Should Accessory Housing Rules Be Expanded?

Should Accessory Housing Rules Be Expanded to
Increase Affordable Housing?
By Rob Swennes

Early this year the County’s Housing Commission recommended to the County Board that the rules governing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) be expanded in order to increase the stock of more affordable housing in Arlington. The focus was on single-family zoned neighborhoods, which make up the large majority of residential acreage in the County. This is a controversial topic. Liberalizing the rules covering ADUs could change the character of our neighborhoods significantly in coming years—for better or worse. A closely related subject is what to do about the many hundreds of illegal ADUs that exist already in the County—a problem that the Zoning Code enforcement staff seems unable to handle. The speakers at our meeting will outline many of
the issues under discussion regarding this subject.


Arlington County at present has fairly tight rules regarding when a group of people other than a “traditional family” can live in a home in a single-family-zoned neighborhood. All of the Leeway Overlee area is single-family zoned except for the apartment and townhouse areas along Lee Highway. Currently a home in the County cannot be occupied by more than 4 unrelated persons and cannot have an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) which is a dwelling area with its own kitchen facilities. A narrow exception exists for in-law suites within or otherwise attached to an existing home, but that is about it. No exception exists for ADUs designed for live-in au pairs or for caregivers providing assistance to elderly homeowners.
The ADU proposal recommended to the County Board by the Housing Commission goes well beyond remedying these two deficiencies in the current housing rules. The proposal urges that ADUs be potentially allowed in any existing single-family home in Arlington. Thus an ADU could be installed even if the main motive of the property owner was to increase his income rather than to address a special need for child care or elder care. One of the most serious potential impacts of such ADUs would be on local parking.
The Housing Commission proposal also suggested

that ADUs be allowed not only within the four walls of an existing house, but that a home owner be allowed alternatively to build an accessory building on his lot that could serve as an ADU. Conversion of existing separate garages to ADUs might be one consequence. Some people have expressed concern that allowing an ADU separate from the main home would undercut the historic concept of a single-family neighborhood.
Poor enforcement of the existing limits on separate dwelling units has also surfaced as a related issue that cannot be ignored in this discussion. The matter boils down to whether a home has more than one kitchen thus permitting two “families” to live in the house. The Zoning Office staff is reported to be unable (or unwilling) to secure search warrants even for some of the most egregious examples of housing overcrowding.
If the requirements to get approval for a “legal” ADU are high but enforcement of unapproved ADUs is lax, what is the incentive for a homeowner to bother getting approval for an ADU? In short, this is a complex subject with significant potential impact on us depending upon what parts of the current proposal are adopted by the County.