Accessory Dwellings
A one-stop source about accessory dwelling units, multigenerational homes, laneway houses, ADUs, granny flats, in-law units…
Fri, 22 Aug 2025 05:20:41 +0000
en-US
hourly
1
Accessory Dwellings
32
32
27425021
Strong Statewide ADU Reform Matrix
/2025/08/07/strong-statewide-adu-reform-matrix/
/2025/08/07/strong-statewide-adu-reform-matrix/#comments
Thu, 07 Aug 2025 14:30:00 +0000
/?p=14955
Legislative ADU reforms have been advancing at a remarkable pace in 2024/2025, making it challenging for even dedicated observers to track every development. For ADU advocates, this represents significant progress.
The trend of states reclaiming zoning authority from local jurisdictions marks a notable institutional shift. I trace this change back to the humble ADU, which catalyzed California’s statewide approach in 2016-2017. The concept is now spreading and evolving so rapidly that I predict the majority of states will implement preemptive statewide zoning measures to address housing issues—including ADUs—within the next year.
Why Statewide Reform Works
For local zoning reforms to succeed, several conditions must align: a pro-housing majority must be elected to city council, and planning staff must be committed to reversing decades of single-family-exclusive zoning. This combination is simply too difficult to achieve consistently, and I’ve concluded it’s unfair to expect local jurisdictions to shoulder this burden alone.
Even when political conditions favor housing reform, the policy implementation process requires enormous effort. Portland’s Residential Infill Project exemplifies this challenge—city staff devoted five years (2016-2021) and likely tens of thousands of hours to complete this crucial initiative.
Statewide reforms offer a stark contrast in efficiency, typically achieving policy changes within 0-2 years. Beyond speed, scale represents the fundamental advantage. Housing affordability operates as a regional issue, not a local one. Even if one city completely solved its housing crisis through innovative zoning and financing reforms, neighboring jurisdictions would remain unaffected, let alone addressing statewide housing shortages. In the absence of regional governments with statutory zoning authority, states represent the only viable mechanism for meaningful housing reform.
Observing Portland’s glacial zoning overhaul likely influenced Oregon state legislators to intervene through House Bill 2001 in 2019, efficiently extending similar “controversial” housing policies to cities across the state.
Analyzing Strong State ADU Reforms
Given the effectiveness of state-level ADU reforms, they deserve greater attention and analysis.
In partnership with the Mercatus Center, we have studied and cataloged the nation’s ten strong ADU zoning reforms, spanning Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. Beyond this substantial number of states adopting strong reforms in the past year, intriguing variations have emerged within otherwise strong ADU legislation. These differences between states with strong reforms now capture my attention most—over time, we may systematically determine how specific zoning reform policy variations impact ADU adoption rates.
We excluded deeper policy analysis of the eight other states that have adopted only weak ADU reforms. Until primary barriers are addressed, meaningful ADU adoption remains unlikely, making further analysis of those states premature.
The Mercatus Center will publish our findings in September 2025. The paper’s essence can be understood through one comprehensive graphic, which is also available here as a high-resolution .pdf.
I was surprised to discover that Oregon, my home state, doesn’t compare favorably even against ADU reform newcomers like Arkansas, Iowa, and Montana. Come on, Oregon!
More seriously, fascinating policy fault lines have emerged, such as whether states have established dedicated statewide authorities to implement ADU reforms, and whether statutory authority supersedes homeowners association restrictions.
Moving forward, I’m eager to track these laws’ real-world outcomes. How many ADUs are actually being constructed as a result of these changes? Which detailed policies matter most for ADU production?
Come to think of it, we did not inquire about whether States are compelling jurisdictions to report their housing production metrics …we’ll have to add that one in next round.
]]>
/2025/08/07/strong-statewide-adu-reform-matrix/feed/
2
14955
Massachusetts Adopted a Strong ADU Law, but Local Regulations will Still Prevent Them
/2025/01/09/massachusetts-adopted-a-strong-adu-law-but-local-regulations-will-still-prevent-them/
/2025/01/09/massachusetts-adopted-a-strong-adu-law-but-local-regulations-will-still-prevent-them/#comments
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:00:00 +0000
/?p=14928
I grew up with an illegal ADU in my attic in Newton, MA that my mom used to house grad students from a nearby campus. The tenants were like members of our family; they literally walked through the center staircase in our house to access their cute, affordable, attic, studio apartment.
I was elated when Massachusetts recently passed the The Affordable Homes Act, which includes an ADU provision (Section 8 of Chapter 150 of the Acts of 2024), that on its surface, is a strong ADU law, making it the 7th US state to adopt strong ADU laws. These states include:
California
Oregon
Washington
Colorado
Montana
Arizona
Massachusetts
However, upon analyzing the law in the context of Massachusetts’ byzantine framework of local regulations, it’s hard to really see their ADU regulations as strong. This post contains a letter that I have submitting the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, the office that the law charges with developing regulations that embody the law.
In the draft regulations, Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities has done a disservice by deferring to local ordinances on their dimenional standards–specifically their setback and lot coverage standards. Given how onerous these standards are, this deference to the local zoning will undermine the statutory intent.
My hope is that this office will read my letter, and letters like it from fellow ADU advocates, and update their rules to contain clear and objective standards that will apply to all jurisdictions in MA.
More broadly, as other States look at ADU reforms, it is clear that being cognizant of the relative restrictiveness of local dimensional standards is critical to the success of a given ADU law. In the case of MA, jurisdictional dimensional standards are so oppressive, that it will be very difficult for average homeowners to build ADUs, in spite of the strong statewide legislation.
Other states like Oregon do not suffer under such oppressive jurisdictional dimensional standards, so preemptive statewide setback standards are less critical. But, in states like CA and MA, it is in everyone’s interest for the state to lay down the law with specific details on what is and is not a “reasonable standard” for ADU development.
Without further ado, here’s my open letter to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities on their ADU Draft Regulations. (*Incidentally, feedback is due by 1/10/25)
Public Testimony
Introduction
The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC) is not complying with Massachusetts’ new housing law, the Affordable Homes Act with its draft ADU regulations. The Affordable Homes Act states that
“No zoning ordinance or by-law shall prohibit, unreasonably restrict or require a special permit or other discretionary zoning approval for the use of land or structures for a single accessory dwelling unit, or the rental thereof, in a single-family residential zoning district; provided, that the use of land or structures for such accessory dwelling unit under this paragraph may be subject to reasonable regulations, including, but not limited to, 310 CMR 15.000 et seq., if applicable, site plan review, regulations concerning dimensional setbacks and the bulk and height of structures…The executive office of housing and livable communities may issue guidelines or promulgate regulations to administer this paragraph.”
If a local ordinance such as setbacks, lot coverage, or heights, entirely prevent the ability to actually build the promised 900 sq detached ADU, the “Protected Use ADU”, do those local regulations still stand? Under these draft EOHLC regulations, the answer is yes.
By deferring to local ordinances in its draft rules, EOHLC’s is effectively adopting these local standards as their own. These local standards aren’t sufficient for the Protected Use ADU. Thus, the office charged with protecting ADUs, is actually preventing them.
The draft EOHLC regulations as they are currently written, pay deference to existing municipal prohibitions on ADUs in their dimensional standards.
The result of this deference is that ADU law will be ineffective at enabling homeowners to actually build ADUs in MA, rendering the law largely meaningless in many cases.
Instead, the state must set preemptive standards for Protected Use ADUs.
Legal Foundations
The The Affordable Homes Act itself was written to allow people to build ADUs in Massachusetts as stated clearly and boldly in the regulation title “Regulation of Protected Use ADUs in Single-Family Residential Zoning Districts”.
The EOHLC draft regulations themselves state, “71.01: Statement of Purpose (1) St. 2024, c. 150, s. 8 (the Act) amended M.G.L. c. 40A, s. 3 to encourage the production of accessory dwelling units throughout the Commonwealth with the goal of increasing the production of housing to address statewide, local, and individual housing needs for households of all income levels and at all stages of life.”
The deference to municipal dimensional standards is not in alignment with the spirit or stated purpose of the law (Section 8 of Chapter 150 of the Acts of 2024).
Dimensional Standards
In particular, in the draft rules, EOHLCs regulators default to underlying zoning standards. EOHLC staff did not consider that ADUs have entirely different dimensional needs than single family homes and that most MA jurisdictions do not differentiate these, nor do they have a sophisticated codes that recognize these nuances. Local zoning codes in MA disregard ADU geometry altogether, and EOHLC is exhibiting a misunderstanding of market feasibility for the development of ADUs by deferring to these standards.
In this letter, I will illustrate how local regulations in MA are guaranteed to stop homeowners from building ADUs, throttling the ADU potential in Massachusetts by approximately 50%.
In particular, smaller lots in older streetcar suburbs of Boston (i.e. inside of Rte 128) are where most ADUs would normally be built in MA due to infill pressures and inflated underlying land values in the Boston metro area. But, small lots can’t build ADUs under existing local dimensional standards in MA.
Let’s now examine in granular detail how the local dimensional regulations related to lot coverage and setbacks completely undermine the ADU law.
Most Local Dimensional Regulations in MA prevent ADUs
There’s hundreds of local regulations to critically examine, but we’ll arbitrarily pick on Billerica, although it would be just as easy to pick on Belmont or Carlisle or countless others.
We’ll select a property and try to fit a 900 sq ft ADU on it (which the state law theoretically allows homeowners to build), based on local dimensional standards.
Dimensional Standards in Billerica
See page 115 of Billerica’s dimensional regulations for residential properties.
Side yard- 15 ft.
Rear yard- 20 ft.
Lot coverage- 25%
1) Starting with lot coverage, on a 5,000 sq ft lot, if there’s already a 1,000 sq ft home, it would be impossible to add a 900 sq ft detached ADU or anything approaching it (25% of 5,000=1,250 sq ft. 1,250 sq ft-1,000 sq ft leaves only 250 sq ft for anything else).
2) Let’s look at an actual sample property in Billerica.
This lot is 7,405 sq ft.
25% (lot coverage) of 7,405 sq ft = 1,851.25 sq ft of buildable area.
1,851.25 sq ft of buildable area, minus the existing building 1,376 sq ft= 475.25 (1,376 sq ft is based on the interior square footage assessment from the county tax assessor- )
3) 475.25 sq ft is not sufficient for even a 1 BR ADU.
Based on this one lot coverage standard alone, these homeowners couldn’t build a decent accessible ADU for someone to age in place, let alone a couple to age in place.
4) Next, let’s examine how incredibly restrictive these setbacks are for ADUs. It would be geometrically impossible to build an ADU on this lot, or literally any of the adjacent lots in this neighborhood for that matter, using Billerica’s local setback standards. Not a single one of these lots shown here could build ADUs with a side yard setback of 15 ft and a rear yard setback of 20 ft (see image below).
How Rear and Side Setbacks Hinder ADUs
To illustrate how large rear and side yard setbacks hinder ADUs, we’ll now switch gears from text and use diagrams instead.
For the reasons described above, we will use a standard urban lot. This lot is 5,000 sq ft. It is 50 ft wide and 100 ft deep.
We’ll position the typical primary house built on that typical property 20ft from the front street lot line, to comply with typical front yard setback requirements.
Here’s an aerial image of six standard 50 ft by 100 ft lots with typical homes.
This first diagram below shows a typical lot, mirroring the massing of the six lots above. It shows front yard setbacks, the primary dwelling, and a 6 ft fire separation between the primary dwelling and the potential buildable area in the back yard. Notwithstanding setbacks, about 35% of the property is left in which to place a detached ADU in the backyard… somewhere.
In these diagrams, each background grid box equals 10 ft. The diagrammatic property is shown as being 10 boxes long, and 5 boxes wide.
Now, let’s show the potential buildable area once 5ft setbacks have been applied. This buildable area is fairly constrained, but there’s sufficient room to fit a good-sized one-story ADU in any number of possible configurations within the buildable area confines.
Next, let’s show the potential buildable area of that same property if 10 ft setbacks were applied. We’ve suddenly shrunk the potential size of the ADU from over 1,000 sq ft in the diagram above, to only 570 sq ft (19 ft x 30 ft).
As a point of reference, 570 sq ft is just barely large enough to accommodate a reasonable 1BR ADU.
Next, let’s show the potential buildable area if 15 ft setbacks were applied. We’ve now shrunk the potential size of the ADU from 570 sq ft to 280 sq ft.
ADUs of this size make very little economic or practical sense to develop. I’ve visited over one thousand ADUs in the last 15 years, and only seen three ADUs this size.
Next, let’s show the potential buildable area if 20 ft setbacks were applied. We’ve now shrunk the potential size of the ADU to a maximum buildable area of 90 sq ft. Given that that minimum size bathroom is ~35 sq ft, this would leave approximately 55 sq ft for the living space. A queen bed would take up 33 sq ft. The kitchen counter with a fridge, stove, and sink would take up more than 20 sq ft.
There wouldn’t be any space left to actually stand up in an ADU of this size.
Legislation that Defaults to Underlying Setbacks
In the absence of designating prescriptive setbacks that preempt local zoning, legislation allows jurisdictions to use their existing setback requirements for ADUs.
Cities that have given thought to ADUs may have crafted conducive setback requirements for them. However, municipalities often default to the “underlying zoning” standard when regulating side and rear setbacks for ADU on a property. The underlying zoning standards were originally intended to define the buildable area for the primary dwelling.
Since there is ample space even on small lots for developing primary dwellings, it was likely never a challenge to “respect the setbacks”.
The problem is that EOHLC defers to “underlying zoning” requirements for rear and side yard setbacks, which carry over to detached ADUs. And, the underlying setback requirements in MA are very onerous.
Westford, Massachusetts – 30 ft rear yard setbacks, and 15 feet side yard setbacks
Weston, Massachusetts – 20-45 ft rear yard setbacks
Stow, Massachusetts – 40 ft rear and side yard setbacks
These types of setback requirements are unfortunately not the exception; they are the rule.
Indeed, most cities have similarly onerous setbacks unless it has specifically viewed this matter through the ADU developer prism of “reasonable” regulations.
Setback standards are legacy standards for primary homes established by planning staff, long before they ever considered the requisite geometry of building a detached ADU.
Current planners may have never given thought to how their zoning code is institutionally hindering the development of ADUs because they “rarely see ADU applications”.
Connecting the dots?
If a state claims to want ADUs as a policy matter to create more housing choice, it must institute “reasonable” setback standards for detached ADUs.
The State should instead set reasonable, clear and objective standards for ADUs, and cities should have to comply with those standards.
These EOHLC draft rules are insufficient, and are not offering clear and objective, nor reasonable standards for homeowners to build ADUs. Rather, these draft rules are perpetuating classist (and racist) regulations.
Ironically, this draft says that cities should provide “Design Standards” that are “Clear, measurable and objective provisions of Zoning, or regulations, which are made applicable to the exterior design of, and use of materials for an ADU.”
EOHLC is passing the buck entirely by not doing this actual work itself, as the law is clearly intended to do. It has taken a lazy path, and deferred to all existing underlying zoning in municipalities.
To be sure, municipalities (ie. planning staff & elected officials & housing obstructionists) will appreciate this EOHLC draft, of course, because it prolongs and empowers jurisdictions to entirely stop people from building more housing as they have successfully done for decades in MA
But, this was not the intent of the law.
If local regulations were sufficient to foster ADUs, there wouldn’t have been a need for a state ADU law.
Many of the lots inside of Rte. 128, where approximately 30% of the population of MA lives (and where the affordable housing crisis is acute), will not be able to build ADUs, as a result of these deferential EOHLC regulations.
Inder these local rules, many homeowners will be stymied and frustrated by dealing with the confusing text and codes, the restrictive morass of local zoning codes, “death by 1,000 papercuts”, after spending thousands of dollars paying architects, and will throw up their hands in frustration and forget the idea of building an ADU.
In a liberalized ADU market, 2/3rds to 3/4ths of new ADUs are built as detached ADUs; this is what the market tends to create for a variety of reasons.
Given that most ADUs are developed in higher-cost urban areas–central city neighborhoods- the lots that host ADUs tend to be smaller, largely established prior to automobile domination. Conversely, residential properties established in the mid and latter part of the 20th century tend to be larger lots on the suburban and exurban fringe of metropolitan areas.
Based on the cities where ADUs are actually being developed in greater quantities, it is fair to assess that more ADUs are built on smaller urban lots (5,000 – 7000 sq ft) than on larger suburban lots (7,000 – 20,000 sq ft).
When establishing statewide laws that will impact the cities where ADUs will actually be built, it is important that the zoning laws are written such that it will actually allow detached ADUs to be developed in these places. If an ADU law & its regulations do not help achieve that outcome, then they have missed the mark.
Creating Clear Standards for ADUs
With all of that explanation provided, the answers are actually simple.
A “Reasonable” Setback Requirement for Detached ADUs is 5 ft
In practice, most rear yard and side yard setback standards tend to be set in 5 ft increments: 5 ft, 10 ft, 15 ft, 20 ft, etc. And, of those, 5 ft setbacks is the only increment that actually allows for the development of detached ADUs. So, I’m throwing out there that moving forward for the ADUs, the best practice for ADUs are 5 ft rear and side yard setbacks.
Lot coverage standards for ADUs are unenforceable
And as far as lot coverage goes, the State has clearly stated that it wishes homeowners to be able to build 900 sq ft detached ADUs. EOHLC has an obligation to protect the rights of homeowners to build these 900 sq ft detached ADUs on their property.
Thus, the State must set preemptive dimensional regulations that stipulate that any lot coverage standards that prevent the construction of a 900 sq ft detached ADUs are unenforceable.
]]>
/2025/01/09/massachusetts-adopted-a-strong-adu-law-but-local-regulations-will-still-prevent-them/feed/
9
14928
A Condo-Converted ADU Family Compound
/2024/08/06/a-condo-converted-adu-family-compound/
/2024/08/06/a-condo-converted-adu-family-compound/#comments
Tue, 06 Aug 2024 17:35:00 +0000
/?p=14832
Vision for an ADU
When we purchased our single family home in March 2020, the main downside was there was no obvious spot for an ADU. We are fans of having flexible living spaces and like the mission of denser living in Portland’s center. Our house is placed roughly in the middle of our 5,000 sq ft lot and while we could have technically squeezed an ADU in the backyard, it would’ve meant tearing up mature landscaping and losing play space for our kids.
Four years later, we’ve ended up with a family compound and endless flexibility, but it was not the result of some brilliant mastermind plan. We kind of stumbled into this solution, learning as we went, and enabled by Portland’s increasingly flexible zoning rules.
When we bought our house, we initially gave little notice to the 1940s side-by-side duplex rental property next door. We were occupied with the move and managing childcare during the pandemic. One thing that became abundantly clear over the ensuing months is that while we were lucky to have family in town, it would be more amazing to have family even closer…like right next door. Enter: the duplex. The duplex had a detached 2-car garage where we imagined putting the ADU we’d always wanted, just a few feet beyond our backyard property line. If only we could just buy that little garage!
Our neighborhood’s zoning is R5, which meant bisecting the lot was impossible, but luckily the duplex owners were receptive to an off-market transaction for the whole place, and we closed on the property mid-2022. We started work on the ADU shortly after that, and completed our family compound vision in the spring of 2023.
Here’s a bird’s eye view of how it turned out:
We now have family occupying the ADU as well as one duplex unit. The other unit is a rental.
In another convenient bit of luck, a hedge is what separated our property from the one next door, so it’s been simple to create flexible openings in the hedge to allow the kids to go back and forth between family members.
ADU Building
The city of Portland’s Residential Infill Project now allows properties with duplexes to have ADUs, which is what made this whole thing possible. We built the ADU knowing we’d eventually condo-convert the whole property (more on that below), and wanted it to work as a standalone entity. This means it has its own utility connections. We are fans of a more traditional architectural style, which is more consistent with the early 1900s homes that dominate our neighborhood. Rather than matching the mid-century duplex, we designed the ADU to look like a little English cottage nestled between the neighboring buildings.Our architect, Asmund Tweto, made sure the scale and orientation of the cottage suited the neighborhood. As a testament to his skill, people frequently ask how long ago we remodeled the cottage, assuming it’s always been there. They’re always shocked to learn it’s brand new construction.
Stephen Hull was the builder on this project, and we were so pleased with his work.
Total cost – $412k including
Building: $367k
Architecture & initial permitting: $28k
Landscaping & patios: $17k
We went with higher end finishes, European kitchen appliances, extra built-ins, and so on, because it was built for family members. One could save around 5-10% of the cost without all these customizations. Having separate utility connections for the ADU also added to the cost, around $10-15k.
Timeline
Started drafting plans: Nov 2021 (Note: our architect was working off plans he’d already created for my mom’s ADU previously, so we were able to save some money and time)
Construction began: July 2022
Completed: March 2023
The Condo Conversion Process
We ended up using the ADU and the north duplex unit for family members, and renting out the south unit. Once that unit is vacant our plan is to sell it, which we can do because we recently condo-converted the whole property. This will let us recoup the cost of building the ADU.
Because we can’t divide the lot, the only way to sell one unit is to create a condo development. This process converts the duplex plus ADU into a three-unit condominium: the ADU, the north side duplex unit, and the south side duplex unit.
It took 6 months for us, but our lawyer said it can sometimes take up to a year to complete. The process was pretty wild, and we fully had no clue what we were doing. Luckily, our attorney and paralegal (Karna and Deb at VF Law) were pros and led the charge very competently. Everyone living in the units is given legal notice and first right of refusal to purchase their units, and there are mandatory waiting periods which can make things drag out if you don’t have cooperative tenants.Condo Conversion Cost – $26k including
Legal fees: $16k
Survey, reserve study, inspection, OREA and city fees: $10k
It’s not cheap, but the property is unquestionably more valuable when sold as 3 individual units rather than one whole compound, so we try to focus on the big picture.
One complication is that we got a mortgage on the whole property when we first bought it, so once we start selling individual units we will need to pay off the mortgage and look into individual loans for the condos. I know developers who do this professionally typically sell all the units at once, which makes it a little smoother financially.
This also requires a new insurance policy, since now we have to insure the HOA as well as the structures, while individual owners will insure the contents of their units. We wanted to keep HOA fees and bureaucracy minimal, so we put as many items as possible under the control of individual owners and just put the exterior structure of the duplex under management of the HOA. This let us keep monthly fees low: $204/month for each duplex unit and $54/month for the ADU.
We look forward to sharing our ADU on the ADU tour and will be onsite to answer your questions about it!
]]>
/2024/08/06/a-condo-converted-adu-family-compound/feed/
1
14832
Colorado Passed Zoning for ADUs in Urban Areas. What’s Next?
/2024/07/10/colorado-passed-zoning-for-adus-in-urban-areas-whats-next/
Wed, 10 Jul 2024 14:30:00 +0000
/?p=14731
Analysis from a former local elected official and affordable housing champion turned ADU researcher.
By Robin Kniech
(You can jump to the Background on Colorado’s Legislation section below to get right to the new state law and predictions).
Me & ADUs in Denver Leading Up to Colorado’s Legislation
I was called many things during a dozen years on Denver’s City Council. I’ll own the label “houser,” because of my focus on affordability for low-income families. But “ADU advocate” wasn’t one of them.
I’ve known people who lived in ADUs: A young adult in a parent’s property here, a divorcing fellow-elected official there, and now friends managing their own as a rental to help afford their primary home. Yet twenty years ago, as a coalition organizer and equity advocate for a Denver community-based organization seeking to expand access to affordable housing for our lowest income neighbors, I never once thought about an ADU during my work.
In 2011 I was elected to serve as an At-large member of Denver’s City Council. I mostly went about my business as a serious affordable housing champion: creating housing funds, a decade-long journey on inclusionary housing, innovating on homelessness interventions and renter protections. A citywide rezoning in 2010 included standards for ADUs and the city saw a trickle of rezonings and permits in my early years.
I thought about ADUs during Monday night Council meetings. But they lived in the zoning hemisphere of my brain as one-off parcel rezonings. I never opposed them as a form of market-rate housing. I voted for every ADU rezoning I saw. But they didn’t excite me as an affordable housing strategy either.
Until two things changed: First, the pace of ADU rezonings increased, including entire neighborhoods exploring permission to build them. A 2019 comp plan update created clearer support for ADU rezonings citywide. That was followed by reforms to set backs, lot coverage, garage conversion and other barriers that just passed in 2023.
The 2019 Blueprint Denver Plan and its language supporting ADUs.
The map below shows the current status of ADU zoning in the city. All but a third of Denver’s residential areas allow them. The process to expand ADUs zoning to those remaining areas, which will ensure Denver conforms with the new state law, began even before its passage.
From Denver Community Planning and Development presentation to Denver City Council, March 18, 2024.
Second, our public Denver Housing Authority took on a pilot to help low- and moderate-income families build affordable ADUs in heavily Latino and lower-income West Denver communities. The neuropathways between the affordable and zoning hemispheres of my brain formed.
Affordability and equity outcomes from the West Denver Single Family + ADU Pilot Program.
I was all-in for the West Denver Single Family + program (WDSF+), as the pilot came to be known, with its subsidies and rent limits. But with no data at all, at least from our local market, I was skeptical market ADUs would serve households struggling with affordability in my city, one of the most expensive housing markets in the nation when accounting for incomes. In fact, because building ADUs was (and is) expensive, many Denver ADU owners rent them short-term to help cover their loans, an anathema to long-term affordability.
When our governor Jared Polis began hinting at major land use reform to require ADUs statewide in late 2022, most of my peers in local government were opposed on the grounds of local control. I was intrigued.
I waited for the big case-making studies common before big legislation. I’d keep waiting until I decided to write that paper myself earlier this year. Before I did, not a lick of statewide data was available on what we in local government had already passed, who it was serving, the prospects we could expect from a statewide change. I had to dig for myself to learn the prices ADUs were renting for, and to whom, in other ADU reform communities or states. Regular Coloradans had access to no information at all beyond broad rallying cries that ADUs were “affordable housing.”
My full-length paper from May 2024.
Attempts to pass land use reform without showing communities how changes promote affordability, and without actual affordability components to serve even lower-income families, undermines the potential for widespread public support of those reforms. Less public support translated to less political support, first to pass ADU and other reforms at the state capitol (until lessons were learned and affordability funding was paired in a successful 2024 attempt). But more importantly, without broad support it’s harder sustain and implement ADU reform in the actual communities where they are built. I was awarded a Colorado Bell Policy Center Economic Mobility Fellowship to research the evidence and then to broaden understanding for when and how land use reforms like ADUs hold promise for greater affordability. The newspaper column below and this radio interview are examples of sharing the narrative with wider, public audiences.
I was a tough customer. But the evidence makes the case for the potential of ADUs: for some moderate income households on their own, and for more low- and moderate-income households with extra efforts and funding.
Denver Post Perspective Section cover of April 28, 2024.
Background on Colorado’s New ADU Legislation
Colorado’s first omnibus land use reform bill that included state-wide zoning reform for ADUs, SB23-213, crashed and burned at the close of our 2023 General Assembly. But legislative sponsors learned from their mistakes, and land use reform was reborn in 2024 with a package of separate bills. Most included funding for actual regulated affordability or menus requiring local governments to employ affordability strategies, or both.