Asheville council approves UDO tweak to let owners convert existing nonconforming buildings into ADUs without Board review

The Asheville City Council approved a text amendment to the city Unified Development Ordinance to allow owners of existing nonconforming structures to convert them into accessory dwelling units (ADUs) by right, eliminating the need for a variance from the Board of Adjustment.

Planning and Urban Design Director (identified in the record with variant names) said the change is an administrative and process‑oriented cleanup intended to streamline conversions of small, existing structures into housing without changing any maximum size allowances. "When someone owns a nonconforming home, they did not create that hardship," the director said, emphasizing the city did not intend to make substantive dimensional changes.

The amendment does not alter numeric size limits for ADUs, staff said. Sam Star Baum, a planner and the Board of Adjustment liaison, said "there is no increase... nothing is changing about structure sizes" and reiterated current standards: 800 square feet is allowed for an ADU on a parcel under 1 acre, total allowable square footage can reach 1,000 square feet in some scenarios and a larger tier (1–3 acres) allows up to 1,200 square feet. Star Baum said the Board of Adjustment has heard 17 cases in roughly the last 26 months and the median converted structure size was 449 square feet.

Supporters at the public hearing and in staff presentations framed the change as a modest way to expand affordable, smaller units and to help residents age in place. "Aging in place is not just about staying in your home. It's about staying connected and supported," Rebecca Chaplin, associate state director for outreach and advocacy at AARP North Carolina, said in support. Matt Allen of the local board of realtors urged council to approve the amendment "as originally proposed without the inclusion of 7 F," arguing broader by‑right allowances are consistent with the city's Missing Middle Housing recommendations and affordable housing plan.

Council members pressed staff on implementation details. Staff confirmed ADU conversions still require a building permit and must meet existing standards including a required 9-by-18-foot parking space and the ADU setback (6 feet from the side and rear). On short‑term rentals, staff and council reiterated that whole‑house short‑term vacation rentals are not allowed in residential zones (only homestays — where the homeowner remains on site and rents up to two bedrooms — are permitted) and described enforcement tools including code enforcement, online-listing monitoring and complaint investigations.

Planning staff also noted prior review by the Planning & Zoning Commission, which recommended adoption with one negative vote; staff said legal advisers recommended against using appendix 7F for this process change and recommended adoption of the amendment as presented. Council members who raised displacement concerns urged pairing the amendment with neighborhood outreach, anti‑displacement measures and a future Unified Development Ordinance modernization effort.

After public comment the council recorded a motion and second and approved the amendment by voice vote with no member announcing opposition. Staff said the city will continue to review notification practices and pursue additional anti‑displacement work and broader UDO reform in the months ahead.