The Kodiak Island Borough is looking to update its local rules regarding accessory dwelling units. These extra housing units could be used to ease the housing crisis, but some worry it could instead grow the short term rental market.
Accessory dwelling units, also known as ADUs, are small, secondary residences that can be attached to an existing home or stand alone on the same lot as another unit. They’ve been growing in popularity across Alaska the last few years, in communities like Anchorage, Petersburg, and Sitka. They have also been widespread in parts of the Lower 48 like California.
Advocates say they can reduce overcrowding and add to the available housing units in Alaska communities.
The Kodiak Island Borough has its own ordinance on the books allowing for these additional housing units which has been in place since at least 2019. But over the last year the Borough’s Planning and Zoning Commission has been discussing ways to update those regulations.
“I can say probably in 2019 when the current Borough ordinance was approved, it wasn’t as big of an issue as it is today in relation to the housing crisis," Chris French, the Community Development Director for the Kodiak Island Borough said.
According to the Kodiak Island Borough Housing Needs Assessment from 2022, about 175 ADUs already exist in the "Kodiak Road System".
He said the municipality is focused on making ADUs more in line with statewide standards which are based off the Alaska Municipal League’s guidelines, the ADUs and don'ts. And the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its proposed amendments for the Borough Assembly to consider, after holding multiple meetings and public hearings on the subject since May of 2023.
Some of the group’s proposed changes include increasing the maximum size of ADUs to 800 square feet, requiring the unit to be located to the side or behind the principal structure, and relaxing the parking space requirements from three spaces to two spaces within the Borough, and one space within the City.
“At least the [planning and zoning] commission’s reasoning behind having a lesser requirement in the city is because of more on-street parking, where you don’t really have that particular ability to have on-street parking in the borough," French explained.
The owner of the ADU within the borough would not have to live on the property if the suggested ordinance is adopted. It would also institute a cap of only one ADU permitted per lot.
But even if a homeowner doesn’t meet these requirements, they could still go through the conditional use permit process to potentially build an ADU on their property anyways. This is a public process that can take months and requires the Planning and Zoning Commission’s approval. French said he believes that process will help deter a surplus of people from building extra units on their properties, as the conditional use permit involves a public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission making the final decision.
The fate of these proposed ADU changes is still in limbo. But Borough Assembly members have already made it clear they don’t want the majority of these “mother-in-law apartments” to be used as short term rentals.
During a work session on Aug. 29, Assembly member Bo Whiteside expressed concern that there is nothing on the books within this particular ADU ordinance to prevent that from happening. Although he said he supports ADUs in general and believes they can help alleviate some of the pressure on the local housing shortage.
“The only thing I can’t support myself is removing that owner requirement, and that’s simply because I want to deter potential property owners from using that entire property, both a single family home and an ADU, for short term rental, which would just remove more housing capacity from our community,” Whiteside stated.
But French isn’t convinced that requiring the owner of the property to live on site, either in the principal dwelling unit or the ADU, would prevent them from operating the ADU as a short term rental.
“The Assembly could add a requirement that they [ADUs] not be used as a vacation home, which is our current definition that we have in the code, basically for the … a short term rental or Airbnb," French explained.
If that stipulation were added into borough law, that would require the property owner to go through the conditional use permit process if the owner wanted to build an ADU and use it as a short term rental.
According to data from the Borough, out of the more than 100 short term rentals in Kodiak listed in the 2022 housing assessment, roughly a third of those are located within borough limits, outside of the city. The 39 located in Fire Protection Area do not include lodges around the island.
The potential impact of updated regulations on ADUs in Kodiak remains to be seen though. Building costs for these additional units can be prohibitive, especially in rural Alaska, so even with more lenient restrictions, these changes might not be enough to encourage residents to build more housing on their property.
Once the Borough determines the final language of the ordinance and introduces it on the assembly floor, then it will go through two public meetings before going to a vote.
The next Kodiak Island Borough Assembly meeting is scheduled for Sept. 19 but the ADU ordinance is not included on the agenda.
