Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Accessory Dwelling Units topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Enid planners present ADU study session; city to consider conservative, zoning‑based approach
Summary
City staff outlined accessory dwelling units (ADUs), their types and benefits, and recommended a cautious, zoning-driven approach; staff said ADUs could be permitted by right in some low-density districts and subject to use-by-review in more restrictive zones, and emphasized that the study session did not commit the city to any change.
Jacqueline Porter, the city’s community development director, led a study-session presentation explaining accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, and recommended a cautious approach if the commission chooses to permit them.
"An ADU is a smaller independent residential unit located on the same lot as a single family home," Porter said, citing the American Planning Association’s definition. She told the commission ADUs can be attached, detached or conversions of existing space, and that they must meet local building and zoning rules to be legal and safe.
Porter described benefits frequently cited by planners: increased housing variety and affordability, opportunities for aging in place, homeowner supplemental income, and ‘‘gentle density’’ that uses existing infrastructure. She named cities with ADU programs and said Oklahoma municipalities including Norman, Oklahoma City, Edmond and Tulsa have ADUs.
She also summarized common concerns: neighborhood character, increased noise and light, privacy, pressure on sewer/water/power infrastructure, traffic and parking impacts, and potential oversupply in rental markets. Porter said those concerns can be addressed with dimensional and design standards, parking rules, and either permitting ADUs as a use by right or subjecting them to a use-by-review public process.
On zoning, Porter recommended allowing ADUs by right in the city’s less restrictive districts (agriculture and the higher-numbered R districts that allow a variety of residential types) while using a use-by-review approach for more restrictive single-family districts (R2–R4). She emphasized that ADUs should not be subdivided from the parent lot.
Commissioners asked procedural and practical questions: how ADUs interact with homeowners associations (Porter: "HOA's will have their own covenants, and they will enforce their own"), what ‘‘permitted by right’’ means (Porter: it would require submission of a building permit and administrative review), and whether occupancy limits would apply (Porter: occupancy limits vary by community; the commission would decide any local standard). Porter said staff would draft a proposed ordinance and return with a study session in a few months and noted the new city attorney has been on the job about three weeks.
No ordinance was proposed or adopted at the session; the presentation was explicitly framed as conceptual. "This is just conceptual and broad views of ADUs," Porter said. The commission asked staff to continue work and return with a draft if the commission wishes to proceed.
