A housing bill signed by Gov. Katie Hobbs last week drew bipartisan support in the Arizona Legislature, but Gilbert is among the municipalities blanching at how it will affect the landscape.
House Bill 2720 greatly reduces the means of cities and towns to regulate “accessory dwelling units,” such as casitas, on residential properties. Proponents championed it as a win for both private property rights and providing affordable housing options.
“I’m glad the Legislature heard my calls to come to the table to pass commonsense, bipartisan legislation that will expand housing options and help mitigate the effects of rising costs to make life more affordable for everyday Arizonans,” Hobbs said in a statement released after the signing May 21.
That was the same day Gilbert’s Planning Department was set to present proposals at a town council study session to streamline the town’s approval process on accessory dwelling units, or ADUs.
It also planned to revise design standards for ADUs to put them on par with the rest of Gilbert, Planning Manager Eva Cutro said.
That went out the window when Hobbs signed the bill earlier in the day. Now Gilbert will race to revise its land development code to comply with the new law by year’s end, lest a provision kick in that would then allow ADUs on all lots or parcels zoned for residential use without any limits at all.
Gilbert Intergovernmental Relations Director Rob Bohr said the Arizona League of Cities and Towns, Gilbert and other municipalities had lobbied for compromises to the bill that would make it more palatable to the municipalities, but the final version that was passed on to the governor did not include any of them.
The bill signed by the governor allows one attached and one detached ADU as a permitted use on all single-family residential lots, and an additional ADU can be had on lots larger than an acre.
The bill also prohibits municipalities from putting restrictions on long-term rental housing and does not require that the renter be related to the owner. Municipalities also can’t force added parking or require that they look similar to the main home.
“The two big pieces that we had most heartburn over, one was the design aspect and not being able to require some design guidelines, particularly matching with the home, with the single-family home that's on the lot,” Bohr said. “The other big piece being the short-term rental piece. ... We had a hard time understanding how allowing for these to be rented out as short-term rentals or vacation homes, how that really addresses the housing issue that we're trying to address.”
Bohr and Cutro said Gilbert has been lenient in its allowances for ADUs compared with other municipalities, but the new law, which will take effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns, will further loosen that.
“We in no way were trying to eliminate accessory dwelling units,” Cutro said. “We (were) really looking to streamline the process and just to make sure our design standards were on par with the rest of Gilbert.”
Council members at the study session were less than enthusiastic about the news of the bill’s signing.
One provision that prevents municipalities from requiring setbacks of farther than five feet from the property line on the side or back of properties drew the attention of Councilmember Bobbi Buchli.
“I am all for affordable housing and helping the people that do not have a home, but not at the risk of my own family and putting units that are five feet from me,” she said.
Councilmember Jim Torgeson objected to the Legislature trying to run municipalities remotely.
“I'm supportive of people having accessory dwelling units for a myriad of reasons, but to do it in such a manner is really counterproductive for a community,” he said. “Oh, well. I guess it doesn't pay to complain today.”
Cutro noted that a number of other places around the country had lifted restrictions in a manner like Arizona has.
“When we go to planning conferences, we were just in Minnesota and their mayor in their opening keynote said how proud they are that they now have no limits on accessory dwelling units to help the housing shortage,” she said. “When I was in California, I was actually on a tour where they were really stating how fantastic this is and showing us all these lots with multiple units on it. And I was the naysayer in the group like, ‘whoa, I don't think that this is great.’ And they all thought I was terrible.”
The Arizona law does make an exception for homeowners associations that have restrictions on ADUs in their covenants, conditions and restrictions, Bohr said.
Nonetheless, “Laws like this will change the landscape of our communities — all of our communities,” Mayor Brigette Peterson said.
Town Attorney Christopher Payne, responding to a Buchli question on how the town can get rid of this, gave a silver lining.
“What the legislature giveth, they can take away — meaning nothing prohibits at the next session this getting revisited, maybe revised or potentially repealed,” he said. “If there's a lot of pushback from the people of Arizona, maybe the legislature will take another look at it in a future session.”
We would like to invite our readers to submit their civil comments, pro or con, on this issue. Email AZOpinions@iniusa.org . Tom Blodgett can be reached by email at tblodgett@iniusa.org or follow him @sp_blodgett on X.
Most Popular
Comments / 0