<body><div><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=1lxqh7_1H2UKsOC00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=1lxqh7_1H2UKsOC00" width="1763" height="1175" ><figcaption>coralimages - stock.adobe.com</figcaption></figure>County residents have testified to the Planning Commission, advocating for the proposed Accessory Living Unit (ALU) zoning ordinance amendment, all the while asking commissioners to do away with remaining restrictions in the name of more affordable housing options.ALUs are essentially separate living areas or a home addition, interior or detached. The amendment would eliminate the requirement for an additional off-street parking space for an ALU, increase ALU occupancy from two to three people, allow an ALU up to 1,200 sq. ft. (or 40% of the house), or an entire basement, allow detached ALUs by right on lots of 36,000 sq. ft. or more, by special permit on lots of 15,000–36,000 sq. ft., with an option to go smaller, offer the Board an option to allow ALUs in townhouses and duplexes, eliminate the separate zoning permit, leaving only a building permit, and remove the owner-occupancy requirement.The Board of Supervisors will hold another hearing on Nov. 17 before a final vote determining ALU regulations.The Coalition for Smarter Growth, whose members testified before the Planning Commission, projected a need for 95,000 new homes by 2035 and concluded that the county’s existing regulations are too restrictive. “In the five years since current rules took effect, only 158 ALUs have been built countywide, and over half of all applications have been denied,” said Becca Dedert, Virginia Housing Advocacy Specialist for CSG, in a media statement.Dedert applauded ALUs and their benefits, arguing that they are an effective way to address the county’s housing needs. “It will take every tool in the policy toolbox to meet our housing needs. This update is an opportunity for ALUs to be a real part of the solution,” said Dedert.She said that ALUs are an “incredibly beneficial” option, offering intergenerational flexibility and “specialized housing needs.” Dedert added that because of their “smaller footprint,” ALUs are among the lowest-cost forms of housing. “Letting homeowners safely and easily build ALUs on their property is one of the most organic and cost-effective ways we can address our housing needs.”CSG stated that it endorses county staff’s “Option 1” recommendations, which eliminate “ongoing owner-occupancy mandates, extra parking space requirements, and recurring permit renewals,” while warning of barriers to turning ALUs into a “functional housing strategy.” Dedert said that the county staff report proposes reducing the by-right minimum lot size for detached ALUs to 36,000 square feet, an improvement over the previous two-acre requirement, although it is still nearly a full acre. “This restriction excludes over 86% of detached, single-family lots, and would lock out almost every homeowner from providing this housing option in our most walkable, transit-oriented neighborhoods,” said Dedert. CSG stated that minimum lot sizes for ALUs are a “regional anomaly not shared by neighboring jurisdictions. Zoning rules, including heights, setbacks, tree canopy, and stormwater ordinances, already sufficiently govern freestanding structures.” CSG advocated for maximizing housing flexibility by allowing ALUs for attached single-family homes by right. “This change aligns with regional and state legislative standards and would unlock ALU options in the townhome communities convenient to Metro stations,” said CSG in a statement. Dedert said that lifting restrictions will allow for a functional ALU policy that “enables gentle infill and transit-oriented development, while addressing our housing goals,” she concluded. “Let’s give Fairfax County residents more housing options.”On behalf of the Mason District Council, Tyler Ray also applauded the benefit of ALUs to the community.“ALUs serve a wide range of important housing needs. They allow homeowners to provide housing for aging parents, accommodate adult children, make room for caregivers, support aging in place, supplement household income, and provide added rental housing,” said Ray.He noted that ALUs can be used effectively in many capacities revolving around these uses.Ray also noted that these uses demonstrate that owner occupancy is not an obstacle to the effective use of ALUs. He said that it is “entirely compatible” with their purpose.Ray said that a homeowner can still live in the principal dwelling while an aging parent, adult child, caregiver, or tenant uses the ALU. He also added that the homeowner can live in the ALU while renting out the principal dwelling. “ALUs can give flexible housing options to families, caregivers, homeowners, and renters without ending the owner-occupancy requirement,” he said. Ray, in advocating for ALUs, enshrined the values of “accountability,” “compliance” and “integrity.” “The Board of Supervisors’ pursuit of expanding the number, size, and occupancy of ALUs must not come without a suitable mechanism for verifying compliance with the standards governing them. A more efficient process may be a reasonable goal, but efficiency should not come at the expense of accountability, compliance, and compromising the integrity of neighborhoods,” said Ray. While supportive of ALUs, Springfield District Supervisor Pat Herrity noted that they can be problematic if not implemented properly.“If done incorrectly, ALUs can cause issues from parking challenges to crowding schools and parks, to detracting from neighboring properties or the established character of the street or neighborhood and have the unintended impact of essentially changing the zoning for the neighborhood,” he said.Herrity said the county should strike a balance by allowing additional housing that fits with existing homes and neighborhoods without altering their character. He argued that interior and basement conversions generally achieve that goal with minimal neighborhood impact, while exterior or detached additions can upset that balance and, particularly in the Occoquan Watershed, may increase impervious surfaces and land coverage. “Exterior or detached alterations can threaten this balance,” he said.Adding to the concern, the Citizens for Great Falls said that each additional household places new demand on sewer lines, septic systems, wells, stormwater systems, and roads that were initially sized for one family per lot. “CFGF’s analysis found that adding ALUs to 30% of homes in a subdivision could raise daily wastewater flow by roughly 18%, risking backups in aging sewer systems. The amendment provides no cumulative infrastructure analysis.” The citizens group also noted parking concerns, concerns that school capacity is not accounted for, and concerns about the elimination of the owner-occupancy requirement. Nevertheless, residents and officials have listed numerous benefits of ALUs that they say must be balanced against areas of concern. </div></body>

Block Source: Fairfax Times

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

County residents have testified to the Planning Commission, advocating for the proposed Accessory Living Unit (ALU) zoning ordinance amendment, all the while asking commissioners to do away with remaining restrictions in the name of more affordable housing options. ALUs are essentially separate living areas or a home addition, interior or...

Residents advocate for ALUs, despite concerns

NewsBreak

County residents have testified to the Planning Commission, advocating for the proposed Accessory Living Unit (ALU) zoning ordinance amendment, all the whi

Residents advocate for ALUs, despite concerns

Comments / 1