Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pensacola advisory committee recommends clearer public guidance to boost ADU use
Summary
At its June 2 meeting the City of Pensacola Affordable Housing Advisory Committee reviewed ADU code language and recommended the city improve public education—website banners, pamphlets and clearer plain‑language guides—to help homeowners, realtors and builders consider accessory dwelling units as housing options.
At its June 2 meeting the City of Pensacola Affordable Housing Advisory Committee discussed the city’s accessory dwelling unit (ADU) land‑development code and recommended steps to make ADUs easier for the public to find and understand. The Chair, who represents the City of Pensacola Planning Council, opened the discussion by noting that "the city does allow accessory dwelling units" and that homeowners choose whether to add them.
Committee members said the current ADU language is buried in the land development code and difficult for a typical homeowner to find or interpret. Deborah Mays, REMAX Horizons Realty, pointed to an external example shown in a briefed video and reported the outside jurisdiction tracked permit counts before and after code changes: "they went from a 2 year period from having 12 ADUs... the slide said 58, I think, by the time she was speaking, it was 60 some odd ADUs were actually built," Mays said, noting that easier public materials appeared to increase uptake.
Members raised practical questions about how ADUs are serviced. From a building‑code standpoint the Chair said some older ADUs are "grandfathered" to share service with the primary house but that "by and large, they really should be fed from their own meter" for power‑safety reasons. The committee also discussed typical ADU sizes and setbacks in the draft code and minor proposed edits addressing proximity to property lines and second‑story window placement.
On use cases, the committee noted ADUs can be used either for long‑term rental or family housing, and Chair explained that short‑term rental use is allowed under state law. Tracy Pickens, city staff, confirmed that the agenda materials and notices had been posted online and said she would gather examples and provide materials for the committee to consider.
The committee’s working recommendation is to ask city staff to explore and return with specific public‑facing outreach tools — such as a website banner, printed pamphlet and plain‑language checklist — that would explain the process, permitting expectations, and likely costs. If the outreach proposal is developed, the committee hopes to refine it in July and consider a formal recommendation to the City Council in August.
The meeting included no formal votes on code changes; the committee framed the conversation as education and awareness work that could support future policy recommendations.
