Don’t sell Mom’s house quite yet: her apartment may not be ready for a while.

The Bonney Lake City Council rejected the idea of allowing detached additional dwelling units – commonly known as mother-in-law apartments – in Residential 1 zoning, which takes in most of the city. The decision came Dec. 7.

The council has discussed the issue for several weeks, but it did not receive enough support during the council workshop to move forward to a vote of the full council.

Presently, ADUs are allowed in R2 and R3 zoning, which allow multi-family housing. If passed, the ordinance would have made ADUs a conditional use within R1 zones.

“It’s not broke, we don’t need to fix it,” Councilman Randy McKibbin said.

The issue was brought forward by the Planning Commission because of complaints heard after the council in 2009 rezoned properties on Inlet Island and in the Church Lake area from R2 to R1. At that time, according to a memo from Planning Commission Chairman Grant Sulham, the main complaint from property owners involved no longer being allowed to build ADUs on their property.

In his memo, Sulham listed several advantages to allowing ADUs in R1 zones, including giving property owners the ability to house aging parents or adult children. It also would allow for extra income, affordable housing options and an ability to help the city meet density goals.

On the other side of the coin, Sulham noted allowing ADUs essentially makes the entire city a multi-family zone, which though not inherently a downside, “it may be perceived as such.”

“The Planning commission finds that ADUs may be beneficial in R-1, but we are concerned with the negative impacts that an ADU might create in a single-family neighborhood,” he wrote.

The commission first made its recommendation Nov. 9. At that time, planning commissioner Brad Dahl highlighted the potential for additional income.

“In light of the economy now it seems like a good idea to allow them,” he told the council.

Councilmembers did not seem to be swayed and ultimately determined allowing ADUs in single-family residential zoning would essentially make the R-1 an R-2 zone.

“It makes it messy and we should not do that,” Councilman Jim Rackley said Dec. 7, noting that he was originally for the ordinance but has reconsidered.

Only Councilmember Dan Decker seemed to support the ordinance.

Though the issue failed to gain enough support to be placed on a full council agenda, the council agreed to discuss the issue again next year.