×

Warning message

The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.

IDO 2025 Update - Council Amendments - ADU- Fiebelkorn

Leave Comments for EPC consideration below.

This amendment from Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn proposes changes to IDO Subsection 14-16-4-3(F)(6).

These amendments will be reviewed by the EPC at a hearing on October 28, 2025.

  • To be included in the staff report for EPC consideration, add comments below by 9 am on Friday, October 10th.
  • To be included in the packet for EPC consideration, add comments below by 9 am on Monday, October 20th.

Have questions?

Return to IDO Update 2025

File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-

Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%

Click anywhere in the document to add a comment. Select a bubble to view comments.

Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio
View all

Comments

Close

Add comment


Is this what distinguishes an "attached" ADU from a duplex? I am unclear about the rationale for introducing a separate definition. What Use-Specific standards govern an attached ADU but not a duplex?
sorry, difference is not clear to me.
OK, don't understand why this is here instead of in 4-3(F)(6)(b)
Why? IDO amendments should not be the design police...
need to keep one or the other (side or rear). Every time you build right on a property line, it is an effective 'taking' of neighbor's property.
in other words, a duplex?
So, no setbacks?