Government

Napa 10 Questions: O’Connell knows How to ADU

Meet Ryan O’Connell, the founder of How To ADU, and an advocate for more housing in California.

O’Connell moved to Napa in 2012 to start nakedwines.com. The business funds winemakers around the country and around the world.

In traveling all over California’s wine regions, O’Connell recalled how he met many vineyard workers, winery teams, and hospitality staff that could not afford to live in the regions where they work.

“There just isn’t enough housing,” he said.

Falling back on his political science background (he earned a B.A. at Tulane University), O’Connell set out to explain Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to California homeowners.

His goal? “To create simple ways for homeowners to reduce California’s housing shortage, in a way that benefits them and their communities.”

Support local news coverage and the people who report it by subscribing to the Napa Valley Register. 

1. What was your childhood ambition?

I used to tell my parents that I wanted to be the President! But when I was 8, I saw Bill Clinton on TV and told my mom I didn’t want to be President anymore. She asked “why not?” and I said Clinton got a lot of gray hair in his first year.

2. What job would you like to try/not try?

Try: Generative AI (artificial intelligence) is so fascinating right now – I’d like to learn how to harness that power for good. I’ve heard that prompting AI will be an entire career one day, like learning how to use a printing press or code software.

Not try: I have so much respect for school teachers and, while I do a lot of educational content, I couldn’t imagine the responsibility of doing that in person and being responsible for a big group of young people.

3. How did you get into the housing industry?

I left my dream career in the wine world in the middle of a global pandemic to make a difference in the housing shortage.

When I launched How To ADU’s YouTube channel and Facebook group, I barely had three subscribers: me, my wife, and my mom!

Fast forward three years and we now have the largest online community of homeowners in California with over 20,000 members of our Facebook group, 54,000 followers on TikTok and 9,000 subscribers on YouTube.

It turns out that people really need information about these new laws and how they can use them to change their lives!

4. What is the biggest challenge your business/industry has faced?

Education and communication are the biggest challenges in the ADU space.

The state passes new zoning laws almost every year, and then each city and county have local staff and nonprofits all working individually on separate programs, ordinances, and more.

While we optimistically call this patchwork process something like the “laboratories of democracy” it ends up with a very fragmented system that varies from one zip code to another.

We are lucky that in Napa we have great programs at the county and city level, nonprofits like the Napa Sonoma ADU Center, and private sector innovation like Redwood Credit Union’s incredible ADU construction loan. So the challenge here is exporting those successful programs to other parts of the state.

5. What’s one thing Napa could do to help local business?

We need to build more housing so that the people who work in Napa can afford to live in Napa.

We benefit from a strong economy and provide a lot of work opportunities in our community, but we do not provide enough housing at different sizes, and levels of affordability.

If you’re a resident of Napa, or work or play here, I hope that you’ll support more housing being built so we can keep our community vibrant and healthy.

6. If you could change one thing about the housing industry, what would it be?

I hope that we all learn to work together to build great communities. Too often, I see arguments between groups of people who should be natural allies.

For example, pro-housing developers, tenant protection organizations, environmentalists, and labor activists may all take different “sides” of a debate. But there are good, smart ways to build that make our communities stronger and serve all of us well.

7. What’s your favorite gift to give?

My go-to is old bottles of wine that I made back in the day. That has to be the least original answer, but it’s the truth. I love sharing wine with people, and sharing a story about the bottle.

8. What’s your favorite charity or nonprofit?

The Napa Sonoma ADU Center and the Napa Valley Community Foundation. Honestly, I am very lucky to be based in a place that takes housing so seriously and has devoted so much talent and so many resources to housing.

9. What’s something people might be surprised to know about you?

I tried to buy a Swedish porcelain factory on vacation once.

10. What is one thing you hope to accomplish in your lifetime that you haven’t yet?

I want to help California reach its goal of building 180,000 units of housing a year.

When I first said that, my wife suggested “maybe start with one.”

Home movies that included this 1962 film taken at Disneyland were recently digitized by Napa’s Closs family. The family has owned and run Buttercream Bakery for many years. Disneyland opened in 1955. 


Closs family

The business news you need

Get the latest local business news delivered FREE to your inbox weekly.

Meet Ryan O’Connell, the founder of How To ADU, and an advocate for more housing in California.
O’Connell moved to Napa in 2012 to start nakedwines.com. The business funds winemakers around the country and around the world.
In traveling all over California’s wine regions, O’Connell recalled how he met many vineyard workers, winery teams, and hospitality staff that could not afford to live in the regions where they work.
“There just isn’t enough housing,” he said.
Falling back on his political science background (he earned a B.A. at Tulane University), O’Connell set out to explain Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to California homeowners.
His goal? “To create simple ways for homeowners to reduce California’s housing shortage, in a way that benefits them and their communities.”

Support local news coverage and the people who report it by subscribing to the Napa Valley Register. 

1. What was your childhood ambition?
I used to tell my parents that I wanted to be the President! But when I was 8, I saw Bill Clinton on TV and told my mom I didn’t want to be President anymore. She asked “why not?” and I said Clinton got a lot of gray hair in his first year.
2. What job would you like to try/not try?
Try: Generative AI (artificial intelligence) is so fascinating right now – I’d like to learn how to harness that power for good. I’ve heard that prompting AI will be an entire career one day, like learning how to use a printing press or code software.
Not try: I have so much respect for school teachers and, while I do a lot of educational content, I couldn’t imagine the responsibility of doing that in person and being responsible for a big group of young people.
3. How did you get into the housing industry?
I left my dream career in the wine world in the middle of a global pandemic to make a difference in the housing shortage.
When I launched How To ADU’s YouTube channel and Facebook group, I barely had three subscribers: me, my wife, and my mom!
Fast forward three years and we now have the largest online community of homeowners in California with over 20,000 members of our Facebook group, 54,000 followers on TikTok and 9,000 subscribers on YouTube.
It turns out that people really need information about these new laws and how they can use them to change their lives!
4. What is the biggest challenge your business/industry has faced?
Education and communication are the biggest challenges in the ADU space.
The state passes new zoning laws almost every year, and then each city and county have local staff and nonprofits all working individually on separate programs, ordinances, and more.
While we optimistically call this patchwork process something like the “laboratories of democracy” it ends up with a very fragmented system that varies from one zip code to another.
We are lucky that in Napa we have great programs at the county and city level, nonprofits like the Napa Sonoma ADU Center, and private sector innovation like Redwood Credit Union’s incredible ADU construction loan. So the challenge here is exporting those successful programs to other parts of the state.
5. What’s one thing Napa could do to help local business?
We need to build more housing so that the people who work in Napa can afford to live in Napa.
We benefit from a strong economy and provide a lot of work opportunities in our community, but we do not provide enough housing at different sizes, and levels of affordability.
If you’re a resident of Napa, or work or play here, I hope that you’ll support more housing being built so we can keep our community vibrant and healthy.
6. If you could change one thing about the housing industry, what would it be?
I hope that we all learn to work together to build great communities. Too often, I see arguments between groups of people who should be natural allies.
For example, pro-housing developers, tenant protection organizations, environmentalists, and labor activists may all take different “sides” of a debate. But there are good, smart ways to build that make our communities stronger and serve all of us well.
7. What’s your favorite gift to give?
My go-to is old bottles of wine that I made back in the day. That has to be the least original answer, but it’s the truth. I love sharing wine with people, and sharing a story about the bottle.
8. What’s your favorite charity or nonprofit?
The Napa Sonoma ADU Center and the Napa Valley Community Foundation. Honestly, I am very lucky to be based in a place that takes housing so seriously and has devoted so much talent and so many resources to housing.
9. What’s something people might be surprised to know about you?
I tried to buy a Swedish porcelain factory on vacation once.
10. What is one thing you hope to accomplish in your lifetime that you haven’t yet?
I want to help California reach its goal of building 180,000 units of housing a year.
When I first said that, my wife suggested “maybe start with one.”

Home movies that included this 1962 film taken at Disneyland were recently digitized by Napa’s Closs family. The family has owned and run Buttercream Bakery for many years. Disneyland opened in 1955. 

Closs family

Photos: Check out Napa County’s LEAST expensive home sold in January

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

23 Lena Drive, American Canyon.

This American Canyon home was the least expensive home sold in Napa County in January. It sold for $515,000. The home is located at 23 Lena Drive.
Source: AJ Hearn, Realty One Group Fox

Dave Horn Unlimited Real Estate Photography

The business news you need
Get the latest local business news delivered FREE to your inbox weekly.

Napa 10 Questions: O’Connell knows How to ADU  Napa Valley Register

Read More...

Montclair Council To Take Final Vote on Accessory Dwelling Units …

Montclair, NJ – Call it a place for Mom. Or a separate living space for a young adult son or daughter. Or an opportunity to offset Montclair taxes with some rental income. Tonight, Montclair Council will vote to finalize an Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), also known as in-law suites, granny flats or guest houses, come in many shapes (apartments above garages or units that are free standing or attached to the main house on the property they share). A typical ADU is roughly 600 to 1,000 square feet, has a bathroom, a kitchen or kitchenette, and, usually, a separate entrance. These smaller units use less electricity and water and are considered more environmentally friendly because they are a low-impact solution to a need for more housing.

Accessory Dwelling Units. Photo:
Wikipedia Creative Commons: (Joiedevivre123321)

Some 1.4 million Americans have added ADUs to their single family homes. ADUs offer an affordable housing option that can keep families together, bridge the gap between when college students live at home before starting a career. They also afford an income stream to homeowners who want age in place by providing rental income. ADUs are also lauded for creating inclusive housing opportunities and more diversity in communities. In 2021, Maplewood and Princeton passed their new ADU ordinances. South Orange is also looking to approve a new ordinance that would allow residential property owners in the township to create ADUs.

Montclair Council can vote to adopt this Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance, a revised version with input from the Planning Board, that was passed on first reading in January.

Montclair Gateway Aging in Place board members Ann Lippel and Frank Millspaugh have been actively involved with Third Ward Councilor Lori Price Abrams to both educate the public and move the proposed ordinance forward. In May, MGAP held a virtual symposium, “ADU: What’s In It For You.”

ADUs are one of the efforts MGAP has supported to help make Montclair age friendlier (you can sign their petition here)

Click here to sign up for Baristanet’s free daily emails and news alerts.

Montclair, NJ – Call it a place for Mom. Or a separate living space for a young adult son or daughter. Or an opportunity to offset Montclair taxes with some rental income. Tonight, Montclair Council will vote to finalize an Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), also known as in-law suites, granny flats or guest houses, come in many shapes (apartments above garages or units that are free standing or attached to the main house on the property they share). A typical ADU is roughly 600 to 1,000 square feet, has a bathroom, a kitchen or kitchenette, and, usually, a separate entrance. These smaller units use less electricity and water and are considered more environmentally friendly because they are a low-impact solution to a need for more housing.

Accessory Dwelling Units. Photo: Wikipedia Creative Commons: (Joiedevivre123321)Some 1.4 million Americans have added ADUs to their single family homes. ADUs offer an affordable housing option that can keep families together, bridge the gap between when college students live at home before starting a career. They also afford an income stream to homeowners who want age in place by providing rental income. ADUs are also lauded for creating inclusive housing opportunities and more diversity in communities. In 2021, Maplewood and Princeton passed their new ADU ordinances. South Orange is also looking to approve a new ordinance that would allow residential property owners in the township to create ADUs.

Montclair Council can vote to adopt this Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance, a revised version with input from the Planning Board, that was passed on first reading in January.

Montclair Gateway Aging in Place board members Ann Lippel and Frank Millspaugh have been actively involved with Third Ward Councilor Lori Price Abrams to both educate the public and move the proposed ordinance forward. In May, MGAP held a virtual symposium, “ADU: What’s In It For You.”

ADUs are one of the efforts MGAP has supported to help make Montclair age friendlier (you can sign their petition here)

Click here to sign up for Baristanet’s free daily emails and news alerts.

Montclair Council To Take Final Vote on Accessory Dwelling Units …  Baristanet

Read More...

State, Bellingham on separate tracks to ease ADU rules

While Bellingham leaders consider loosening rules for accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, a state senator from Bellingham is pushing a bill that would go even further to encourage the construction of backyard cottages on the same lot as single-family homes.

Sen. Sharon Shewmake is the lead sponsor of what is essentially the same legislation she championed in the House a year ago. Senate Bill 5235 would require all but a handful of rural counties in the state to allow at least two ADUs on most urban residential lots. 

Bellingham has allowed ADUs — either attached to the main residence or detached — everywhere except the Lake Whatcom watershed since 2018. But Shewmake’s bill has provisions that are still the subject of spirited debate in Bellingham, or appear to be rejected altogether.

SB 5235 would allow absentee homeowners to build ADUs, effectively doubling or tripling the number of units they could rent on their property. Since January, the Bellingham City Council has been debating the same point: whether to waive a 2018 rule requiring the owner to live on the property if they build an ADU.

At a Feb. 13 meeting of the council Planning Committee, council members signaled they would reject that recommendation and keep the owner-occupancy requirement.

The committee, consisting of three of the seven council members, voted unanimously to maintain owner occupancy on properties with ADUs. This was an advisory vote; a final council decision on the new ADU rules isn’t expected for another month or two at least.

Planning committee member Dan Hammill said during the meeting that he had a change of heart about the owner-occupancy rule. Supporters of the rule have said it would prevent investors from buying up houses as rental properties, further shutting out home buyers in an already overheated real estate market.

“I didn’t really believe that there would be a land run on single-family homes and ADUs by investors and developers,” Hammill said, “but … we are seeing that in other states, like California.”

Shewmake, an economics professor at Western Washington University, said arguments claiming investors would buy up Bellingham’s housing stock “don’t make sense from an economic perspective.”

“Ferndale is not experiencing that at all,” Shewmake said. “If anything, Ferndale went farther than Bellingham has” in relaxing ADU regulations.

Ferndale does not require an ADU owner to live on-site but still isn’t receiving as many ADU applications as it would like, Shewmake said. On Feb. 15, Ferndale announced a promotion giving away Metallica-themed T-shirts to the first 10 people who build an ADU on their property.

“Building an ADU is great for Ferndale,” Mayor Greg Hansen said in a news release about the free T-shirts. “It adds to our housing supply, provides opportunities for rentals or aging in place, and utilizes existing city infrastructure.”

“I think Bellingham should be doing this,” Shewmake said — encouraging ADU construction, that is, not giving away T-shirts. “I think they should be bold in doing away with owner occupancy because we’re in a housing crisis.”

Shewmake’s bill also would allow property owners to sell their ADU outright to a prospective homebuyer — what’s being referred to in unwieldy terms as the “condominiumization” of ADUs. The Bellingham City Council hasn’t even begun discussing that option yet.

While a debate persists in Bellingham over whether ADUs are affordable housing or yet another profit opportunity for investors, in any case they are a small piece of the overall housing puzzle. The city has received about 50 building applications for ADUs per year since relaxing its rules in 2018. Over that same period, it has been processing building permits for 700 to 800 units in multifamily dwellings annually.

Given the small role ADUs play in Bellingham’s housing picture, Hammill questioned whether long deliberations over ADU rules were a good use of council’s time. 

“I think spending this amount of time on something that is very, very low impact, and will never be approaching the impact of multifamily or single-family permits to me is just — it’s not quite a fool’s errand, but it sure seems to look like that on the surface,” Hammill said.

In any case, all of the Bellingham council’s work to adopt new ADU rules could be swept away by Shewmake’s bill or separate ADU legislation, the bipartisan House Bill 1337, if either becomes law.

In fact, ADUs are a small piece of what some state lawmakers are trying to do to bring more density to residential neighborhoods. House Bill 1110, which also has bipartisan sponsorship, would effectively eliminate single-family zoning by allowing four- and six-plexes on lots originally intended for one home.

But Shewmake said both ADU bills currently churning through legislative committees remain important. She asserted that encouraging ADUs benefits individual homeowners more than real estate investors.

“I’m not going to build a 50-unit complex,” Shewmake said. “But I could scratch together enough savings to build an ADU and have an impact on my community that’s otherwise left to the big developers.”

While Bellingham leaders consider loosening rules for accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, a state senator from Bellingham is pushing a bill that would go even further to encourage the construction of backyard cottages on the same lot as single-family homes.
Sen. Sharon Shewmake is the lead sponsor of what is essentially the same legislation she championed in the House a year ago. Senate Bill 5235 would require all but a handful of rural counties in the state to allow at least two ADUs on most urban residential lots. 
Bellingham has allowed ADUs — either attached to the main residence or detached — everywhere except the Lake Whatcom watershed since 2018. But Shewmake’s bill has provisions that are still the subject of spirited debate in Bellingham, or appear to be rejected altogether.
SB 5235 would allow absentee homeowners to build ADUs, effectively doubling or tripling the number of units they could rent on their property. Since January, the Bellingham City Council has been debating the same point: whether to waive a 2018 rule requiring the owner to live on the property if they build an ADU.
At a Feb. 13 meeting of the council Planning Committee, council members signaled they would reject that recommendation and keep the owner-occupancy requirement.
The committee, consisting of three of the seven council members, voted unanimously to maintain owner occupancy on properties with ADUs. This was an advisory vote; a final council decision on the new ADU rules isn’t expected for another month or two at least.
Planning committee member Dan Hammill said during the meeting that he had a change of heart about the owner-occupancy rule. Supporters of the rule have said it would prevent investors from buying up houses as rental properties, further shutting out home buyers in an already overheated real estate market.
“I didn’t really believe that there would be a land run on single-family homes and ADUs by investors and developers,” Hammill said, “but … we are seeing that in other states, like California.”
Shewmake, an economics professor at Western Washington University, said arguments claiming investors would buy up Bellingham’s housing stock “don’t make sense from an economic perspective.”
“Ferndale is not experiencing that at all,” Shewmake said. “If anything, Ferndale went farther than Bellingham has” in relaxing ADU regulations.
Ferndale does not require an ADU owner to live on-site but still isn’t receiving as many ADU applications as it would like, Shewmake said. On Feb. 15, Ferndale announced a promotion giving away Metallica-themed T-shirts to the first 10 people who build an ADU on their property.
“Building an ADU is great for Ferndale,” Mayor Greg Hansen said in a news release about the free T-shirts. “It adds to our housing supply, provides opportunities for rentals or aging in place, and utilizes existing city infrastructure.”
“I think Bellingham should be doing this,” Shewmake said — encouraging ADU construction, that is, not giving away T-shirts. “I think they should be bold in doing away with owner occupancy because we’re in a housing crisis.”
Shewmake’s bill also would allow property owners to sell their ADU outright to a prospective homebuyer — what’s being referred to in unwieldy terms as the “condominiumization” of ADUs. The Bellingham City Council hasn’t even begun discussing that option yet.
While a debate persists in Bellingham over whether ADUs are affordable housing or yet another profit opportunity for investors, in any case they are a small piece of the overall housing puzzle. The city has received about 50 building applications for ADUs per year since relaxing its rules in 2018. Over that same period, it has been processing building permits for 700 to 800 units in multifamily dwellings annually.
Given the small role ADUs play in Bellingham’s housing picture, Hammill questioned whether long deliberations over ADU rules were a good use of council’s time. 
“I think spending this amount of time on something that is very, very low impact, and will never be approaching the impact of multifamily or single-family permits to me is just — it’s not quite a fool’s errand, but it sure seems to look like that on the surface,” Hammill said.
In any case, all of the Bellingham council’s work to adopt new ADU rules could be swept away by Shewmake’s bill or separate ADU legislation, the bipartisan House Bill 1337, if either becomes law.
In fact, ADUs are a small piece of what some state lawmakers are trying to do to bring more density to residential neighborhoods. House Bill 1110, which also has bipartisan sponsorship, would effectively eliminate single-family zoning by allowing four- and six-plexes on lots originally intended for one home.
But Shewmake said both ADU bills currently churning through legislative committees remain important. She asserted that encouraging ADUs benefits individual homeowners more than real estate investors.
“I’m not going to build a 50-unit complex,” Shewmake said. “But I could scratch together enough savings to build an ADU and have an impact on my community that’s otherwise left to the big developers.”

State, Bellingham on separate tracks to ease ADU rules  Cascadia Daily News

Read More...

$2 million grant could ready accessory dwelling units for rentals …

(Credit: Courtesy photo)

Thanks to a partnership between Shelter Island Town and the nonprofit Community Development Corporation of Long Island, up to $2 million could be spent over a two-year period in grants to property owners to create affordable accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on their properties.

Chairwoman Elizabeth Hanley of the Community Housing Board announced the grant Feb. 9.

Community Development Corporation (CDC) President and Chief Executive Officer Gwen O’Shea submitted the application and the Island is one of the municipalities that will  benefit from a $2 million grant.

“You really have been the driving force,” Supervisor Gerry Siller said to Ms. Hanley.

Grants of up to $125,000 are available to qualifying low and moderate income homeowners to bring the properties up to local and State codes and retrofit them to accommodate renters. Those who qualify for the grants will either add an ADU to their property, or make capital improvements to an existing ADU.

The CDC will work with the Town to coordinate the program, which will be managed by the CDC.

Property owners who want to participate in the program would have to apply for grants administered by the CDC,  Ms. Hanley said.

Homeowners who opt to take advantage of a grant have to agree to provide the rental at an affordable rate set by the federal department of Housing and Urban Development. Rentals would be available to those who meet income levels set for Suffolk County.  Occupants must be annually certified to ensure they continue to qualify for an affordable rental, Ms. Hanley said.

In addition, it’s possible a homeowner could apply for grant money from State, County and/or local municipalities if they need to updgrade their septic systems to state-of-the-art nitrogen-reducing systems.

(Credit: Courtesy photo)

Thanks to a partnership between Shelter Island Town and the nonprofit Community Development Corporation of Long Island, up to $2 million could be spent over a two-year period in grants to property owners to create affordable accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on their properties.

Chairwoman Elizabeth Hanley of the Community Housing Board announced the grant Feb. 9.

Community Development Corporation (CDC) President and Chief Executive Officer Gwen O’Shea submitted the application and the Island is one of the municipalities that will  benefit from a $2 million grant.

“You really have been the driving force,” Supervisor Gerry Siller said to Ms. Hanley.

Grants of up to $125,000 are available to qualifying low and moderate income homeowners to bring the properties up to local and State codes and retrofit them to accommodate renters. Those who qualify for the grants will either add an ADU to their property, or make capital improvements to an existing ADU.

The CDC will work with the Town to coordinate the program, which will be managed by the CDC.

Property owners who want to participate in the program would have to apply for grants administered by the CDC,  Ms. Hanley said.

Homeowners who opt to take advantage of a grant have to agree to provide the rental at an affordable rate set by the federal department of Housing and Urban Development. Rentals would be available to those who meet income levels set for Suffolk County.  Occupants must be annually certified to ensure they continue to qualify for an affordable rental, Ms. Hanley said.

In addition, it’s possible a homeowner could apply for grant money from State, County and/or local municipalities if they need to updgrade their septic systems to state-of-the-art nitrogen-reducing systems.

$2 million grant could ready accessory dwelling units for rentals …  Shelter Island Reporter

Read More...

Could more granny flats and backyard cottages be a solution to Salt …

Opening another line of attack on its affordable housing crisis, Salt Lake City plans to wipe away current rules on new accessory dwelling units in favor of a more streamlined design and approval process.

State law already allows ADUs inside single-family homes without city review, but a series of reforms afoot in Utah’s capital would lower barriers for property owners who want to add detached dwellings such as backyard cottages and granny flats.

Under the changes vetted at City Hall for almost a year, building add-on homes would be permitted automatically instead of requiring a public hearing before the city’s planning commission and months of delay. Where ADUs are allowed also would greatly expand under the proposed ordinance, which is heading to its first public airing in early February.

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune)
One of Modal Living’s “small but smart” detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on display at City Creek Center in Salt Lake City in 2019.

Mayor Erin Mendenhall and City Council members are voicing support for more ADUs as the changes take shape, highlighting accessory dwellings as a valuable way to entice more affordable homebuilding and add crucial variety to the city’s depleted housing stock.

But the idea of lowering barriers and allowing new living units in more neighborhoods isn’t as simple as it might seem, especially in light of concerns from residents.

Major differences are already surfacing among council members over the proposal’s relaxed parking requirements per unit and mandates that new dwellings be owner-occupied and barred from use as short-term rentals.

Council member Chris Wharton even described himself as “an evangelist” for using ADUs as a tool to address the present housing shortage, but he warned of potential parking snarls in denser neighborhoods such as the Avenues, Marmalade and Guadalupe without tweaks to the proposed ordinance.

“I can’t support it,” Wharton told recently colleagues, “if it doesn’t have more consideration for those areas.”

‘No actual reason’ for current city approach

(Salt Lake City Planning) Accessory dwelling units would be permitted in a much larger area of Salt Lake City, under a proposed ordinance scheduled for a Feb. 7, 2023, public hearing before the City Council.

The city loosened its zoning to allow ADUs for the first time in late 2018, but applications under that conditional use process have been notably underwhelming, averaging 25 to 32 permit requests a year.

City Hall approval usually takes three to six months and processing costs are an obstacle, according to city Planning Director Nick Norris. None of the ADU requests in the past four years has been rejected, and it’s rare that plans are altered significantly as a result of city review.

“There really is no actual reason to have a conditional use process,” Norris said. “There’s just not detrimental impacts that have been identified that haven’t been addressed by the standards in our code.”

Planning commission members petitioned for the latest ordinance overhaul last February, he noted, after years of watching their meeting agendas fill up with ADU applications.

So the newly proposed rules would make accessory dwellings a go-ahead use on six types of residential lots previously set aside, including properties spread over the city’s foothills and larger-lot single-family properties across Sugar House, Central City, the Avenues, Capitol Hill and elsewhere.

Add-on dwellings would also be permitted in nonresidential areas and commercial zones not used for manufacturing. That includes lots across the downtown core, those located near mass transit stations and properties where duplexes or larger multifamily buildings are already allowed.

The new approach would also be more permissive on the size, height and bulk of detached ADUs. It would ease required setbacks from adjacent yards and include provisions intended to activate nearby alleyways with pedestrian pathways and exterior lighting.

ADUs can be bigger, taller and in more places

In residential areas, the draft rules say an ADU could be 17 feet tall or up to 24 feet with added setbacks, but a unit’s height no longer would be limited by the height of the main residence.

ADUs could be up to 1,000 square feet in size, with that cap sliding up to 1,200 square feet on residential lots that span 12,000 square feet and those located in nonresidential zoning districts. Planning commissioners suggested boosting maximum ADU size in September from 720 square feet to 1,000 square feet — in hopes, they said, of making it more feasible to build family-sized units.

But council member Dan Dugan, whose district includes many east-bench neighborhoods, said he was not in favor of allowing ADUs that large, while fellow council member Alejandro Puy, who represents the west side’s Glendale, Poplar Grove and Fairpark areas, countered that he didn’t “have any concern with that size or going higher.”

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Two homes at The Pines in Midvale, as seen in December 2021. The small Ivory Homes development includes prebuilt accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in each of the homes.

Dugan also raised worries over relaxing rules for off-street parking in some older residential neighborhoods, where homes are often built on smaller streets and lack driveways and garages, leaving them vulnerable to bottlenecks when parking is heavy.

“We’re causing more problems than good,” Dugan said, “by not requiring an off-street parking location.”

The proposed ordinance does require one off-street parking stall per ADU, but it makes many exceptions, including when street parking is available in front of the property or if it is located within a quarter-mile of a transit stop or a half-mile from a designated bike lane.

Other council members, meanwhile, worried some of the parking concessions didn’t go far enough. “Parking stresses a lot of neighbors, I understand that,” Puy said, “but I think we need to go bold on this.”

Will the city keep some ADU review?

Even more basic pieces of the proposed ADU rules are also in debate — and that’s before property owners and the public have weighed in, with a first hearing now scheduled for Feb. 7.

Darin Mano, new council chairman this year, is opposed to requirements that ADUs be occupied by the property owner when the units are built in residential areas. (That doesn’t apply to ADUs in commercial zones.)

The Salt Lake City Council. Top row, from left: Ana Valdemoros; Amy Fowler; and Alejandro Puy. Center: Darin Mano. Bottom row, from left: Chris Wharton; Dan Dugan; and Victoria Petro-Eschler.

“That’s a pretty significant disincentive to building these,” Mano told the council, calling it “the biggest barrier to this helping our housing stock. . . . That means you can either never move, or when you do, you must sell the property.”

Puy agreed, but said his bigger fear was that large numbers of ADUs permitted under a new ordinance would be turned into short-term rentals on online sites such as Airbnb. Other parts of city code forbid short-term rentals, but state law leaves Utah cities with relatively few powers to enforce such bans — and the capital city has hundreds of them.

“We have zero tools right now to enforce our laws, and I will be scared of opening that door,” Puy said, “because without them, this is an incentive to turn the city into ‘short-term rental central.’”

Wharton called yanking the owner-occupied rule “just a nonstarter,” saying it would only worsen problems with absentee landlords “not being responsive to residents as they continue to collect higher rents while providing fewer services and less upkeep.”

Mano responded that with rest of the council against removing owner occupancy, he wouldn’t hold up the ordinance over his own opposition to that part.

Wharton, with support from colleague Amy Fowler, said the city might want to retain some kind of review for each ADU application, although Norris, the city planning director, said that probably would be “a morale killer” for the planning commission.

Residents who were reluctant four years ago to welcome ADUs were reassured at the time, Wharton contended, by the idea that conditional use hearings would take into account their concerns. “We need to give voice to that part as well,” said Wharton, “and the fact that public and neighborhood support for ADUs is critical to their success in Salt Lake City.”

But he, too, said his concerns weren’t worth “drawing a line in the sand” against approving the proposed ordinance as a whole. “I just don’t want to lose people and support of ADUs,” Wharton said, “because of what we’re doing.”

Opening another line of attack on its affordable housing crisis, Salt Lake City plans to wipe away current rules on new accessory dwelling units in favor of a more streamlined design and approval process.
State law already allows ADUs inside single-family homes without city review, but a series of reforms afoot in Utah’s capital would lower barriers for property owners who want to add detached dwellings such as backyard cottages and granny flats.
Under the changes vetted at City Hall for almost a year, building add-on homes would be permitted automatically instead of requiring a public hearing before the city’s planning commission and months of delay. Where ADUs are allowed also would greatly expand under the proposed ordinance, which is heading to its first public airing in early February.

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune)
One of Modal Living’s “small but smart” detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on display at City Creek Center in Salt Lake City in 2019.
Mayor Erin Mendenhall and City Council members are voicing support for more ADUs as the changes take shape, highlighting accessory dwellings as a valuable way to entice more affordable homebuilding and add crucial variety to the city’s depleted housing stock.
But the idea of lowering barriers and allowing new living units in more neighborhoods isn’t as simple as it might seem, especially in light of concerns from residents.
Major differences are already surfacing among council members over the proposal’s relaxed parking requirements per unit and mandates that new dwellings be owner-occupied and barred from use as short-term rentals.
Council member Chris Wharton even described himself as “an evangelist” for using ADUs as a tool to address the present housing shortage, but he warned of potential parking snarls in denser neighborhoods such as the Avenues, Marmalade and Guadalupe without tweaks to the proposed ordinance.
“I can’t support it,” Wharton told recently colleagues, “if it doesn’t have more consideration for those areas.”
‘No actual reason’ for current city approach
(Salt Lake City Planning) Accessory dwelling units would be permitted in a much larger area of Salt Lake City, under a proposed ordinance scheduled for a Feb. 7, 2023, public hearing before the City Council.
The city loosened its zoning to allow ADUs for the first time in late 2018, but applications under that conditional use process have been notably underwhelming, averaging 25 to 32 permit requests a year.
City Hall approval usually takes three to six months and processing costs are an obstacle, according to city Planning Director Nick Norris. None of the ADU requests in the past four years has been rejected, and it’s rare that plans are altered significantly as a result of city review.
“There really is no actual reason to have a conditional use process,” Norris said. “There’s just not detrimental impacts that have been identified that haven’t been addressed by the standards in our code.”
Planning commission members petitioned for the latest ordinance overhaul last February, he noted, after years of watching their meeting agendas fill up with ADU applications.
So the newly proposed rules would make accessory dwellings a go-ahead use on six types of residential lots previously set aside, including properties spread over the city’s foothills and larger-lot single-family properties across Sugar House, Central City, the Avenues, Capitol Hill and elsewhere.
Add-on dwellings would also be permitted in nonresidential areas and commercial zones not used for manufacturing. That includes lots across the downtown core, those located near mass transit stations and properties where duplexes or larger multifamily buildings are already allowed.
The new approach would also be more permissive on the size, height and bulk of detached ADUs. It would ease required setbacks from adjacent yards and include provisions intended to activate nearby alleyways with pedestrian pathways and exterior lighting.
ADUs can be bigger, taller and in more placesIn residential areas, the draft rules say an ADU could be 17 feet tall or up to 24 feet with added setbacks, but a unit’s height no longer would be limited by the height of the main residence.
ADUs could be up to 1,000 square feet in size, with that cap sliding up to 1,200 square feet on residential lots that span 12,000 square feet and those located in nonresidential zoning districts. Planning commissioners suggested boosting maximum ADU size in September from 720 square feet to 1,000 square feet — in hopes, they said, of making it more feasible to build family-sized units.
But council member Dan Dugan, whose district includes many east-bench neighborhoods, said he was not in favor of allowing ADUs that large, while fellow council member Alejandro Puy, who represents the west side’s Glendale, Poplar Grove and Fairpark areas, countered that he didn’t “have any concern with that size or going higher.”

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Two homes at The Pines in Midvale, as seen in December 2021. The small Ivory Homes development includes prebuilt accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in each of the homes.
Dugan also raised worries over relaxing rules for off-street parking in some older residential neighborhoods, where homes are often built on smaller streets and lack driveways and garages, leaving them vulnerable to bottlenecks when parking is heavy.
“We’re causing more problems than good,” Dugan said, “by not requiring an off-street parking location.”
The proposed ordinance does require one off-street parking stall per ADU, but it makes many exceptions, including when street parking is available in front of the property or if it is located within a quarter-mile of a transit stop or a half-mile from a designated bike lane.
Other council members, meanwhile, worried some of the parking concessions didn’t go far enough. “Parking stresses a lot of neighbors, I understand that,” Puy said, “but I think we need to go bold on this.”
Will the city keep some ADU review?Even more basic pieces of the proposed ADU rules are also in debate — and that’s before property owners and the public have weighed in, with a first hearing now scheduled for Feb. 7.
Darin Mano, new council chairman this year, is opposed to requirements that ADUs be occupied by the property owner when the units are built in residential areas. (That doesn’t apply to ADUs in commercial zones.)

The Salt Lake City Council. Top row, from left: Ana Valdemoros; Amy Fowler; and Alejandro Puy. Center: Darin Mano. Bottom row, from left: Chris Wharton; Dan Dugan; and Victoria Petro-Eschler.
“That’s a pretty significant disincentive to building these,” Mano told the council, calling it “the biggest barrier to this helping our housing stock. . . . That means you can either never move, or when you do, you must sell the property.”
Puy agreed, but said his bigger fear was that large numbers of ADUs permitted under a new ordinance would be turned into short-term rentals on online sites such as Airbnb. Other parts of city code forbid short-term rentals, but state law leaves Utah cities with relatively few powers to enforce such bans — and the capital city has hundreds of them.
“We have zero tools right now to enforce our laws, and I will be scared of opening that door,” Puy said, “because without them, this is an incentive to turn the city into ‘short-term rental central.’”
Wharton called yanking the owner-occupied rule “just a nonstarter,” saying it would only worsen problems with absentee landlords “not being responsive to residents as they continue to collect higher rents while providing fewer services and less upkeep.”
Mano responded that with rest of the council against removing owner occupancy, he wouldn’t hold up the ordinance over his own opposition to that part.
Wharton, with support from colleague Amy Fowler, said the city might want to retain some kind of review for each ADU application, although Norris, the city planning director, said that probably would be “a morale killer” for the planning commission.
Residents who were reluctant four years ago to welcome ADUs were reassured at the time, Wharton contended, by the idea that conditional use hearings would take into account their concerns. “We need to give voice to that part as well,” said Wharton, “and the fact that public and neighborhood support for ADUs is critical to their success in Salt Lake City.”
But he, too, said his concerns weren’t worth “drawing a line in the sand” against approving the proposed ordinance as a whole. “I just don’t want to lose people and support of ADUs,” Wharton said, “because of what we’re doing.”
Could more granny flats and backyard cottages be a solution to Salt …  Salt Lake Tribune

Read More...

Editorial: Yes, California scrapped single-family zoning. But radical …

It’s been more than a year since California got rid of most single-family zoning — yet the radical change in policy has been decidedly unradical in practice. A new study found that Senate Bill 9, which allows up to four units on a single-family lot, has barely been used.

That’s not a surprise, despite the angst that preceded the law’s passage in 2021. Some homeowner groups and local elected officials vehemently opposed SB 9 and warned it would destroy single-family neighborhoods. But the law is more likely to gradually change communities by adding a little density and a few more homes over years, not months.

California can’t afford to have housing production move too gradually, though. The state desperately needs new homes built to ease the housing and homelessness crises, so it’s worth examining why more property owners haven’t embraced SB 9. The law permits a landowner to build a duplex on a single-family lot, or subdivide the property into two lots that can each accommodate two units, which could be sold separately.

The study from UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation evaluated 13 cities where property owners seemed most likely to take advantage of SB 9 because of healthy real estate prices and a lot of backyard home construction. But in those cities, a total of 282 applications for SB 9 homes were submitted and only 53 approved.

For comparison, California cities permitted nearly 20,000 backyard homes, or accessory dwelling units, in 2021, according to state data. (2022 numbers are not yet available, though they are expected to be similar or higher.)

Los Angeles, which was one of the 13 cities analyzed, had the bulk of the SB 9 activity, with 211 applications for homes submitted and 38 approved through November. That is dwarfed by the 5,000 ADU permits approved by the city in 2021.

Why are ADUs booming but not SB 9 duplexes? They’re similar housing types in similar communities, but it’s easier to build an ADU now thanks to multiple state laws passed since 2016 that overruled local requirements for parking, setbacks and other criteria that made it difficult and expensive to build backyard homes. After SB 9 passed, some cities layered on the requirements — in some cases, to discourage duplexes. (Not Los Angeles, which is one reason the city had so many applications.) If lawmakers want to see more duplexes for sale or lease in single-family neighborhoods, they’ll have to pass more laws streamlining the process and overriding local regulations that make it unnecessarily expensive and complicated to build.

The slow progress so far doesn’t mean the law has failed. SB 9 was never going to be a magical solution to California’s housing crisis. It was (and is) an important step to lift restrictive zoning laws that have made it too hard to build enough homes to keep up with population growth.

Two-thirds of residential land in California had been restricted to single-family homes and had been off-limits to the development of backyard houses, duplexes and fourplexes that would be more affordable to middle-income and low-income renters and buyers. ADU laws and SB 9 removed those restrictions, opening up neighborhoods to more housing opportunities.

California’s housing shortage was created over decades. Reforming the housing laws that fueled the crisis will take time as well. It’s an essential culture shift for the future of the state that is not going to happen in just a year. Give SB 9 time to work.

It’s been more than a year since California got rid of most single-family zoning — yet the radical change in policy has been decidedly unradical in practice. A new study found that Senate Bill 9, which allows up to four units on a single-family lot, has barely been used.
That’s not a surprise, despite the angst that preceded the law’s passage in 2021. Some homeowner groups and local elected officials vehemently opposed SB 9 and warned it would destroy single-family neighborhoods. But the law is more likely to gradually change communities by adding a little density and a few more homes over years, not months.
California can’t afford to have housing production move too gradually, though. The state desperately needs new homes built to ease the housing and homelessness crises, so it’s worth examining why more property owners haven’t embraced SB 9. The law permits a landowner to build a duplex on a single-family lot, or subdivide the property into two lots that can each accommodate two units, which could be sold separately.

The study from UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation evaluated 13 cities where property owners seemed most likely to take advantage of SB 9 because of healthy real estate prices and a lot of backyard home construction. But in those cities, a total of 282 applications for SB 9 homes were submitted and only 53 approved.
For comparison, California cities permitted nearly 20,000 backyard homes, or accessory dwelling units, in 2021, according to state data. (2022 numbers are not yet available, though they are expected to be similar or higher.)

Los Angeles, which was one of the 13 cities analyzed, had the bulk of the SB 9 activity, with 211 applications for homes submitted and 38 approved through November. That is dwarfed by the 5,000 ADU permits approved by the city in 2021.
Why are ADUs booming but not SB 9 duplexes? They’re similar housing types in similar communities, but it’s easier to build an ADU now thanks to multiple state laws passed since 2016 that overruled local requirements for parking, setbacks and other criteria that made it difficult and expensive to build backyard homes. After SB 9 passed, some cities layered on the requirements — in some cases, to discourage duplexes. (Not Los Angeles, which is one reason the city had so many applications.) If lawmakers want to see more duplexes for sale or lease in single-family neighborhoods, they’ll have to pass more laws streamlining the process and overriding local regulations that make it unnecessarily expensive and complicated to build.

The slow progress so far doesn’t mean the law has failed. SB 9 was never going to be a magical solution to California’s housing crisis. It was (and is) an important step to lift restrictive zoning laws that have made it too hard to build enough homes to keep up with population growth.
Two-thirds of residential land in California had been restricted to single-family homes and had been off-limits to the development of backyard houses, duplexes and fourplexes that would be more affordable to middle-income and low-income renters and buyers. ADU laws and SB 9 removed those restrictions, opening up neighborhoods to more housing opportunities.
California’s housing shortage was created over decades. Reforming the housing laws that fueled the crisis will take time as well. It’s an essential culture shift for the future of the state that is not going to happen in just a year. Give SB 9 time to work.
Editorial: Yes, California scrapped single-family zoning. But radical …  Los Angeles Times

Read More...

Disputed ADU change clears councilors 5-4 | Community …

SALEM — A set of changes to the city’s “accessory dwelling unit” rules took one further step toward becoming final at a City Council meeting Thursday night, one by the slimmest margin possible.

The City Council, meeting as a “Committee of the Whole,” voted 5 members to 4 to end an owner-occupancy requirement on rules governing the creation of the units. The vote is a recommendation for the City Council itself to adopt at its next regular meeting on Thursday, Jan. 26. Four other rule changes were recommended by the body more favorably.

The city’s in-law apartment rules have a storied history. After years of conflict and failure to move the issue forward with a 67% voting requirement, changes to state rules saw the measure pass with a simple majority of six members instead of eight in 2021.

ADU opponents most heavily focused debate leading up to the 2021 vote on the owner-occupancy requirement. They argued that requiring a homeowner to live on the property would ensure those renting units are respectful toward neighborhoods.

But that requirement, and another prohibiting ADUs to be created in detached structures, were blamed by city officials for only six permits being issued for ADUs since the rules took effect. For that, city planners sought their deletion, leading to the votes taken last night.

“We’re changing two years of work we put into it,” said Councilor-at-Large Conrad Prosniewski. “Absentee owners have been a big problem in this city, and when an owner lives on the property, they’re responsible for who lives on the property with them.”

But Ward 3 City Councilor Patricia “Patti” Morsillo argued that the requirement has a discriminatory impact on city housing.

“We really need to think about (comments) labeling renters as a problem or labeling absentee landlords as creating issues in neighborhoods,” she said. “We need to back that up with more than anecdotal evidence, because it’s really harmful. Not everyone wants to own a home.”

That said, Morsillo noted that some developers are trying to build ADUs in newly built homes (which aren’t owner-occupied yet), so that younger families can buy them and have instant access to a revenue stream to make the mortgage more manageable.

Public comment was in favor of keeping the requirement, with two speaking about keeping the rule but one suggesting to revisit it a handful of years later, after the other changes clearing councilors have had a few years to settle.

The recommendations go to the City Council meeting next week. With the body down to 10 members due to Ward 1 City Councilor Robert “Bob” McCarthy serving as acting mayor, a five-to-five vote would mean a measure’s defeat. It remains unclear how Ward 4 City Councilor Leveille “Lev” McClain sits on the issue. He was absent from the meeting and now represents either passage or defeat for the measure on Jan. 26.

Visit bit.ly/3QRwJGJ for more from this meeting.

Contact Dustin Luca at 978-338-2523 or DLuca@salemnews.com. Follow him at facebook.com/dustinluca or on Twitter @DustinLucaSN.

SALEM — A set of changes to the city’s “accessory dwelling unit” rules took one further step toward becoming final at a City Council meeting Thursday night, one by the slimmest margin possible.
The City Council, meeting as a “Committee of the Whole,” voted 5 members to 4 to end an owner-occupancy requirement on rules governing the creation of the units. The vote is a recommendation for the City Council itself to adopt at its next regular meeting on Thursday, Jan. 26. Four other rule changes were recommended by the body more favorably.
The city’s in-law apartment rules have a storied history. After years of conflict and failure to move the issue forward with a 67% voting requirement, changes to state rules saw the measure pass with a simple majority of six members instead of eight in 2021.

ADU opponents most heavily focused debate leading up to the 2021 vote on the owner-occupancy requirement. They argued that requiring a homeowner to live on the property would ensure those renting units are respectful toward neighborhoods.
But that requirement, and another prohibiting ADUs to be created in detached structures, were blamed by city officials for only six permits being issued for ADUs since the rules took effect. For that, city planners sought their deletion, leading to the votes taken last night.
“We’re changing two years of work we put into it,” said Councilor-at-Large Conrad Prosniewski. “Absentee owners have been a big problem in this city, and when an owner lives on the property, they’re responsible for who lives on the property with them.”
But Ward 3 City Councilor Patricia “Patti” Morsillo argued that the requirement has a discriminatory impact on city housing.

“We really need to think about (comments) labeling renters as a problem or labeling absentee landlords as creating issues in neighborhoods,” she said. “We need to back that up with more than anecdotal evidence, because it’s really harmful. Not everyone wants to own a home.”
That said, Morsillo noted that some developers are trying to build ADUs in newly built homes (which aren’t owner-occupied yet), so that younger families can buy them and have instant access to a revenue stream to make the mortgage more manageable.
Public comment was in favor of keeping the requirement, with two speaking about keeping the rule but one suggesting to revisit it a handful of years later, after the other changes clearing councilors have had a few years to settle.
The recommendations go to the City Council meeting next week. With the body down to 10 members due to Ward 1 City Councilor Robert “Bob” McCarthy serving as acting mayor, a five-to-five vote would mean a measure’s defeat. It remains unclear how Ward 4 City Councilor Leveille “Lev” McClain sits on the issue. He was absent from the meeting and now represents either passage or defeat for the measure on Jan. 26.
Visit bit.ly/3QRwJGJ for more from this meeting.
Contact Dustin Luca at 978-338-2523 or DLuca@salemnews.com. Follow him at facebook.com/dustinluca or on Twitter @DustinLucaSN.

Disputed ADU change clears councilors 5-4 | Community …  The Salem News

Read More...

Report: ADU expansion, tax relief among city’s options to promote …

Photo by The Lyda Hill Texas Collection of Photographs in Carol M. Highsmith’s America Project, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division.

Report: ADU expansion, tax relief among city’s options to promote preservation

Friday, January 20, 2023 by

Chad Swiatecki

Preservation advocates want the city to simplify the process for building accessory dwelling units, and use an ombudsman position to help navigate city processes as some of the steps needed to save existing housing stock while helping to address affordability.

Those were some of the conclusions in a recent paper from Urban Land Institute Austin that looked at the programs and problems involved in the preservation movement while demand for local housing continues to surge.

The technical assistance report brought together more than 40 experts including city preservation staff, local business and property owners, planners and developers to make recommendations based on the findings that Austin loses its local character when long-standing homes are torn down.

The report also found demolition and new construction is often an easier and more lucrative option than preservation, noting: “At present, it is often an easier permitting path and more profitable for developers to tear down existing older homes, making way for new construction. The development process would benefit from the intentional alignment and comprehensive cooperation of the various city departments involved in preservation work, ensuring that the reviews and paperwork needed to support preservation efforts are as easy – if not easier – than demolition.”

The ability to create ADUs on the same property as a preservation-worthy home is seen as one of the best tools for the city to encourage owners to hold on to their homes while adding needed housing stock and possibly rental income to offset rising property taxes.

David Steinwedell, chair of the panel that wrote the report, said the city needs to improve and centralize more of its preservation tools involving maintenance assistance and tax relief to make them easier for non-developer owners to use.

“There are existing programs that are underutilized such as the repair program and homestead exemption. However, some existing options, such as ADUs are too complicated or expensive for many homeowners,” he wrote in an email after consulting with panel members.

“If the city grows relationships and trust with communities where displacement is occurring and provides an ombudsman as recommended in the report to help connect residents with programs or walk through complicated processes, that will help expand utilization of existing opportunities.”

Steinwedell’s group sees increased use of a community land trust as well as changes to homestead property tax exemptions as two possible remedies for property owners being priced out of their homes by rising property values. Further changes to assessment practices – including basing assessments on property rental income – would require the cooperation of Travis County and may be difficult to orchestrate.

Another problem the panel found was persistent distrust of the city by neighborhood groups throughout the area.

“A surprise was the lack of trust by residents and neighborhood groups in the city to fairly administer the programs. An often repeated fear was that using a city program would trigger inspections that would result in additional work being required that the resident didn’t have the funds to complete.”

Lindsey Derrington, executive director of Preservation Austin, said preservation of homes built before Austin became a boom town helps to keep longtime residents in the area while also creating options for first-time homebuyers who grew up here.

“(Preservation) has to be part of the equation for keeping longtime residents in place and giving first-time homebuyers more options for living in Austin’s central city neighborhoods,” she said. “Our Land Development Code, market forces and development processes make it easier to demolish existing and more affordable homes for newer, more expensive housing. We have to change this dynamic.”

Cara Bertron, a senior planner specializing in displacement prevention for the city, said redevelopment tends to result in denser clusters of homes unaffordable for most residents, while preservation and ADU expansion can help address the city’s affordability problem.

“It’s easy to overlook that many older houses are market-affordable now, so preserving them is an important part of a citywide affordability strategy. In terms of new construction, accessory dwelling units behind existing homes can help to create more affordable housing in the context of existing neighborhoods, especially with more technical and financial support for homeowners.”

Read the full report here:

Download (PDF, 14.27MB)

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.

Join Your Friends and Neighbors

We’re a nonprofit news organization, and we put our service to you above all else. That will never change. But public-service journalism requires community support from readers like you. Will you join your friends and neighbors to support our work and mission?

Photo by The Lyda Hill Texas Collection of Photographs in Carol M. Highsmith’s America Project, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division.

Report: ADU expansion, tax relief among city’s options to promote preservation

Friday, January 20, 2023 by
Chad Swiatecki

Preservation advocates want the city to simplify the process for building accessory dwelling units, and use an ombudsman position to help navigate city processes as some of the steps needed to save existing housing stock while helping to address affordability.

Those were some of the conclusions in a recent paper from Urban Land Institute Austin that looked at the programs and problems involved in the preservation movement while demand for local housing continues to surge.

The technical assistance report brought together more than 40 experts including city preservation staff, local business and property owners, planners and developers to make recommendations based on the findings that Austin loses its local character when long-standing homes are torn down.

The report also found demolition and new construction is often an easier and more lucrative option than preservation, noting: “At present, it is often an easier permitting path and more profitable for developers to tear down existing older homes, making way for new construction. The development process would benefit from the intentional alignment and comprehensive cooperation of the various city departments involved in preservation work, ensuring that the reviews and paperwork needed to support preservation efforts are as easy – if not easier – than demolition.”

The ability to create ADUs on the same property as a preservation-worthy home is seen as one of the best tools for the city to encourage owners to hold on to their homes while adding needed housing stock and possibly rental income to offset rising property taxes.

David Steinwedell, chair of the panel that wrote the report, said the city needs to improve and centralize more of its preservation tools involving maintenance assistance and tax relief to make them easier for non-developer owners to use.

“There are existing programs that are underutilized such as the repair program and homestead exemption. However, some existing options, such as ADUs are too complicated or expensive for many homeowners,” he wrote in an email after consulting with panel members.

“If the city grows relationships and trust with communities where displacement is occurring and provides an ombudsman as recommended in the report to help connect residents with programs or walk through complicated processes, that will help expand utilization of existing opportunities.”

Steinwedell’s group sees increased use of a community land trust as well as changes to homestead property tax exemptions as two possible remedies for property owners being priced out of their homes by rising property values. Further changes to assessment practices – including basing assessments on property rental income – would require the cooperation of Travis County and may be difficult to orchestrate.

Another problem the panel found was persistent distrust of the city by neighborhood groups throughout the area.

“A surprise was the lack of trust by residents and neighborhood groups in the city to fairly administer the programs. An often repeated fear was that using a city program would trigger inspections that would result in additional work being required that the resident didn’t have the funds to complete.”

Lindsey Derrington, executive director of Preservation Austin, said preservation of homes built before Austin became a boom town helps to keep longtime residents in the area while also creating options for first-time homebuyers who grew up here.

“(Preservation) has to be part of the equation for keeping longtime residents in place and giving first-time homebuyers more options for living in Austin’s central city neighborhoods,” she said. “Our Land Development Code, market forces and development processes make it easier to demolish existing and more affordable homes for newer, more expensive housing. We have to change this dynamic.”

Cara Bertron, a senior planner specializing in displacement prevention for the city, said redevelopment tends to result in denser clusters of homes unaffordable for most residents, while preservation and ADU expansion can help address the city’s affordability problem.

“It’s easy to overlook that many older houses are market-affordable now, so preserving them is an important part of a citywide affordability strategy. In terms of new construction, accessory dwelling units behind existing homes can help to create more affordable housing in the context of existing neighborhoods, especially with more technical and financial support for homeowners.”

Read the full report here:

Download (PDF, 14.27MB)

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.

Join Your Friends and Neighbors
We’re a nonprofit news organization, and we put our service to you above all else. That will never change. But public-service journalism requires community support from readers like you. Will you join your friends and neighbors to support our work and mission?

Report: ADU expansion, tax relief among city’s options to promote …  Austin Monitor

Read More...

Town Board tightens up accessory dwelling regulations

Photo by Jason Benavides

Jan. 19. By Dave Vieser. The Cornelius Town Board has adopted new regulations for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) in order to limit the number of such units throughout the town and better control density. An ADU is a dwelling unit on a permanent foundation containing areas for sleeping, cooking and sanitation, separate from and incidental to the principal structure.

Deputy Town Manager Wayne Herron noted that the current town land code allows the total of all accessory buildings to be up to half of the square footage of the principal building. “This can allow more density than intended which burdens our infrastructure and schools. We have also seen multiple ADUs used for short-term rentals.”

He said the purpose of the new regulations is to clearly define what an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and to limit the number of such units.

Wayne Herron

Details

The new regulations limit the number of ADU’s to one, not to exceed 50 percent of the total property footage, and prohibit the use of travel trailers, campers, recreational vehicles and tractor trailers.

They must be located in the rear yard, and must comply with all setback requirements. ADUs can be located within a principal structure, such as a basement apartment, or detached garage.

The new regulations may be obtained on the town website: www.cornelius.org.

What about existing ADUs?

If the unit exists today, there is no impact from these new regulations. They will only apply to new units going forward from the date of the adoption, which was Jan. 17, 2023.

Photo by Jason Benavides

Jan. 19. By Dave Vieser. The Cornelius Town Board has adopted new regulations for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) in order to limit the number of such units throughout the town and better control density. An ADU is a dwelling unit on a permanent foundation containing areas for sleeping, cooking and sanitation, separate from and incidental to the principal structure.

Deputy Town Manager Wayne Herron noted that the current town land code allows the total of all accessory buildings to be up to half of the square footage of the principal building. “This can allow more density than intended which burdens our infrastructure and schools. We have also seen multiple ADUs used for short-term rentals.”

He said the purpose of the new regulations is to clearly define what an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and to limit the number of such units.

Wayne Herron

Details

The new regulations limit the number of ADU’s to one, not to exceed 50 percent of the total property footage, and prohibit the use of travel trailers, campers, recreational vehicles and tractor trailers.

They must be located in the rear yard, and must comply with all setback requirements. ADUs can be located within a principal structure, such as a basement apartment, or detached garage.

The new regulations may be obtained on the town website: www.cornelius.org.

What about existing ADUs?

If the unit exists today, there is no impact from these new regulations. They will only apply to new units going forward from the date of the adoption, which was Jan. 17, 2023.

Town Board tightens up accessory dwelling regulations  corneliustoday.com

Read More...