Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Dwelling Units topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Corinne planning commissioners debate ADU rules, set January public hearing
Summary
The Corinne Planning Commission reviewed proposed accessory dwelling unit rules — including state minimums for internal ADUs (6,000 sq ft), a proposed 1,200 sq ft cap for detached ADUs, permit and appearance requirements, and use of the variance process for nonconforming lots — and agreed to schedule a public hearing in January; no vote was taken tonight.
The Corinne Planning Commission spent most of its meeting reviewing proposed changes to the city’s accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance, focusing on lot-size thresholds, size limits for detached ADUs, permits and how to treat tiny or mobile homes.
The discussion centered on a planner’s clarification of state law that “a city cannot prohibit an internal ADU on any lot 6,000 square feet or larger,” and on how Corinne’s local minimum lot size (about 9,900 square feet in R‑1 zones) interacts with that state rule. The planner told commissioners that detached ADUs have no state minimum and that he used 12,000 square feet as a placeholder, but commissioners suggested matching the local quarter‑acre lot size (9,900 sq ft) so owners in existing R‑1 areas would not be excluded.
Why it matters: the changes would determine where homeowners can add a separate dwelling unit — and under what size limits and inspection rules — which affects housing capacity, property rights and neighborhood character in Corinne’s mix of very small downtown lots and much larger rural parcels.
Key facts and outcomes - State minimum for internal ADUs: the planner emphasized state code limits local bans on internal ADUs on lots of 6,000 sq ft or larger. The commission discussed how grandfathered, nonconforming lots would be handled. - Detached ADU thresholds and size caps: the planner proposed a 1,200 sq ft cap for detached ADUs as a compromise; commissioners discussed examples from Ogden and Willard (where detached ADU sizes and caps vary by parcel size and may range from 300–1,500 sq ft in those ordinances). - Variance approach for nonconforming lots: the planner recommended using the existing variance process to reduce setback requirements (for example, reducing a 30 ft setback where lot size makes current setbacks impractical), citing the five statutory variance criteria. - Permits and appearance: commissioners asked whether the city should require both Planning and Zoning approval and an operating permit for ADUs; the planner said he added short ordinance language requiring a city permit to operate an ADU and an appearance standard for detached ADUs to maintain a residential look. - Tiny/mobile homes and building code: commissioners and staff said tiny homes on wheels are generally treated differently from permanently sited structures; permanent foundations, footings below frost line, IRC/IBC compliance and fire separation influence whether a dwelling qualifies as an ADU. - Utilities and impact fees: commissioners noted that larger ADUs may require a separate utility meter and thus additional impact fees, which can constrain feasible ADU sizes on some properties.
No vote was held. Commissioners agreed the Planning Commission should hold a public hearing and tentatively scheduled it for January (members referenced January 13). After the hearing, the item will move forward to the city council as required by local procedure.
Quotes “The state of Utah said a city cannot prohibit an internal ADU on any lot 6,000 square feet or larger,” the planner said while reviewing state code guidance. “For detached ADUs, there’s no state minimum; I used 12,000 as a placeholder and suggested 1,200 square feet as a reasonable cap.”
“If you don’t like what’s going to be built next to your house, you should have bought the ground so you can control it,” the chair said in response to concerns about neighbor objection, noting that the variance process and permitting provide checks on what can be built.
Next steps The Planning Commission will advertise and hold a public hearing in January; no ordinance vote was taken tonight. After the public hearing, staff will return the item according to the commission’s direction and applicable notice requirements.
Votes at a glance - Agenda approval: motion by Michael Bass, seconded by Jenny Harris — approved. - Previous minutes approval: motion by Michael Bass, seconded by an unnamed commissioner — approved. - Adjournment: motion by David Jobe, seconded by Jenny Harris — approved.
Authorities and references cited in the meeting: Utah state code regarding ADUs, the International Residential Code (IRC) and International Building Code (IBC) for building and fire-safety requirements, and sample municipal ordinances from Ogden, Willard, Provo and Logan.
