Columbus holds public hearing on proposed zoning changes to allow accessory dwelling units

Columbus City Council on Tuesday heard more than two hours of testimony and staff briefing on a proposed zoning rewrite to allow accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, more broadly in residential districts as part of the council’s “Housing for All” initiative.

Councilmember Otto Beatty opened the public hearing, saying, “The purpose of this public hearing is not only to discuss the potential legislation, but more importantly, to hear from residents, homeowners, neighborhood leaders, and advocacy organizations about their ideas, opinions, and experiences with ADUs.” The council said a draft ordinance will be circulated to the public in the coming weeks.

Chief Zoning Officer Shannon Pine told the council an ADU is “a second residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for 1 or more persons,” and walked through proposed code changes intended to streamline construction by removing the need for many property owners to pursue council variances. Pine said the city analyzed 44 ADUs approved between 2019 and 2023 and found an average unit size of about 722 square feet and an average height of 22 feet; the completed examples reviewed were predominantly detached units and many were created through the variance process.

Under the concepts Pine presented, ADUs would be allowed in all residential districts covered by Title 33 (the city zoning code), with several specific limits and exemptions. Key elements discussed by staff include: capping an ADU at 65% of the principal building’s floor area or 1,000 square feet (whichever is greater) but never larger than the principal building; a maximum height of 25 feet or the height of the primary building, whichever is less; an increase in allowable total lot coverage to 65% (from 50%); allowance of ADUs in rear yards subject to minimum side-yard standards; exemption from additional parking requirements for the ADU while preserving parking obligations for the primary residence; and continued need for building permits and certificates of appropriateness in historic districts.

Speakers representing nonprofits, housing advocates, developers and neighborhood groups largely urged council to adopt permissive, citywide rules and to avoid adding off‑street parking requirements that speakers said would make ADUs financially impractical. Rayna Sims, associate state director of outreach and advocacy for AARP Ohio, emphasized older adults’ interest in remaining in place and noted survey findings that many would consider an ADU. Kriti Buenconseo of the Affordable Housing Alliance of Central Ohio and Anate Kasongo of Convergence Columbus both urged citywide allowances and discouraged requiring new parking for ADUs.

Community organizations and developers offered specific implementation ideas. Karina Johnson of Rise Together and Yvonne Riggi, an architect and Columbus homeowner who built an ADU, recommended preapproved plans, predictable utility rules and incentives for deed‑restricted affordable ADUs. Riggi said her household’s ADU required multiple variances and that “we would not have to go through any of that because all 10 variances would potentially be covered by this legislative change,” describing how removing variance barriers reduces design fees and delay.

Speakers also flagged utility and connection costs as a practical obstacle. Catherine Green, zoning chair for the Columbus Southside Area Commission and an ADU owner, described her project’s sewer hookup: “Our sewer line was able to use the same connection as the main house at a cost of $8,000 versus the $30 to $50,000 for a new connection,” and said some stalled projects cited financing and utility-connection costs as reasons they were not built.

Other recurring concerns included: whether owner‑occupancy requirements should be imposed (some speakers urged prioritizing owner-occupants to limit investor purchases), how to prevent ADUs from being used primarily as short‑term rentals, and how to protect tree canopy and manage stormwater with increased lot coverage. Several speakers asked the council to clarify utility metering and addressing (Shannon Pine said separate addresses are usually issued and that utility connection details will require follow‑up with utility departments).

Council members acknowledged those outstanding technical issues and said the current hearing was intended to gather public input before drafting legislation. At the close of the hearing Councilmember Beatty said a draft ordinance will be published “in the coming weeks” and provided an email contact (tzemene@columbus.gov) and a sign-up QR code for further outreach.

No formal vote or ordinance was taken at the hearing; staff and council described the session as a public information and input meeting in advance of drafting code language.