I am thrilled with this ordinance/ it's about time Phoenix. However, as a Designer that works a lot in Historic Districts, I feel strongly that the language listed for the ADU to match the appearance of the existing home should be amended. I feel it goes against the national standards. It can be compatible yet distinguishable. We don't want a false sense of history. Designers should be free to design with materials form the current era; as the national standards indicate.
As a resident of District 3, I fully support this ordinance. We need more housing options in our city and I'm glad that the council is considering this.
As a resident of a single family dwelling, I support this ordinance. While I may never build an ADU on property, homeowners should have the freedom to do so. This ordinance alone will not solve the housing affordability but can help. The affordability crisis we are in hurts the elderly, poor, and disabled the most. Building ADUs allows people like the elderly and disabled to live semi independently while still having the support of family nearby. It will also increase the housing supply.
Casitas and ADUs are a great solution to be engaging and utilizing during the current housing shortage and rent crisis. I look forward to the legalization of housing styles that area legal in cities all across the valley already.
As a Phoenix-based residential architect, I strongly support this text amendment. My one concern is the language proposed in Section 706 A (3). The plain language sounds innocuous, but imagine you've purchased the worst house on the block as a step up into a better neighborhood. Maybe a cheap 1978 "builder grade" home, or a very questionably designed 2005 fix & flip. Why would we force owners to match that? Please allow homeowners the freedom to design beautiful projects that they dream about.
As a resident of a single family dwelling/neighborhood, I oppose this ordinance! This will not solve the housing problem, it will destroy the so called single dwelling neighborhoods. This is already happening, investors are buying these properties and permits are being issued for so called"casitas" that are being rented out. Investors aren't living in these homes and family members aren't living in the "casitas." We already have too many people/cars in a family dwelling this will make it worse!
I fully support this ordinance as a measure to increasing housing supply and density. As other comments have pointed out, Section 706A.3.a and 706A.3.b should be reconsidered as this will unnecessarily burden property owners.
As a design professional & zoning commissioner, I support the new ADU ordinance. However, I believe that per Section 706.A.3.a/b you are limiting the property owners' ability to create a unique environment as they wish. Based on many years experience, I believe most will organically choose to match the architecture, but some won't. What about future remodels - would both structures be required to be updated? HOAs take care of this, no need to enforce when not in an HOA neighborhood.
As a professional in the field, I completely support the adoption of this ordinance to allow for accessory dwelling units and increase housing and density in the City. However, I do not agree with the portion of the proposed text for Section 706A.3.a and 706A.3.b requiring that the ADU be integrated into the design of the primary dwelling unit and shall have complimentary design, materials, and colors as the primary unit. Building codes and ordinances should not decide appearances.
As an Architect in the city, I wholeheartedly support the amendment, with one caveat. The language regarding the ADU being of complementary style or material to the primary residence. This is bringing arbitrary interpretation into the process and commercial pre-application style language into single family residential processes and will likely create undue burden on the process and homeowners.
I would like to express emphatic support for adopting Ordinance G-7160 - Accessory Dwelling Units - Z-TA-5-23-Y, though I caution that while certainly a drop in the bucket of our affordable housing crisis, it is only a drop and actually affordable, high-density housing must still be a priority. Still, this is a positive action and I am glad to see it happening.
Phoenix Community Alliance supports the proposed revisions to the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) text amendment. Proposed changes will allow more individuals greater access to housing. This is a tangible first step in addressing the current housing shortage in Phoenix.
Patrick McDaniel
Advocacy Director
Phoenix Community Alliance
ADU’s use can be adapted for different household types, income levels, employment situations and stages of life. ADUs offer young people entry-level housing choices. ADUs provide empty nesters and others with the option of moving into a smaller space. ADUs offer a way to include smaller, relatively affordable homes in established neighborhoods with minimal visual impact and without adding to an area’s sprawl. ADU's are the lowest hanging fruit to increase density and create affordable housing.
The Manufactured Housing Industry of Arizona supports - Manufactured housing is a fraction of the cost of site-built homes. Estimates are that they are 50-65% the cost of a site-built home. Not only are manufactured homes more affordable, but they are also environmentally sustainable. Site-built projects tend to have a garbage dumpster next to them the entirety of the project as manufactured homes are built in climate-controlled factories with maximum material efficiencies and limited waste.
I am thrilled with this ordinance/ it's about time Phoenix. However, as a Designer that works a lot in Historic Districts, I feel strongly that the language listed for the ADU to match the appearance of the existing home should be amended. I feel it goes against the national standards. It can be compatible yet distinguishable. We don't want a false sense of history. Designers should be free to design with materials form the current era; as the national standards indicate.
I support the ADU proposal
As a resident of District 3, I fully support this ordinance. We need more housing options in our city and I'm glad that the council is considering this.
As a resident of a single family dwelling, I support this ordinance. While I may never build an ADU on property, homeowners should have the freedom to do so. This ordinance alone will not solve the housing affordability but can help. The affordability crisis we are in hurts the elderly, poor, and disabled the most. Building ADUs allows people like the elderly and disabled to live semi independently while still having the support of family nearby. It will also increase the housing supply.
Casitas and ADUs are a great solution to be engaging and utilizing during the current housing shortage and rent crisis. I look forward to the legalization of housing styles that area legal in cities all across the valley already.
As a Phoenix-based residential architect, I strongly support this text amendment. My one concern is the language proposed in Section 706 A (3). The plain language sounds innocuous, but imagine you've purchased the worst house on the block as a step up into a better neighborhood. Maybe a cheap 1978 "builder grade" home, or a very questionably designed 2005 fix & flip. Why would we force owners to match that? Please allow homeowners the freedom to design beautiful projects that they dream about.
As a resident of a single family dwelling/neighborhood, I oppose this ordinance! This will not solve the housing problem, it will destroy the so called single dwelling neighborhoods. This is already happening, investors are buying these properties and permits are being issued for so called"casitas" that are being rented out. Investors aren't living in these homes and family members aren't living in the "casitas." We already have too many people/cars in a family dwelling this will make it worse!
I fully support this ordinance as a measure to increasing housing supply and density. As other comments have pointed out, Section 706A.3.a and 706A.3.b should be reconsidered as this will unnecessarily burden property owners.
As a design professional & zoning commissioner, I support the new ADU ordinance. However, I believe that per Section 706.A.3.a/b you are limiting the property owners' ability to create a unique environment as they wish. Based on many years experience, I believe most will organically choose to match the architecture, but some won't. What about future remodels - would both structures be required to be updated? HOAs take care of this, no need to enforce when not in an HOA neighborhood.
As a professional in the field, I completely support the adoption of this ordinance to allow for accessory dwelling units and increase housing and density in the City. However, I do not agree with the portion of the proposed text for Section 706A.3.a and 706A.3.b requiring that the ADU be integrated into the design of the primary dwelling unit and shall have complimentary design, materials, and colors as the primary unit. Building codes and ordinances should not decide appearances.
As an Architect in the city, I wholeheartedly support the amendment, with one caveat. The language regarding the ADU being of complementary style or material to the primary residence. This is bringing arbitrary interpretation into the process and commercial pre-application style language into single family residential processes and will likely create undue burden on the process and homeowners.
I would like to express emphatic support for adopting Ordinance G-7160 - Accessory Dwelling Units - Z-TA-5-23-Y, though I caution that while certainly a drop in the bucket of our affordable housing crisis, it is only a drop and actually affordable, high-density housing must still be a priority. Still, this is a positive action and I am glad to see it happening.
Phoenix Community Alliance supports the proposed revisions to the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) text amendment. Proposed changes will allow more individuals greater access to housing. This is a tangible first step in addressing the current housing shortage in Phoenix.
Patrick McDaniel
Advocacy Director
Phoenix Community Alliance
ADU’s use can be adapted for different household types, income levels, employment situations and stages of life. ADUs offer young people entry-level housing choices. ADUs provide empty nesters and others with the option of moving into a smaller space. ADUs offer a way to include smaller, relatively affordable homes in established neighborhoods with minimal visual impact and without adding to an area’s sprawl. ADU's are the lowest hanging fruit to increase density and create affordable housing.
The Manufactured Housing Industry of Arizona supports - Manufactured housing is a fraction of the cost of site-built homes. Estimates are that they are 50-65% the cost of a site-built home. Not only are manufactured homes more affordable, but they are also environmentally sustainable. Site-built projects tend to have a garbage dumpster next to them the entirety of the project as manufactured homes are built in climate-controlled factories with maximum material efficiencies and limited waste.
Phoenix needs more affordable housing options in all shapes and sizes. This is a needed change to allow for more housing using less space.