Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Dwelling Units topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews accessory dwelling unit draft that would permit internal ADUs, prohibit external units
Summary
Planning commissioners reviewed a draft ADU ordinance that mirrors recent state guidance by allowing internal accessory dwelling units tied to owner-occupancy while excluding standalone external units; commissioners raised septic, health-department and inspection concerns and asked staff to align language with county references.
The Wallsburg Planning Commission on Jan. 21 reviewed a draft accessory dwelling unit ordinance that would permit internal accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and prohibit external, detached ADUs for now.
Spencer Foster, the meeting presenter, said the draft “is to allow internal accessory dwelling units and prohibit external accessory dwelling units.” Commissioners and staff discussed why the distinction matters: external ADUs typically require separate utility connections, may trigger health-department septic upgrades, and present additional inspection and regulatory complexity that smaller towns may not be prepared to manage.
Why it matters: commissioners flagged two practical issues. First, many Wallsburg properties rely on private septic systems and the county health department may require system upgrades when additional living units are created. Second, the commission noted that internal ADUs are the state’s immediate focus and are simpler to regulate because utilities and services remain tied to the main dwelling.
Key elements of the draft
- Internal-only approach: The draft mirrors state guidance by allowing internal ADUs (for example, finished basements or above-garage units that remain connected to the primary dwelling’s utilities) and prohibiting detached/external ADUs unless the commission later amends the code.
- Owner-occupancy and affidavit: The draft would require that either the primary dwelling or the internal ADU be occupied by a full-time resident owner and would require an affidavit filed with the town; exceptions such as sabbaticals, military service or medical admissions are specified.
- Permitting and inspections: The draft currently calls for an affidavit rather than a full permitting-inspection regime; commissioners explored whether to add a permit and inspection process (and potentially fees) so the town could monitor ADUs and collect revenue if it chooses.
Commissioner concerns and next steps
Commissioners asked staff to switch local references from “Utah County” to “Wasatch County” where appropriate, and to clarify septic and health-department implications. Several commissioners said they prefer a simple ordinance to avoid loopholes but acknowledged the town could later amend the code to allow external ADUs if policy and infrastructure changed.
No formal vote was taken on the ADU draft; staff will circulate an updated version to the commission before scheduling a public hearing.
Ending
Staff will update the draft to reflect local county references, clarify owner-occupancy and affidavit requirements, and outline the health-department and septic implications for properties considering internal ADUs.
