Commission to seek code clarifications, schedules work session after rise in ADU requests

Commissioners at the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission’s May 13, 2025 meeting asked staff to prepare a focused work session and possible code amendments related to accessory dwelling units and major accessory buildings after several recent permit applications revealed technical and policy issues.

The request followed multiple agenda items that involved ADUs or accessory buildings — including an ADU in an existing shell building on North Forestdale Drive, and a major accessory building with an ADU proposed on Wylaway Road West. Commissioners and staff discussed how county land-use limits (for example, a 1,000-square-foot cap on ADUs and a 2,000-square-foot threshold for “major accessory buildings”) interact with building-code requirements (accessibility, egress and fair-housing considerations) that are enforced at permit review and by the state construction code.

Planning staff described the problem as one of cumulative impacts and intersecting regulatory regimes. Staff explained that building-code accessibility requirements can be triggered when a structure contains multiple residential units (staff cited that reaching four residential units in a single structure triggers additional accessibility requirements), which can make some ADU configurations infeasible without elevators or other costly modifications. Staff told commissioners they will return with an analysis of issues that have arisen since the ADU-related code changes were adopted, and with possible language amendments.

Commissioners asked staff to bring background materials and legal context to a work session. The chair and staff suggested inviting legal counsel and senior planners to present the history and rationale of the existing ADU provisions, related building-code constraints, and options for changes. Commissioner Heather Peteroy and others asked for practical examples, documented limits (for example, on number and size of accessory buildings per lot) and how short-term-rental rules and accessibility law intersect with local code.

What staff said and what will happen next Planning staff acknowledged the county will prepare a summary of the code history and documented issues and said it will return with a proposed work session (staff indicated that a work session could be scheduled in the coming weeks). Staff also said changes to state or federal law (for example, accessibility standards) can limit what the county can permit, and that the department will present both planning- and building-code implications so the commission can consider balanced changes.

Why it matters Commissioners said they are not attempting to block ADUs but want clarity on whether current rules allow uses that are consistent with the county’s objectives (for example, protecting commercial zones while allowing employee or family housing). The outcome could lead to code amendments clarifying allowed sizes, further restrictions or implementation steps to reduce unintended conversions of commercial shells into de facto second homes.

Requested deliverables Commissioners asked staff to: - Prepare a work session explaining the history and intent of the ADU language and the planning decisions that led to the current code. - Document the building-code interactions (accessibility, egress and fair housing triggers) that are affecting ADU feasibility. - Provide examples and possible amendment options (e.g., limits on major accessory-building size when an ADU is proposed, minimum-term rental limits, or alternate permitting pathways).

Sources: meeting transcript excerpts and on-record staff remarks.