Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Adu Owner Occupancy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Provo council directs staff to remove ADU owner-occupancy exemption after planning confusion
Summary
Provo City Council voted unanimously to remove a confusing exemption in the city’s owner-occupancy definition for accessory dwelling units and asked staff to return with broader fixes to ADU licensing and the expedited map-change process.
Provo City Council on Sept. 9 voted 7-0 to instruct staff to remove a specific exemption from the city’s owner-occupancy definition in Provo City Code chapter 14-30 as it applies to accessory dwelling unit (ADU) licensing. Councilors also voted 7-0 to ask staff to return with a proposal to revise the expedited map-change and special-use permit process used to put parcels on the ADU-allowed map.
City planning analyst Malia Daley told the council the change responds to conflicting readings of a paragraph commissioners identified as creating a de facto exemption to owner-occupancy. "To make this text amendment simple and something easy to go forward, we just suggested to remove the exemption," Daley said, adding the proposed language would require that everyone on title must live at the property in order to qualify for an ADU license.
Assistant city attorney Brian (last name not specified in the transcript) told the council the paragraph in the code was confusing and had been interpreted differently by staff and the Planning Commission. He said the paragraph does not, on its face, create an exemption but “is a provision that doesn't make any sense” and recommended deleting it to remove the confusion. The council’s actions leave open the option for a separate process to design a narrowly tailored exemption and verification procedure if the council wishes to allow exceptions in the future.
Councilors asked how the change would affect temporary leaves of absence and other special situations such as lease-to-own contracts. Daley and staff said the ADU licensing chapter includes a separate temporary-leave provision that would remain in effect; staff said applicants must apply for that leave in advance and that the proposed deletion would not change that rule. Staff also said lease-to-own situations are generally treated the same as other title/ownership questions: the person on recorded title is the owner-occupant for licensing purposes unless code or case-specific facts require a different administrative determination.
The council also asked staff to return with recommendations on the city’s expedited process for adding parcels to the ADU-allowed map and on a broader cleanup of code cross-references that use different terms for residence verification. Daley said the planning commission decision to recommend approval of a recent map amendment hinged on the ambiguous paragraph and that if the council prefers to allow limited exemptions, staff would need direction on verification and enforcement procedures.
Action details: the council's first motion (remove the exemption language in chapter 14-30) passed 7-0. A second motion directing staff to draft revisions to the expedited map-change/special-permit section was made and approved 7-0.
Staff said the revision deleting the exemption must go to Planning Commission before returning to council; staff also offered to draft a separate, longer review if the council seeks to craft a formal exemption process or other clarifications.
The city will present the Planning Commission–recommended code deletion and any future proposed language at upcoming public hearings as required by the municipal code and state law.
