Tulsa allows backyard units by right. Your covenant still does not
Tulsa allows backyard units by right. Your covenant still does not
2026-09-15 · Oklahoma · Regulation
Two Oklahoma cities now permit accessory dwelling units broadly, and neither will lift a finger about the covenant that forbids them. Oklahoma has enacted no statewide ADU law and no preemption of association authority, so the declaration remains the only thing standing in the way — and the only body that can enforce it is the association.
Tulsa
Tulsa's accessory dwelling provision is § 45.031, amended by Ordinance No. 25656 on September 10, 2025. Where they are allowed, at § 45.031(D)(1):
“Accessory dwelling units are allowed by special exception in RE, RS, AG, and AG-R districts. Accessory dwelling units are allowed by right in all other districts when accessory to a household living use.”1
The stated purpose, at § 45.031(B)(1), is to “Accommodate new housing units while preserving the character of existing neighborhoods”; allow “efficient use of the city's existing housing stock and infrastructure”; provide options responding to “varying income levels, changing household sizes and lifestyle needs”; and give residents — “particularly seniors, single parents, and empty-nesters” — a means to remain in their homes and obtain “extra income, security, companionship and assistance.”
The ordinance is silent on private restrictions. Combined with the City's published position that “City of Tulsa Code Officers are unable to enforce neighborhood covenants,” the answer in Tulsa is: permitted by right in many districts whatever a covenant says, and the covenant is the association's problem alone.
Owasso
Owasso lists “Accessory Dwelling Unit — All R Districts” — permitted by right in every residential district — and writes the disclaimer directly into the ADU section itself at § 4.6.8: “Some neighborhoods may have restrictive covenants prohibiting accessory dwelling units. The City does not enforce local private covenants” and leaves owners to verify whether accessory dwellings are allowed in their neighborhoods.2
Oklahoma City is narrower, and gates on a plan typology
OKC's accessory dwelling provision at § 59-9350.2.1 is not a by-right rule. It applies where “(A) The site is located in the Urban Medium (UM), or Urban High (UH) Land Use Typology Area as identified and defined in… the comprehensive plan.”
Its only private-instrument limit is a planned unit development, not a covenant. § 59-9350.2.1(B) permits an accessory dwelling where the site is zoned R-1, or NC, R-2, R-3 or R-4 and occupied by a single-family structure, “provided however, an Accessory Dwelling shall not be allowed if the site is within a Historic Landmark Overlay District, or the site is zoned in a SPUD or PUD and the use was not specifically permitted by the SPUD or PUD.”
There is also an interlock with short-term rentals worth knowing, at (G)(2): accessory dwellings “shall only be used for Home Sharing/Short Term Rental… if the Accessory Dwelling is located on the same parcel as the host's primary residence and the host's primary residence is occupied by the host at the time of the rental,” and a special exception must still be obtained.
Other OKC standards: one per parcel; one family per accessory dwelling; addressed separately from the principal dwelling; “The Accessory Dwelling shall not be divided from the property ownership of the Principal Dwelling”; manufactured homes prohibited; and total floor area not to exceed 950 square feet.
OKC's posture therefore splits. Its short-term rental article yields expressly to covenants and lets the Board of Adjustment weigh one as a ground for denial. Its ADU provision says nothing about covenants at all.
What the conditions actually are, where they exist
Owasso's conditions are structural and short: “a. Said structure shall adhere to all current Building Code requirements; b. Only one (1) such structure shall be allowed per Lot of Record; c. There must be one (1) off-street parking space provided; d. No Building Permit shall be issued for a residential accessory dwelling unit unless there is a principal residential structure on the property; and e. No structure shall be placed on any utility easement or within any public right-of-way.”
Tulsa's design controls are more prescriptive: entrances may not face the nearest side or rear property line absent an alley or street; the unit “must be located at least 10 feet behind the principal building”; the exterior finish “must be the same or visually match in type, size and placement, the exterior finish material of the principal building”; roof pitch “must be the same as the predominant roof pitch of the principal building”; and the accessory-building size maximum “is increased by 500 square feet.”
Notice how closely Tulsa's design conditions track what an architectural committee would impose anyway. The conflict between a city ADU ordinance and a covenant is rarely about appearance. It is about whether a second dwelling exists at all.
What a board can do
Read your declaration for what it actually prohibits. “One single-family dwelling per lot” is a different restriction from “no structure without architectural approval,” which is different again from a restriction on occupancy or on separate kitchens. Which clause you have determines what you can enforce.
Expect the permit to issue. In Tulsa and Owasso the city will not check your covenant, and a permit is not a defence for the owner but it is also not a violation the city will act on.
Decide your position before the foundation is poured. An association that objects after construction is asking a court to order removal — which Oklahoma courts do grant on a clear covenant, as an association obtained in 2025 against an owner who buried a 500-gallon propane tank after being refused permission. But it is a far larger fight than a letter in week one.
If you want to permit them, say so on your own terms. A board that expects ADUs to arrive is better off adopting a written standard — size, placement, parking, appearance, and whether the unit may be rented separately — than enforcing a prohibition inconsistently.
The state-level picture
Worth stating plainly, because it is the thing most often assumed wrong: Oklahoma has passed nothing on accessory dwelling units. A citation sweep of both sessions of the 60th Legislature returns zero enacted ADU measures. Unlike California or Colorado, Oklahoma has enacted no statute touching an association's authority over accessory dwellings. Zoning remains entirely local, and a municipal approval does not override a recorded covenant anywhere in this state.
The one place the subject is moving is the building code. The Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission has an Affordable Housing and Consolidated Dwellings committee examining amendments to the residential, building, existing-building and fire codes “to better address consolidated dwellings and affordable housing.” That is a construction-standards conversation, not a covenant one.
What to watch next
What Tulsa Ordinance No. 25656 actually changed in § 45.031 on September 10, 2025. The codified text carries only the consolidated version and the history line, so the substance of the amendment is not visible without pulling the ordinance from the city clerk — and a change to where ADUs are allowed by right is the sort of thing an association would want to know about its own district.
Related Oklahoma HOA Topics
Stay on top of Oklahoma HOA law
Every week: new Oklahoma legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.