Columbus City Council held a public hearing on proposed changes to the cityzoning code that would recognize accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as an allowed housing type across residential districts and remove many variance requirements.

Council Member Otto Beatty, sponsor of the ordinance, said the draft would amend Title 33 (to be carried into Title 34 in the zoning recodification) to "allow accessory dwelling units in conjunction with the principal dwelling unit or an apartment building in all residential zoning districts subject to certain guidelines regarding the allowable number of ADUs, the size, the height, and the location." He set the ordinancefirst reading for Nov. 17 and the final reading for Nov. 24.

The Department of Building and Zoning Services described the proposal in detail. Tony Celebrizzi, deputy director, and Christina Palmer of the residential zoning clearance section defined ADUs as "a secondary residential unit that provides complete living facilities" and described three common types: interior conversions, attached additions and detached units (often over garages). Palmer said proposed standards would require ADUs to be clearly accessory and subordinate, not to exceed 65 percent of the primary dwellingfloor area or 1,000 square feet (whichever is greater), and not to be taller than the principal building. Historic-district ADUs would still require a certificate of appropriateness, and HOA restrictions would remain enforceable.

Supporters at the hearing said ADUs are one practical tool to add housing supply and to help families and older residents. Jessica Klinger, a former council staffer who testified about living in a carriage-house ADU, said her experience "helped me achieve my dreams," enabling her to attend graduate school and later create stability for her family. Michael Wilkos of United Way of Central Ohio said the lack of rental supply is lengthening shelter stays and raising rents: "The number 1 reason we cannot get people out of shelter, there are no rental units to move people into," he said, noting local rent growth and vacancy trends that put pressure on housing costs.

Advocates from the Affordable Housing Alliance of Central Ohio and neighborhood coalitions highlighted outreach work and a series of ADU "sprints" aimed at design and financing solutions. Anate Kasongo said 52,000 families in Franklin County are severely cost-burdened and that 83 percent of survey respondents supported allowing ADUs; the sponsoring office reported that 81 percent of the 60-day public comment respondents supported ADUs citywide.

Opponents raised concerns about investor activity, neighborhood character, environmental impacts and enforcement. Joe Motil argued ADUs would "pad" developer and investor returns, risk tree loss and increase stormwater runoff, and said he opposed detached ADUs that could be visible from neighbors' backyards: "I don't want to look out my backyard and see my neighbor's 25 foot tall, 700 to a thousand square foot apartment building," he told the council. He urged strict limits including owner-occupancy requirements.

Council staff and witnesses repeatedly noted other implementation barriers beyond zoning: financing for homeowners, alley and utility upgrades, permitting costs and contractor availability. Several speakers urged targeted programs to make ADUs accessible to lower-income and legacy homeowners, including the Convergence Columbus initiative that has worked on financing and outreach strategies.

The proposal addresses two recurring policy questions in the public record: whether ADUs should be required to provide off-street parking and whether ADUs should be allowed as short-term rentals. Beatty said the draft does not require an additional off-street parking space, noting cities that add parking mandates often slow ADU adoption; on short-term rentals he said the city is reviewing the existing short-term-rental registry and regulations and that further regulation could follow.

No vote was taken at the hearing. Council Member Beatty closed the meeting by urging continued community engagement and noting the ordinance is a first step that can be refined later if unintended consequences appear.

What happens next: the ordinance is scheduled for a first reading on Nov. 17 and a final reading and vote on Nov. 24. If enacted, the zoning changes would eliminate the need for variances in many cases but not remove building-code permits, historic-district approvals or HOA limitations.