Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs staff review of ADU code process after disputed rental at 1841 N. 1550 E.
Summary
Following discussion of a rental violation at 1841 North 1550 East, councilors directed staff to review Provo code section 17.03.100 and prepare a council intent statement about one-lot map amendments and how enforcement and cure processes should operate; the motion passed 5–1.
City planner Jessica Danakee presented an ordinance-text-amendment matter involving an accessory-dwelling-unit (ADU) at 1841 North 1550 East, a property found to have a basement rental. Danakee said code enforcement opened the case in 2024 and contacted the property this year; one downstairs tenant has moved and the other is scheduled to move soon.
Danakee said approving an ordinance text amendment for the property would be a path to bring the property into compliance. Scott (code enforcement) confirmed officers visited multiple times before contacting an occupant in mid-2025.
Councilors and staff discussed how the city balances enforcement and the opportunity for property owners to seek code changes. Legal staff and enforcement staff explained that, depending on the code section, officials sometimes allow applicants to pursue a permit or text amendment that would cure a violation rather than immediately pursuing prosecution. Councilors expressed frustration that repeat or prolonged violations can be resource-intensive for staff and divisive for neighborhoods.
Councilor McKay moved that staff review Provo City Code section 17.03.100 and prepare a council intent statement clarifying how one-lot map amendments and related ADU procedures should be handled, including recommendations on neighborhood notification practices and thresholds; Councilor (second) seconded. The motion passed 5–1 (recorded votes indicated Councilor Bogdan, Councilor Garrett, Councilor Hamlin, Councilor McKay and Councilor Christiansen voted yes; Councilor Wobble recorded no; Councilor Hogan was excused). The motion asked staff to return with recommended decision points (for example, minimum lot sizes or neighborhood support thresholds), and to include options for how the city could manage neighbor outreach (city-run notices, signature thresholds or other processes) and possible fee changes to cover administrative costs.
Councilors and staff noted state law changes that restrict some local regulatory approaches to short-term rental platforms and cautioned that advertisement or tax records have restricted admissibility in some contexts; staff said they would review those constraints as part of the code review.
Ending: Council ordered staff to return with a memo and recommended language for a council intent statement and possible code refinements to 17.03.100; no immediate changes to enforcement were enacted at the meeting.
