The contentious issue of accessory dwellings got a full, all-day airing Tuesday with picketers waving signs pro and con in front of city buildings and speakers weighing in at a public hearing that lasted more than three hours.
The issue was set against the context of preserving neighborhoods from a proliferation of unmaintained rentals, while proponents of these alley cottages and mother-in-law apartments argued for more opportunities for housing and rental income.
At 10:22 p.m., the Durango City Council agreed unanimously to keep the proposed regulations mostly intact “with modest changes” and edits.
The council agreed to minimum lot sizes of 7,000 square feet for the neighborhood parallel to north Main Avenue and 5,000 square feet for the neighborhood east of downtown – except for south of College Drive, where there would not be a minimum.
Accessory dwellings are limited to these neighborhoods, but the city will look at allowing them in the Animas City neighborhood next year.
By public demand, the council also agreed to keep an owner-occupancy rule to help preserve a single-family character of the neighborhoods and provide accountability for maintaining properties.
There was a back-and-forth debate about the fairness of telling people where they have to live, but Mayor Dick White was satisfied there were sufficient exemptions to the owner-occupancy rule for hardships. People could always appeal if they need to move elsewhere for work or family.
“Life happens,” White acknowledged.
The council, though, with a few other edits, dropped a condition to require a pathway to the back alley.
Some expressed frustration with the council’s decision-making.
South-side resident Michael Todt said the council has a habit of claiming “public support” to show support for its pet issues.
“There are 106 of us who did not want the (hotel) height variance,” Todt said in reference to a contentious decision earlier this month about a hotel on East Second Avenue.
If there was consensus, it was for the city to enforce the proposed rules.
“The key thing I have heard is enforcement – enforcement from the pro side and the con side,” Councilor Dean Brookie said.
As a matter of perspective, senior city planner Vicki Vandegrift said accessory dwellings should be “viewed as an extra property right if you can make it work (on your property).”
The city is not guaranteeing everybody can have an accessory dwelling.
“Some people are just not going to win (an accessory dwelling),” Brookie said.
Accessory dwellings would be allowed officially for the first time in Durango as part of a new land-use development code, which the city now expects to adopt in January.
Currently, accessory dwellings are not allowed under the code except for duplex situations and grandfather exemptions.
David McHenry, an opponent, questioned whether the city was doing enough to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods. He wondered about the acceptable amount of rentals for a neighborhood.
A group of paid protesters, who did not identify their source of funding, picketed Tuesday morning outside River City Hall on Camino del Rio, which contains the offices for the city’s planning department.
In response, supporters picketed in front of City Hall on East Second Avenue before the council meeting.
“I’m not being paid,” quipped Jeff Widen, who held up a sign that said, “Yes on ADUs.”
Widen, who owns a home with an accessory dwelling in Animas City, said the rental income from an accessory dwelling makes it possible for his family to “afford the mortgage.”
Because of the many proposed restrictions and regulations on accessory dwellings, Brookie said he did not think an “accessory dwelling frenzy” would result.
Some thought the fears were overblown, especially about the loss of privacy.
“I have these things called shades, and no one looks,” Nancy Stoffer said.
Sarah Wright questioned how much the city could protect privacy through regulations because “Durango is not a flat city. You can go up on a hill and look down on people’s yards.”
Former Mayor Michael Rendon spoke out in favor of accessory dwellings.
Rendon recalled moving to Durango with $50,000 for a down payment on a house but could not find anything he could afford.
Ultimately, his solution was to purchase a lot with two homes, rent out the larger home and live in the small accessory dwelling in the back.
“I’m only in Durango because of ADUs,” Rendon said.
To address the noise fears, Rendon said accessory dwellings are small and not “conducive to good parties.”
jhaug@durangoherald.com
