The Provo City Council is discussing changes to accessory dwelling unit requirements that could make obtaining approval for basement and mother-in-law apartment rentals more difficult.
Currently, the city code offers two ways to get approval for accessory dwelling units, known as ADUs: a land use text amendment, which means a group of homeowners can apply to change the land use of their area to allow ADUs, or a special use permit.
The issue arose after years of rising tensions among residents and city leaders, some of whom favor adding more ADUs and others who oppose them in their neighborhoods. City leaders are now pushing to simplify the approval process and streamline enforcement through a group of proposals presented at Tuesday’s meeting.
Current Pathways to ADU Approval
Multiple properties, such as entire neighborhoods, in areas where ADUs are not permitted can request a text change to be added to the map of ADU-approved areas. The municipal council approves or rejects the request as a zoning decision. The process can be time consuming and requires a $1,000 fee.
For a special use permit, an individual property owner must collect signatures from neighbors showing a 66% majority approval of the ADU, submit documentation proving the unit meets the standards for an ADU, and obtain a rental occupancy permit. The permit is granted by an administrative decision by city staff to the property owner, and not by the City Council designating the land as approved.
The Provo City Council is considering a proposal that would eliminate the special use permit process. During Tuesday’s meeting, several residents expressed concerns about removing this path. The proposal was ultimately moved forward for discussion at the next council meeting in two weeks.
The proposal would eliminate the administrative process, but policy analyst Melia Dayley said there is a provision in the text amendment process where residents can collect signatures from neighbors to waive the associated fee. Collecting signatures does not guarantee approval, but it does indicate that the municipality supports the applicant.
Dayley said about 49% of residential zones in Provo allow ADUs, a slight decrease from last year’s 54%. In 2023, 18 special use permits were granted. Twelve have been awarded so far this year, and a further ten are under investigation.
Dayley presented the proposal to the City Council on Tuesday and said the Planning Commission recommended rejection.
State legislatures say by default that ADUs must be allowed in all primary residential zones, but cities can ban them in up to one-third of residential zones. However, college towns, such as Provo, were given an exception to ban ADUs in up to two-thirds of residential zones, explained City Attorney Brian Jones.
‘ADUs help a city grow sustainably’
Councilman George Handley said the average salary isn’t enough to own homes in Provo, so many people are turning to accessory housing to pay mortgages.
Single-family homes pose the greatest costs to cities because residents are dispersed and more roads and sewers are needed. So utilizing available space in basements at no additional cost to the city could be extremely helpful, he said.
“The vast majority of those involved in urban planning and smart growth know that ADUs help a city grow sustainably while supporting homeownership,” Handley said.
The threat from ADUs comes from people operating them illegally, but there is no data showing that the special use pathway has increased the number of violations, he added. It would be better to strengthen the city’s enforcement of ADUs and provide more legal options rather than restrict them, he said.
The city adopted proposals Tuesday that updated ADU requirements to require rental data to be submitted to the city within 10 days of signing, simplified the code for agreements for single-family homes with more than one kitchen and refined the documentation required to prove owner occupancy for ADU. applicants. The council also approved lowering the age to 60 for “additional living accommodations” for “elderly residents,” which are similar to outbuildings but have different requirements.
Councilman Travis Hoban said it sends a “really bad message” to remove a path that “does no harm” but is important to the homeowners who need it.
The city has been tactful in its rollout of ADUs and enforcement so far, but this proposal would push the city in the wrong direction because the rezoning process is “not practical” for most people, he said. Instead, the city should continue to roll out ADUs in a way it can enforce, he said.
“If we really support homeownership and try to enable good people to have an ADU, we need to focus on enforcement and keep the pathway in place,” Hoban said.
Councilwoman Rachel Whipple said there have been a manageable number of applicants for special use permits, and through this process the city can better ensure people are following the rules.
“These are not derisive statements. These are not people who commit offenses and cause problems. … From an enforcement perspective, this has only been good and useful. To repeal this would be a step backwards,” she said.
Whipple said she would be interested in expanding the city’s use of ADUs to serve homeowners and “innocent renters” by making it legal for more properties. The special use pathway could use some improvements, but should not be repealed unless a better process is implemented, she said.
Councilman Craig Christensen said he is concerned about the enforcement of ADUs. He said he doesn’t hate ADUs, he just doesn’t think the special use permits are the right solution.
“I just think this piece of legislation is weak,” he said. “I would like to see it done in an orderly manner so that neighborhoods and streets and groups of streets decide on that rather than going door to door.”
The public speaks out
Resident Ashley Jensen said she was against ADUs when she lived on Dover Lane, where the street was lined with cars from most properties renting illegally. She has since become pro-ADU – as long as there is enforcement.
“I like that the city knows which ones are rented out. I like them to come in… check if the standard of living is good. It is better to just accept it and put rules around it so that it keeps our city beautiful,” she said.
Jordan and Zack Wright lived in a Provo basement apartment for several years and felt it helped them become responsible adults who contributed to their community. As future homeowners, they want to provide that same experience to others and believe the city should focus on educating residents about regulations rather than eliminating the process.
“It’s a shame that so few people use legal options to rent their spaces,” said Jordan Wright. “I hope you open your minds to the possibility that ADUs in neighborhoods not currently zoned for them could be a very good thing under the right circumstances.”
