Ivins council reviews proposed accessory dwelling unit rules ahead of Aug. 1 housing-plan deadline

Ivins City Council met in a work session on July 17 to review a proposed ordinance that would amend chapters 11 and 12 of city code to authorize and regulate accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

City planning staff told the council the draft is intended to respond to state legislative changes and to meet a milestone in Ivins' moderate-income housing plan, which staff must submit by Aug. 1. Staff described two alternatives to the Planning Commission—s original draft and asked the council to direct edits and clarifications.

The draft would allow both internal ADUs (units inside an owner-occupied primary dwelling) and external, detached ADUs. Staff said the external-unit size in the proposal was written as an option in the draft to allow units up to about 1,000 square feet (an increase from a 600-square-foot baseline in earlier drafts) while still applying lot-coverage limits. Parking requirements in the draft call for one space for smaller units and a second space if units exceed a larger size threshold. The draft also removes a previously used "casita agreement" and clarifies that the city will not charge impact fees for ADUs, consistent with state law.

Council members and staff focused on several recurring items. They agreed the ordinance must clearly distinguish the two types of units and be internally consistent: whenever the code text refers only to detached units it should say so, and when it refers to both types it should list both terms. The council settled on drafting acronyms for the code to help readability: ADUE (external accessory dwelling unit) and ADUI (internal accessory dwelling unit). The council instructed staff to apply the same long-term-rental restriction language to both internal and external ADU definitions and to reference the city—s existing short-term-rental rule (cited in the meeting as section 16.12.123).

Council members also discussed owner-occupancy and how the city should define a "primary resident." The draft retained the city—s existing language that the owner must live full time in either the primary dwelling or an accessory unit; some council members asked staff to evaluate whether that requirement should be broadened so a property could host multiple long-term renters even if the record owner does not live on site. Staff noted they cannot adopt less than the state minimum but can adopt tighter requirements if the council wishes; the council did not adopt a change in the meeting, and directed staff to bring clear, spelled-out language back for the record.

Other technical issues discussed included limiting lot coverage for detached units (the draft uses a rear-yard-percentage approach around 25—6%–35% in line with research), defining gross building area for ADU measurement, and clarifying separate treatment of garages versus carports. The council preserved language that would prohibit separate utility meters for ADUs, citing concerns that separate meters effectively create separate dwelling units and could shift infrastructure costs.

Members named several municipalities the staff reviewed while drafting Ivins' ordinance, including Mill Creek, South Salt Lake, Draper and Hurricane; staff said many Utah jurisdictions are still finalizing ADU language after recent state-level activity. The council asked staff to reconcile small contradictions in the draft (for example, whether ADUs were allowed in every zoning district that allows single-family homes versus limited low- and medium-density single-family zones) and to return with a redlined, consolidated version the council can act on at a future meeting.

No formal vote was taken on the ordinance at the July 17 work session. The meeting concluded with a procedural motion to adjourn.