

Thank you.

Um do you promise that what you're about to say is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Absolutely.

Thank you, you may proceed.

First, we are just excited to be here.

Thank you very much to Alderman Clark Hubbard for sponsoring this bill, um, to Alderman Aldric for co-sponsoring, um, and for the fantastic work of the planning commission, the planning department on this.

The goal here is how do we take national best practices that happen to align with a type of housing that already exists in St.

Louis City and give people the flexibility to build this type of housing again?

It's great for multi-generational living.

Um, it's great for folks that are aging in place, which is why AARP is a national expert on this.

Um, and really it's how do we bring more housing to St.

Louis?

How do we bring more population to St.

Louis?

And we think this is just one way where we can give homeowners that flexibility that really is going to help a variety of issues, whether that's population, whether that's affordability, because these tend to be more affordable if they become a rental.

Um, just how do we give more housing flexibility to folks?

So we're excited to be here in St.

Louis Realtors is enthusiastic to support this legislation.

Thank you for joining us today.

Thanks.

Okay, and with that, um, we can begin to go through the committee in order of seniority.

So Alderman.

Oh, sorry.

Sorry.

I'm sorry.

Um Madam Vice Chair, I didn't notice that Miss Casey Mealbarg was here on behalf of the mayor's office.

I wanted to make sure she attends.

And I didn't see her back there.

Sorry.

Good morning for the record, Casey Milberg, Chief of Staff for Mayor Spencer.

Um, here to express our tremendous excitement and gratitude for this piece of legislation, which we're fully in support of and that we cannot wait to sign.

Thank you so much to Alderwoman Clark Hubbard.

You have been pushing this for several years.

It's been a labor of love and advocacy.

So we recognize that I know it's been important to others on this committee as well.

Um, and thank you so much to Alderman Aldridge for your co-sponsorship and championing this too.

In addition to all the comments that have previously been offered, um, you know, we do want to know that this is a wonderful piece of legislation at any time, but especially at this point in time as we are looking to find more housing solutions within the tornado impact area.

Uh, we know that this legislation will meet the needs of the entire city, but especially residents within that area as well.

So uh don't want to be labor the truly excellent and thoughtful points that have already been made on this, and would close with a tremendous amount of gratitude as well for our wonderful planning and zoning staff who put so much effort for such long time into this to make this happen.

And we again cannot wait for this to get to the mayor's desk and look forward to signing it expeditiously.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, no other speakers.

Okay, Altamin Cohn, thank you, Madam Vice Chair, uh, thank you, madam chair, for uh putting this legislation forward.

This is something that I too have uh wanted for many years now, and I'm I'm glad that uh you've been putting the time and effort into doing this the last several years.

Um I would like to be added as a co-sponsor of the legislation.

So not it.

Thank you.

Um I do uh just have some questions.

I don't know of whom uh, but how are we ensuring that these are predominantly I'm just trying to think of like Nairdwells that might be out there?

Uh so if you have, for instance, a single family structure that's currently made available for rent, it's not someone's primary uh not an owner-occupied residence.

Uh what would prevent the landlord of that property from building an accessory dwelling unit and basically turning the single family residence into a multifamily dwelling parcel.

Say one more time.

So right now, you know, this would be permitted, and I would imagine any zone, right?

Single family, multifamily zones.

So if you have a single family zone, uh the ADU, you know, I think most of us would, you know, expect that an ADU would be built for the purposes of housing a family member, or you know, if there's uh family coming to town or friends that are staying for a period of time that, you know, or maybe it's a she shed that is just really nice.

I don't know.

Um, but I don't think most folks are looking at the accessory dwelling unit necessarily as a like for-profit enterprise.

So using it as rental property, either for long-term rental or short-term rental.

Um, and so what is that at all addressed?

Because I'm not seeing anything really in here that would prevent that from happening.

So if that's basically these are permitted underneath our like our single family dwelling districts, I mean that would essentially turn a single family parcel into a multifamily dwelling district if you have someone that builds one of these and then they just start using it as rental property and renting it out to anyone and everyone, especially where you have some areas of the city where a lot of the single family parcels aren't owner-occupied parcels, they're investor-owned parcels.

So I see that that could probably be somewhat problematic in you know areas like that.

Well, similar to how kind of tenure or whether something's owner-occupied or renter occupied is not restricted for the primary structure.

We um th the regulations don't propose restricting that for the ADU.

Um under these regulations, they could be rented out, and that is um I think has some benefits as well as trade-offs.

I think um an owner occupant of the primary structure.

Um this could only be a sort of revenue generating use if they could rent it out.

I also think um kind of multi-generational families rent as well as own.

And so having um kind of an ADU and primary structure option for rental renter households um could be a benefit to meeting that need.

Um so let's say someone who is a private equity firm in New York, buys a $500,000 house in St.

Louis Hills, decides that they want to build an ADU on the back side of the lot.

You know, the property gets rented out, then they build the ADU.

They don't necessarily need to inform the tenants that are staying in the single family property on the front of the lot that they're building an ADU, and then they build the ADU and all of a sudden they have a two-family lot in St.

Louis Hills.

And the tenant who was originally there wasn't even made aware that they were going to build an ADU.

I'm just like predicting what may happen.

And I'm not saying that that's necessarily a good, bad, or indifferent, but uh are those considerations that we're even concerned about.

I mean we yeah, we did weigh that and looked at some of AARP's resources.

Um I mean, they'll say made a strong and persuasive to us case that kind of not limiting um ADUs to owner occupants or or kind of owner occupants of the primary structure had um a lot of benefit in terms of meeting the diverse housing needs in the city.

I think um kind of when short-term rental regulation, uh Diane know that's kind of in limbo.

I probably cannot speak to too much of it in detail, but we did consider that, but I think legally could not kind of touch it with this legislation.

Um this is all to say I yeah, I think we did consider the trade-offs, but went for relatively more flexibility than less, and tried to follow the principle of treating ADUs like other housing options in the city, which could I think be purchased and adapted in a similar way as you're describing.

Okay.

So I'm just trying to think through how that would work.

I I and my perspective here, you know, I mean, most of my ward is a multifamily district, you know, east of Grand, you've got you know, lots of two families, four families, etc.

Even when you have single family residences on those blocks, they're generally still in a multifamily dwelling district because most of the block is a two-family.

Um, you know, I still think though, you know, we'll show up at town halls or neighborhood meetings and still get people who are like, how do you prevent people out of state from owning property in the U.S.?

I I literally got that email last night from my constituent.

Um, you know, which we can't do, we can't prevent.

But at the same time, you know, if we're setting in place policies that might allow these out-of-town actors to come in and you know, profit off of the land, but not necessarily put the resources in, you know, that some people would expect in terms of it just seems to me like this might be a situation where particularly in a single family dwelling district that we're basically saying you don't need to have a single family dwelling district in the city of St.

Louis anymore.

And if we're saying that, let's just say it.

But like I think at the end of the day, that might be a real concern for some people who do live in those communities.

Um, and I'm just basing that off of you know the feedback that I get from people who don't even want the city to allow out of state people to buy land here, um, which you know uh are always interesting conversations to navigate.

But um, you know, conceptually, I I love this.

I I've wanted it for many years.

Um, I think you know, particularly in areas of the city where you have smaller homes and you know, shotgun homes, even where you don't have a hallway separating, you know, a bedroom from a kitchen, uh, you know, having that accessory dwelling unit is a way to have some privacy.

Um, and uh, you know, I think that those are helpful.

Um, I do like the idea of um, you know, the unit should be limited to 50% of the area or 750 square feet, whichever is larger.

Um, I have a two-family, you know, my one bedroom apartment is maybe 800 square feet.

Uh the building total, you know, is less than 2,000 square feet.

So I guess I would be at like a thousand square foot, you know, ADU on the back of my house if I were ever to do that, um, which is larger than my own apartment.

But uh, you know, it's uh I I do see the thoughtfulness that's been put into this.

So I I I want to call that out as well.

But I just do wonder, you know, how are we going to address those situations if they arise in the future?

So some of these questions came up, the planning commission discussion, and part of that discussion too was recognizing with this sort of interim fix in our code, we have the opportunity to kind of learn from how it's going, and then in the zoning upgrade, kind of dialed it in if need be and kind of fix either by reining in or maybe even expanding flexibility.

So there are parts of that discussion about expanding flexibility for how these could be built on property.

Um so just making note of that too, that a lot of communities and their approach to ADU regulation, it is iterative because it's a changing landscape.

So just noting that especially with the upgrade in motion, we'll have the opportunity to refine based on um concerns that emerge sort of in either direction, either too restrictive or too flexible.

Um and I I realize that we're going through a zoning update, but I'm just curious, Mary, how often do we update the zones themselves?

So do they uh for instance uh you know, something that seems to be talked about more recently, you know, the whole like conversion machine, you know, two families going to single families or four families going to two families.

Um that hasn't happened broadly across the city, but it has happened in certain neighborhoods, particularly in the Central Corridor or you know, Tower Grove South, Tower Grove Heights, Shaw, uh Lafayette Square Soulard.

Are most of those still sitting in a multifamily dwelling district, or do we convert that like if an entire if there's enough density of conversions, do we update that from a multifamily dwelling district to a single family dwelling district?

Are you talking about about an amendment to the code?

So you know it I it would I would imagine it would have to be an amendment to the code.

That would be more like an assessors thing that would convert that, but we wouldn't necessarily amend the code each time somebody converted a two-family to a single family, or in some instances it's a two-family to a three-family.

We have both kinds of conversions.

When when was the code adopted last that had a lot like A through H code?

In the 1950s.

So that was before Seulard became Seulard as we know it today, right?

Like Seulard in the 1950s was largely tenement housing, and uh you know, was slated to be demolished by the interstate.

That would be before I was born.

So what's going on in Seattle?

Um, during the 1950s, there was a push to get Seulard and Lafayette Square demolished in order to expand the interstate system.

So largely because there were poorer people who were living in those communities.

Uh many of the facilities didn't even have bathrooms in them at that point in time.

Um, most of those have been converted now to single-family homes.

There's obviously quite a few apartments and multifamily homes there.

But as you know, neighborhoods like a Seulard or a Lafayette Square over the course of decades has you know revitalized or like converted properties from multifamily to single family.

We've never gone back to say like, oh, well, this should be a single family dwelling district now versus a multifamily dwelling district.

No.

As a whole.

Okay.

And actually, we probably wouldn't do that because we could run into spot zoning.

Um, and because of the nature of the way that the current code is cumulative, even though you were changing the density, it was probably still allowed.

Right.

Okay.

Which I think to a degree also, you know, helps with the concern that I had at the get at the beginning of this, which is you know, a lot of the city is designed for this type of use, which I think Mr.

Henderleiter might have said as well.

Um, so the areas where that becomes more of a concern are probably going to be on the western half of the city, uh, where a lot of that, you know, kind of I'll call it suburban style development.

It's not necessarily what most people would consider suburban style development now happened uh, you know, kind of post-1940.

Um that's really all the questions I have.

You know, I am you know supportive of the legislation.

Uh I really look forward to uh supporting it and seeing how it helps benefit the city going forward as well.

Thank you.

Thank you, Honorable Ms.

Schweitzer.

Thank you.

Thank you all for the presentation.

I also really enjoyed the presentation at the planning commission meeting.

Uh and I'm excited about this legislation.

A few questions.

Uh the appeal that was used as an example, it was adding an ADU onto an existing garage.

Was that garage still used for parking?

Yes.

Okay.

Um and then one of the questions um, you know, you came up in thinking about the uh tornado recovery and how this can be used for relief in that way.

I assume this is makes uh ADUs available for both uh custom builds on lots as well as prefabricated options or kind of kit houses.

Yeah, uh the zoning code doesn't touch on like kit housing or yeah, kit houses or prefab.

Um so it would allow for any kind of dwelling per is defined by the zoning code.

They still but uh to your exact point I was gonna ask questions.

Like, I think any of my constituents listening at home, they want to know that anything that happens here allow allows for the possibility, but the building code, the building division is what oversees the structure, the you know, fire safety, uh, all these other issues that we deal with all the time when people are doing work in our that's correct.

Okay.

Um you there is a statement made that this shall not change the density regulation.

I wasn't exactly sure what that meant.

And I would just love some clarity around that.

Yeah.

Um because we're treating this as an accessory use to a primary use, our primary uses still require a minimum amount of land to be built.

So let's say I have a vacant lot, I'm gonna build a single family home with an ADU.

I still need that 2,000 per the amendment recently of land for the single family, but I don't need additional land to create this additional dwelling, accessory dwelling.

Unless for some reason parking would be required for that single family home, in which case they wouldn't be able to do like a one-story ADU.

Or would they?

If you're saying the primary structure wouldn't provide their parking because they're using that space for the ADU, they would be denied because they are required to be able to do that.

Still have to vary.

Yes, because it's a primary use.

Yeah, because a lot of the pictures of the examples, which are very helpful for seeing the size and everything like that, you know, they don't make they make it look like there's no parking on the lots, which might be I we talked about parking in the last planning commission meeting, so that's something where it may make sense to have these photos instead demonstrate like this is still parking, you know, or this is where their park off street lot is located, um, which is just one element of all of these different pieces I know, but is something that I think comes up.

Um one of the things that was mentioned as well was the setbacks from the edges of the property would be three feet.

And I seem to remember it being four feet.

So is that a change?

It's not a change from the planning commission.

Um our underlying code still uses four feet for primary structures.

Um primary structures.

Interesting.

Um that actually doesn't align with building code, which allows for a three feet.

Um so the desire was to kind of move towards alignment with the building code uh before like fire separation and so forth would be required.

Right.

Um okay uh yeah, what's it what's interesting about about this, you know, we have probably over a dozen ADUs already in existence in the first ward, most of which happened with very little to no controversy, and some have happened with quite a bit of controversy um and uh concern in the neighborhood.

Um some of these things are addressed in this ADU legislation, you know, and not being over 25 feet, the consistent setback.

One of the issues that they actually came up with, though, is that they would have had to get signatures to have less than four foot of a setback, and then ended up moving it to a four-foot setback, so they didn't have to get the signature.

So I just that was why that stood out to me this particular conversation.

Yeah, so for primary structures, you can do a maintenance agreement, uh, which is the signature from the neighbor adjacent where you're encroaching on their side yard.

So they would so that was something that came up for this last AD situation in my ward, but maybe wouldn't have been relevant because it wasn't their primary structure.

It was a carriage house that they were putting a staircase on.

Right.

So to date, we don't have ADUs in the code, so they're still treated like a primary structure.

Got it.

So this makes the ADU have a different thing than if they were to do it, but what if it was an attached ADU?

Would they still be subject to a three foot or four foot?

The attached ADU would be a three foot per this new legislation.

Interesting.

Okay.

Um, I appreciate all the information.

Thank you for answering all of my questions today.

And thank you so much.

Thank you, Honor Woman Schweitzer Auto.

Thank you.

Um great presentation.

Uh it's very exciting.

Uh I definitely would like to be a co-sponsor.

So nothing.

Most of my questions they've already asked.

Um, but I do have a question about the US mail.

So how would mail delivery happen since now this dwelling is at the back of a property?

And I'm just thinking about, you know, from my own perspective, um, in my neighborhood, most houses have a fence separating um the yard.

Um, and so once you get into the backyard where let's say an ADA ADU uh is located for mail purposes.

How do you get your mail?

Right.

That's an interesting question.

Now we it hadn't been brought up before, and I hadn't thought about, I guess, other than when you have AB, uh, when you go to a a dwelling and it might have apartment A B back, you know, rear entry.

I'm not sure, but I will make sure that I reach out to someone in the USPS and see what their answer to that would be, unless you already know it.

And okay.

That's interesting.

Yeah, addressing comes through the zoning office as well as collaboration with uh IT and the assessor's office to ensure that uh properties are assessed appropriately and uh for safety purposes to make sure uh the fire department can find folks.

Um so anytime somebody applies for this, um we work with like I said, IT to figure out if the numbering system works, and then typically it would be just whatever the address is and then rear.

Um, and then we notify everybody to make sure that like I said, everybody's safe and can get their mail.

Interesting.

Well, I'm still you know, and again, I'm visualizing the neighborhood where I live, right?

And so there is a backyard.

And so does the ADU, and maybe this is a landlord thing, I don't know.

But what access uh would they have to the backyard?

You know, as a uh a young person who had an apartment, uh, and it was actually in my lease that you rented the interior dwelling.

You couldn't use the outside for anything.

You could not use the yard, you could not use the parking pan.

My my landlord was an attorney, so it's a very good uh good lease.

And so, but um, but just questions like that do come up.

And there, I know that there are other um persons who you know do have properties where literally, you know, you can't sit on the back of the property, you can't sit on the front of the property, you rent the inside, that's it.

And so I just have a question about like that yard, you know, most of my neighborhood yards are pretty good size.

So if I let's say I I have an ADU, it's not a family member, I'm writing it out, right?

And so what access um would the ADU persons have to that part of the the property?

Sounds like that would be Kate.

Thank you, Aldama McKee for that question.

And I'm sorry, I listen, I'm learning something from that experience that you had myself.

Uh but that sounds like that would be a property owner, wouldn't be covered in this legislation or in anything prior to this for that matter.

Sounds like that would be a property owner and a landlord's call, but am I okay?

All right.

Well, I have no other questions.

Uh and I did ask to be a co-sponsor, right?

Thank you.

Thank you, Alderman Browning.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Alderman Clark Hubbard, for uh bringing this forward for the second time and uh and just sticking with it because this is important.

And thank you to our planning and zoning staff for the excellent work that you always do.

Uh this is an exciting uh opportunity for our city to build more diverse housing uh to build housing that meets specific needs uh or provide extra side income for people to uh maybe be able to afford to live in our city.

So uh I I think when we talk about this, it's important to note that we already do have ADUs in the city.

This isn't a new thing.

Uh, that this zoning code that we have right now is not the zoning code we've always had, and so there are things that were built, and and I look forward to revisiting our code in other ways to figure out how we can get more of these like kind of missing middle housing that we're often um not finding as as much anymore.

Uh when we see neighborhoods that are converting things from you know two families to one family, that's a loss of housing.

And and I don't begrudge anyone for doing that.

I myself live in a house that before I bought it, it was a two-family and it's now uh a single family.

Uh but we do need to make it more possible then to build more units that do fit those needs and and to add that density to our city uh and to be able to then add that population.

So this is a really important thing for our city, and again, I'm really grateful that you brought it forward.

Uh I'd I'd love to be at it as a co-sponsor as well.

Um and uh I I think my colleagues have pretty uh extensively covered the questions that you know I would have asked.

So um again, I just really appreciate this and look forward to supporting that.

Uh Alderman Cohn, you know, thank you.

Um I just piggybacking off of what my colleague from the Later 11th ward was asking earlier.

Um shouldn't have been next.

You should have been.

You've not been recognized yet.

We we're gonna come back.

I thought he might be quick, have a quick question.

No, no, no, no.

I'm never quick.

That is true.

Okay, well we'll come back, Altaman Cone.

We'll let Ottawa Aldrich go.

Go ahead.

Uh thank you all the woman, uh, Sanye.

Thank you, all the woman Clark Hobart for bringing this forward.

Unlike the Alderman from the third, I will be keeping this quick.

I like to make a motion to embank this as well as uh thank the zoning uh team for pulling this together.

Uh, your leadership.

I know you've been working on this for a while, and uh thank the mayor's office for uh making sure this gets signed.

Second, there's been a motion to a second, a call for previous role.

Any objections?

I wasn't here.

Oh, okay.

There's been an objection, Madam Clerk.

Uh well, how about are there any objections now to embanking this?

Okay, excellent.

We've been banked.

Automatrich, you can continue.

No more questions.

Okay.

I also don't have um any questions.

They've all been covered extensively.

I'm glad to be added as a co-sponsor.

Thank you to Planning Department, Design Department, Audible Clerk Hubbard, everyone else who's been involved in this, and we're gonna circle back to AutoCone.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair.

Um so just piggybacking off of the Alder Woman from the 11th's question around um the postal address.

What about utilities?

Are these required to have separate utilities or would they be on the same utility as the primary residents?

That might be a way to perhaps address some of the other concerns that were brought up earlier as well.

But you know, would they have their own electrical box with their own electrical billing?

Would they, you know, have to what about water and sewer as well.

Well, water and sewer, yeah.

I mean, I don't know how you would necessarily separate it.

Separate those.

Uh and usually the landlord of a building picks up water and sewer anyway because they're one line and one line out.

But um, you know, certainly for like electrical gas, uh, you know, those are probably the two primary ones.

Would we require a new hookup for those, or do they just run off of the existing hookup?

Well, I just um verify that right now the existing ADUs in the city of St.

Louis kind of go both ways depending on the primary uh structures um choice.

Is that right?

Yeah, it's my understanding.

Um that's handled through utilities departments and folks are doing it both ways.

Um so you could have it set up where it's completely separate and they have their own meters, uh, but you can also have it tied to your primary use.

Okay.

Interesting.

Are you pondering?

I'm pondering.

Uh it might need to continue the conversation for when this comes out onto the floor, but uh I would like to continue that conversation for sure.

So and just just for my clarity, because since it's already gone both ways, and so maybe I can kind of follow up and see how what's working if you think there's a better way or I don't know if I have any thoughts on it.

I just want to ask you and you know flush it out a little bit.

And yeah, uh you know uh I'm I'm just curiosity.

Well, that does complete our line of questioning.

So um Audible Clark Hubbard, do you want to be recognized to close now?

Thank you.

I just want to thank again um all the work that's gone into this, even prior to 2023, even though the individuals that I worked um with with AORP in the first go round don't even work for AARP anymore.

So I'm hoping I wanted to be able to tell them that look, we did, we got it done because they were a little disappointed the first time.

But just again, this thing you know, sometimes when you're working with something like this, that'll affect and be so good for so many different people in their different spaces.

It takes time, and I understand that, and I'm glad now that it's coming at this time now more than ever.

Um just knowing that to the points that have been uplifted today, how um it can be a tool for our people as they rebuild and recover in the uh tornado impact zone to a lady who doesn't want to lose her property and has an empty garage in the back, and this is an opportunity for her um to now transition and age in place.

Um, as they said, it's uh someone who wants to house their grandmother or their you know loved one, just all the different opportunities for this.

I think we don't take for we don't want to take for granted and being able to be in position to create this opportunity, streamline this process, um, take away these overarching barriers sometimes that hold us against ourselves here in the city of St.

Louis and make people walk away from the city of St.

Louis.

Unfortunately, then this is our time for that.

Um, so thank you again to everyone for your advocacy and your work.

And uh I ask again for your favorable and consideration for due pass recommendation for board bill 60.

I make a motion that we pass Board Bill 60 with the due pass recommendation.

Second.

We've had a motion in a second, madam clerk.

May you please call the road.

Alderman Cohn.

All right, all the woman sweit, sir.

Alder Woman Keys.

Aye.

Vice Chair Sonyer, aye.

Alderman Browning, aye.

Alderman Aldrich?

Aye.

Chair Clark Hubbard?

Aye.

We have seven aye votes.

Congratulations, Chairwoman Clark Hubbard on board bill 60, passing committee with a due pass recommendation.

All right, thank you, madam clerk.

Do we have any resolutions for review?

We have none.

Uh, do we have any committee discussions?

We have none.

Acknowledgement of any written testimony.

We have four written testimonies in support.

Thank you.

Those will be in the drive for us.

Do uh we have any announcements other than I'll start off with our first announcement.

If you all notice we all have these pretty purple papers here, thanks to our zoning uh direct commissioner Miss Mary Harburden for supplying us with these.

We all have access to these.

If we want to take them out in our community, I was in the Skinker De Bolivar neighborhood last night, and one of my constituents had a stack up and passing them out.

Um, for our zoning upgrade, City of St.

Louis zoning upgrade, belovedly called the Zoop.

Um, there's still opportunity for you to engage in this.

If you're watching and you're a resident in the city of St.

Louis, there's a city advisory board that is in process of forming.

Now you can apply for it, and there'll be a lottery pick to ensure that that uh committee reflects the city of St.

Louis as they move forward in this zoning, upgrading this zoning overhaul.

So make sure you get tap into that um information again.

Learning so much about this and how it's been used and this opportunity for us to be able to not only move forward but write some wrongs that have been done in the um in the in the event that they had to launch and and and stay um updated and everything with this last week.

We were told that we were on the right track.

So I'm keeping that at the forefront.

We are on the right track here in the city of St.

Louis with this City of St.

Louis zone and upgrade.

Uh, you can go to the planning and urban design agency of the city of St.

Louis, or you can go to www.z-o-u-p-e slash, I'm sorry, hyphen stl.com.

That's zoop hyphen stl.com to get more information.

Any other announcements?

Okay, our members were present, so there's no need to excuse.

So with that, I'll take a motion to adjourn.

Second.

Ms.

Moved by Vice Chair Sany and seconded by our woman keys with a call for previous row by Audow Woman Slicer with no objection.

We are adjourned.

Everyone have a blessed day.