Council committee advances modest changes to ADU rules to boost use; removes owner-occupancy requirement
Loading...
Summary
The Rules Committee voted to pass an amendment loosening accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rules — eliminating the owner-occupancy requirement and allowing rental (but not short-term rentals) — aiming to spur construction after limited take-up under earlier rules.
The City Council Rules Committee on Jan. 6 approved an amendment to a long-standing ADU ordinance aimed at increasing the number of accessory dwelling units built in Jacksonville. The committee voted to move the bill forward after brief discussion and an amendment recommended by planning staff.
Council President Rory Diamond, who sponsored the change, described it as a moderate fix to an ADU ordinance passed roughly two years earlier that had set strict limitations including an owner-occupancy requirement, small size limits and a homestead exemption requirement that together discouraged construction. “They’re not being really built...this is a moderate fix,” Diamond said, summarizing the proposal to remove the owner-occupancy requirement and allow rental use (but not Airbnb-style short-term rentals), while keeping design controls, setbacks and size compatibility with the principal house.
Why it matters: City leaders say ADUs can add housing supply with less disruption than larger multi-family projects; the committee’s change aims to make ADUs more feasible for owners and investors while retaining design and neighborhood safeguards.
What the amendment did The committee adopted technical edits from planning staff and clarified that minimum lot requirements for the RMD-d zoning district apply only where comprehensive-plan density requirements are met. The substantive policy change removes the requirement that ADU owners live in the principal dwelling and allows ADUs to be rented to long-term tenants, not to be used as short-term vacation rentals. Design controls, setback rules and compatibility requirements remain intact.
Public comment and impact Public comment at the meeting raised related questions — including whether solid-waste fees would apply to ADUs and whether the change would increase rental units on lots currently used as investment properties. Council members said they wanted to avoid unintended consequences such as multiple ADUs on a single parcel; staff clarified the ordinance allows one ADU per single-family dwelling.
Committee action After discussion and a staff-recommended amendment, the committee voted 4 to 2 to pass the bill as amended out of Rules Committee.
Ending: The bill will proceed to full council. Council members who opposed the measure said they wanted more time to study potential side effects; supporters argued the change removes unnecessary barriers that have made ADUs a “dead letter” under the prior rule.
