Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Adus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission presses staff to finalize ADU rules required by state; deed-restriction language to be removed
Summary
Ivins planners reviewed an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance the state expects for the city's moderate-income housing report; commissioners asked staff to reconcile coverage/lot‑size language, clarify tiny‑home and modular definitions, and remove a now‑unrequired deed restriction before the August state report deadline.
The Ivins Planning Commission concentrated significant time June 3 on a proposed accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance the city must finalize for a state-mandated moderate‑income housing report due in August.
Staff described the draft as a consolidation of prior commission discussions, state guidance and sample ordinances; the item aims to define what qualifies as an ADU, set development standards, and clarify requirements for detached garages, tiny homes and modular units. Planning staff said they had compiled material from roughly a dozen model documents and previous minutes to produce the draft.
Commission discussion focused on several technical discrepancies and definitional questions. Commissioners and the city building official noted potential conflicts between a table of percentage "buildable area" allowances and a separate section that limits detached accessory structures by square footage (example language listing limits such as "2 1,000‑square‑foot structures or 1 2,000‑square‑foot structure on parcels smaller than 37,000 square feet"). Commissioners asked staff to align those tables and clarify whether the intent was to allow multiple accessory structures that are not ADUs (garages, agricultural structures) while limiting the number of ADUs to one per lot, in keeping with state guidance.
On tiny homes, the draft requires that a tiny home be permanently sited—wheels and tongue removed and attached to a permanent foundation and utilities—and staff agreed to add a separate modular/hud‑code paragraph to ensure factory‑built units are treated consistently. Commissioners also asked staff to choose and justify ADU size limits (the state references 600–1,000 square feet as common thresholds) and to confirm whether multiple detached structures on large lots are intended to be accessory non‑habitable buildings or additional ADUs.
A separate, time‑sensitive matter arose about deed restrictions. Staff and counsel confirmed that state law no longer requires a deed restriction for ADU rentals; staff will remove the deed‑restriction requirement from the draft. Staff proposed to redline the ordinance, reconcile highlighted inconsistencies and circulate a revised draft to commissioners by Monday so it can be finalized and transmitted in advance of the August report to the state.
No final ordinance was adopted at the meeting; commissioners instructed staff to circulate redlines and return the item for public hearing and action at a subsequent meeting.
