Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Dwellings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Falls Church begins work-session debate on broader accessory-dwelling rules
Summary
Planning staff presented draft zoning changes to allow accessory dwellings (ADUs) by right in most single-family districts, recommend a 1,000 sq ft or 50%-of-primary limit, no required off-street parking, no owner-occupancy requirement, and a single ADU per lot; council and staff discussed stormwater, tree-canopy, short-term rental policy, life-safety/building-code interactions and the process/timing for first reading and referrals.
Planning staff walked the Falls Church City Council through a comprehensive draft zoning text amendment on Nov. 4 to expand and clarify rules for accessory dwellings.
Staff framed the update as two related items: a resolution to initiate a rezoning (TR 2440) and a draft ordinance (TO 02/2017) with text amendments. The stated intent is to allow accessory dwellings by right in R1A and R1B single-family districts (and to list permitted accessory uses explicitly in RC and RM rather than telescoping those districts to R1 rules). Key elements of the staff recommendation included:
• Size: ADUs limited to the smaller of 1,000 gross square feet or 50% of the principal dwelling's habitable area.
• Lot limit: One accessory dwelling per lot.
• Location and setbacks: Detached ADUs allowed with flexible setbacks (5-ft side/rear setback permitted with reduced height; 10-ft setback permitted with higher height limits). Staff proposed no ADU taller than the principal dwelling and explicit prohibitions on siting ADUs in the front yard.
• Height: For a 5-ft setback, max 20 ft (1.5 stories); for a 10-ft setback, max 25 ft (2 stories). ADU height must be less than the primary dwelling.
• Parking: Staff recommended no off-street parking requirement for ADUs, citing broader practice that off-street parking is often a barrier to ADU construction and increases impervious surface.
• Owner-occupancy/rental: Staff recommended no owner-occupancy requirement and common ownership of principal and accessory dwelling, to provide flexibility for owners—including residents who work abroad.
• Short-term rentals: Staff recommended no immediate ADU-specific ban on short-term rentals, instead suggesting a separate, citywide short-term rental policy could be developed. Council members voiced concerns that allowing short-term rentals in ADUs could change neighborhood character and urged staff to study legal and vesting issues.
• Review and approvals: ADUs would require a residential building permit and any associated trade permits; nonconforming existing accessory structures could seek a one-time special-use permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals to convert to an ADU.
• Utilities & fiscal: Staff said separate meters are currently required for separate residences and estimated initial hook-up fees could exceed $27,000; staff also estimated, by analogy to Arlington, modest annual ADU production in Falls Church (about two new ADUs per year given local construction rates), and noted possible average property value increases observed in Arlington (staff cited an illustrative 15% change in comparable cases).
Council members focused discussion on sequencing (whether planning commission should be the first formal reviewer before council first reading), process implications of first reading, legal constraints in the charter, tree-canopy and grading-plan triggers tied to a 2,500-square-foot disturbance threshold, fire- and building-code life-safety considerations for internal ADUs, and ways to avoid unintended incentives to tear down older houses. Concerns were raised about stormwater impacts, tree canopy loss, cumulative infrastructure impacts (including sewer capacity and school population changes), and the potential for some property investors to use ADUs as an investment product rather than to house relatives.
Staff said the planning commission would hold a work session on the same materials on Nov. 6, and staff predicted formal referral and notice processes could run through November–February, with earliest second-reading consideration around March 2025. Council members and staff agreed to continue public engagement; several requested additional analyses (GIS estimates of lots that could accommodate ADUs under proposed coverage/impervious limits; clearer tree-canopy and grading-plan triggers; and examples of other jurisdictions’ short-term rental approaches).
