Commission presses staff to clarify ADU draft after state law requires one unit by right

Planning staff told the Staunton Planning Commission on June 18 that Virginia Senate Bill 531 requires localities to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in zoning districts that permit single‑family dwellings, and that local code must be amended to comply before the statute’s effective date. "Senate Bill 531 ... overrides local zoning authority and requires that all localities allow accessory dwelling units ... The new statute takes effect July 1 of 2027," Tim Hart said.

Staff presented four draft changes: a new chapter 18.111 to define ADUs, revisions to R3 provisions that previously governed SUP‑issued ADUs, a proposed ADU permit fee of $250, and a new definition for "cooking facility" to clarify what constitutes a dwelling. The staff packet also included a proposed building‑permit fee schedule (building permit fee cited as $0.18 per sq ft with a $75 minimum) and referenced existing special‑use permit conditions.

Commissioners spent much of the discussion probing practical consequences. Key concerns included:

- By‑right vs. SUP pathways: Under the new state law one ADU is allowed by right; commissioners asked whether very large houses could continue to seek special‑use permits for additional units and how prior SUP approvals would interact with the new ordinance. Hart said existing SUP conditions remain enforceable unless the new ordinance contradicts them and that owners could elect to operate under the new rules where compatible.

- Interior vs. detached units and parking: Commissioners asked staff to clarify whether the by‑right ADU is expected to be inside the principal structure and whether detached units would require additional review; staff suggested adding table columns labeling units as "interior" or "detached" and referencing the new code section for the by‑right unit.

- Setbacks and fire code: Commissioners raised safety concerns about detached units placed within five feet of property lines; staff and commissioners noted that building‑code fire‑separation rules apply and could require fire‑rated walls for very close structures.

- Infrastructure and fees: One commissioner suggested that facility fees for independent water/sewer connections (an approximate figure of $11,000 was cited) could discourage ad‑hoc detached ADUs; staff said facility fees can apply when an independent connection is requested, but legal counsel will be consulted on how fees apply when units share existing services.

- Potential for unintended density and developer strategies: Commissioners discussed scenarios such as adding ADUs behind townhouses or condominiumizing lots to increase unit counts; staff agreed to collect examples from nearby jurisdictions and include comparative permit applications in a follow‑up packet.

Staff recommended ongoing monthly work to refine the ordinance and produce clearer charts distinguishing by‑right vs. SUP units, sample permit forms, and maps showing where ADUs would be allowed. Several commissioners urged caution about adopting final language before observing how other localities implement SB 531; others urged the commission to prepare a compliant ordinance in advance of the statutory deadline.

The commission did not take a formal vote to adopt an ADU ordinance at the meeting. Staff said they will return with revised language, additional explanatory charts and comparative ordinance examples (staff cited Charlottesville, Harrisonburg and Winchester as models reviewed) so the commission can consider a public hearing date once the draft is clearer.