Two of the three ADU bills have been voted out of committee, but one essentially picks up pieces of the third.

HB 1660, as introduced, focused only on prohibiting owner occupancy requirements on lots with ADUs, unless the ADU was used as a short-term rental. That provision remains, but the committee has also added several new components to the bill:

• Requiring the housing element of a comprehensive plan to allow for the construction of ADUs within an urban growth area (UGA) and requiring the removal of specific barriers to such construction, including regulations on floor area, impact fees, amount of ADUs per lot, and the ability to “condo-ize” the ADU.
• Removing exemptions in current law that would allow cities to require off-street parking for ADUs within a quarter mile of a major transit center under certain circumstances.
• Prohibiting homeowners' associations, common interest communities, and restrictive covenants from actively or effectively prohibiting ADUs within a UGA.

HB 1711, the incentive ADU bill, also passed out of committee. It did not receive amendments. The legislation would allow “cities and counties [to] adopt ordinances, development regulations, and other official controls which waive or defer fees, including impact fees; defer the payment of taxes; or waive specific regulations” if a binding commitment or covenant ensures that the ADU will not be regularly offered for short term rental. The city or county must also audit for compliance.

Both bills were referred to Rules.