×

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

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.

  • EPC may accept simple statements of support or opposition if submitted by Sunday, October 26 at 9 a.m. under the 48-hour rule [EPC Rules of Conduct Article III.2.E.iv] via the EPC Comment Portal. Other comments need to be made verbally at the hearing. Comments including new evidence will be collected for subsequent hearings in the review and decision process.

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%
Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio
View all

Comments

Close

Commenting is closed for this document.


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?