Maryland lawmakers review accessory dwelling unit regulations amid community concerns

The Board of Town Commissioners held a work session on June 10, 2025, to discuss various topics, with a significant focus on the implications of recent changes to Maryland law regarding accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The meeting began with Kevin presenting an overview of the state legislation, which had undergone substantial revisions, alleviating initial concerns about its impact.

The discussion highlighted the need for the town to align its definitions of ADUs with state standards. Key points included the accommodation of vehicles, where the town's code currently allows the Planning Commission to review ADUs on a case-by-case basis, particularly regarding parking requirements. The state law stipulates that ADUs cannot be included in density calculations, which means they do not count as additional dwellings for the purposes of residential growth restrictions.

Commissioners raised questions about how these changes affect the Adequate Public Facilities (APF) regulations, clarifying that ADUs are exempt from density restrictions under APF. This means that the development of an ADU cannot be halted based on density concerns.

The meeting also addressed setback requirements for ADUs, which must align with those for other accessory structures. The state law mandates a minimum setback of three feet from neighboring properties, allowing for the construction of ADUs in close proximity to existing homes. This raised concerns among commissioners about potential impacts on neighborhood quality of life, particularly in densely populated areas.

Another significant change discussed was the removal of restrictions that limited ADUs to use by family members. The new law allows property owners to rent out ADUs, which could lead to increased rental activity in residential neighborhoods. This shift prompted discussions about the potential for homeowners associations (HOAs) and local regulations to impose limitations on ADU usage, with commissioners expressing concerns about the vagueness of such restrictions.

Overall, the meeting underscored the need for the town to review and possibly revise its regulations to ensure compliance with state law while addressing community concerns about the implications of ADUs on residential areas. The Board plans to continue discussions on this topic in future meetings, focusing on how to balance property rights with neighborhood integrity.