Thank you to the Durango City Council for taking the time to reconsider the proposal to relax lot-size requirements for detached Accessory Dwelling Units in Established Neighborhoods 2 (west of Main Avenue) and 3 (in and around Animas City). The Community Development Commission’s current recommendation to Council would allow for 34 additional units to be built in neighborhoods that are already overly dense.
Council has listened to its constituents, read many letters and emails, asked the right questions and gathered much-needed, relevant information. They have discussed and pondered the proposal, and I applaud that. Council is expected to consider the proposal again Jan. 21, or on Feb. 3, due to a councilor’s planned absence and request to postpone.
From the idea’s introduced to City Council in August, through the late-September CDC meeting, the October Council meetings, the postponement to gather additional data from Community Development and, most recently, the Council study session held Jan. 6, extensive research and information have been produced.
This is a complex, multifaceted proposal with many unknowns, which became clear during the study session. Community Development Director Jayme Lopko delivered a thorough presentation responding to the data the Council had requested. She and her staff spent countless hours producing a wide range of figures and scenarios, including:
- EN2 – There are currently 662 regular dwelling units (homes, condos, triplexes, duplexes, etc.) and 69 ADUs (34 fully approved). This proposal would add 25 more ADUs.
- EN3 – There are 332 regular dwelling units and 46 ADUs (29 fully approved). This proposal would add nine more.
- Many ADUs are not registered, have not completed registration, have not paid city fees and may be out of compliance.
- Forty percent have changed ownership without reliable re-registration, and Community Development cannot verify whether these units still meet owner-occupancy requirements.
- There are many short-term vacation rentals, and Council requested a matrix combining ADUs, duplexes and triplexes to visualize overall density.
- Community Development cannot keep up with oversight. Door-to-door verification is unrealistic given budget and staffing constraints, leaving the city to rely on neighbors to report irregularities.
There are numerous complications surrounding existing ADUs and their legality, including owner-occupancy requirements, re-registration every two years, re-registration when a house is sold, and parking impacts.
Council has expressed interest in a public works study examining how ADUs have affected infrastructure since 2014. Aging water and sewer systems, rising pressures, and planned upgrades already driving rate increases raise legitimate questions about whether utilities can absorb additional demand. As Bob Lowry, interim Public Works director, has noted, “we must address aging water and sewer infrastructure around town,” and there are “complications lying in wait beneath the asphalt” (Herald, Dec. 14).
Residents are reporting tangible effects of overconcentration: crowding, parking shortages, blocked sun, sky, and trees, loss of privacy, noise, more dogs and cats, humming air conditioners and heaters, reduced nighttime darkness, and alleys crowded with motorcycles, boats, and gear. With no Engage Durango process, no public forums, and the loss of citizen advisory boards that could have helped vet such a consequential change, moving forward now risks compounding problems rather than addressing housing needs.
Before approving additional units, the city must demonstrate that it can accurately account for, monitor and enforce rules governing existing ADUs. The proposed 34 new units in EN2 and EN3 would increase density in areas where many ADUs remain unverified or potentially out of compliance, compounding pressures on infrastructure and community livability.
Given the complexity of this proposal, the Council should pause or deny any expansion of ADUs until oversight and impacts are fully understood, as existing data and resident experiences show the city cannot reliably track, enforce, or support even the ADUs already in place. Adding more units would further strain utilities, infrastructure, and neighborhood quality of life.
Once again, thank you to the Council for carefully examining this issue. Adding new units to an already uncertain total would further erode neighborhood character and livability. Growth is challenging, and this proposal will not solve the problems it creates.
Durango’s livability and character depend on collaboration among residents, staff, and Council. I look forward to continuing this work together as an engaged citizen.
Martha McClellan has lived in EN2 since 1994 and cares deeply about the character and stability of Durango’s older neighborhoods. She writes the Herald’s Authentic Aging column.
