Arlingtonians: speak up for accessory dwellings

Development

Arlingtonians: speak up for accessory dwellings

by David Alpert • July 18, 2008 10:58 am

Tomorrow, the Arlington County Board is having a hearing on the proposal to legalize accessory dwellings. This would allow homeowners (but only those who live in their homes) in single-family neighborhoods to create an apartment for two people (like a garage apartment).

Photo by M.V. Jantzen on Flickr.

Accessory dwellings are an important way to increase affordable housing. Healthy communities aren't just families in big houses, but a mix of younger and older, singles, couples, and families, different incomes and races. Arlington's proposal takes many steps to "preserve the character" of residential neighborhoods, like limiting the accessory dwellings to two people so that big families don't use them. Renting out a part of one's house is also great for aging homeowners who can't afford to keep up their homes and would otherwise be forced to move.

According to the Arlington Connection, board members are leaning toward voting for the measure, but the Planning Commission recommended against it and many residents want to maintain the exclusivity of their enclaves.

You can testify at the meeting, which starts at 9 am tomorrow at 2100 Clarendon Boulevard, Room 300. (Who schedules meetings for 9 am on Saturdays? Apparently Arlington.) According to the Web page, you can still speak as long as you arrive and turn in your slip before the last speaker, so it's probably fine to get there a little later. You can also comment online.

6 comments — Share	— tags: accessory dwellings, affordable housing, Arlington, Virginia

Accessory dwelling debate comes to MoCo (Sep 3, 2008)
Arlington waters down, passes accessory dwelling legalization (Jul 20, 2008)
Arlington rental proposal brings out immigrant phobia (May 14, 2008)
Multi-family conversions, alley and accessory dwellings under attack (Apr 29, 2008)
Arlington looking to legalize accessory dwellings (Mar 26, 2008)

Comments

Diverse housing stock is a cornerstone of good, robust neighborhoods. This is a great way for the young and the old to live in nice communities or even stay close to their families. It's also a great way for people with large homes or lots to make a little bit of money, as you said, especially after a family moves out.

I'm constantly disappointed to hear about what is banned in the DC area.

by The King of Spain on Jul 18, 2008 12:00 pm

I already called the County Board (703-228-3130) to urge the board to pass this proposal. The high cost of housing is partially related to an artificially low supply, and this proposal will help by allowing more units. Plus, it allows people more freedom to use their land as they see fit.

I'd like to thank the Arlington County Republican Party for reminding me about this; they called me yesterday to urge me to call the Board to oppose the plan.

by Michael on Jul 18, 2008 12:56 pm

We need this to get passed. I think the affordability aspect is the main benefit from this. Of course, some will be worried about the effectiveness of services when the population of a neighborhood rises and the density increases, though, but that's not a big deal IMO as the county isn't going to double in population b/c of this. Arlington is a desirable place to live and for those who can't afford it or simply don't need a lot of space, this will be a big win for them. With the housing crisis, we can expect demand for rentals to continue to increase as will prices, so this can't come soon enough.

by Vik on Jul 18, 2008 5:42 pm

Here in Aspen Hill, MD, we have massive overcrowding in neighborhoods designated "single family detached residential". Legalizing this gross overcrowding would be a terrible idea. We didn't buy here because we wanted to live next to worker barracks and boarding houses; we bought here (in 1963) because we wanted to move into a neighborhood of people who would be settled here and form a community, rather than moving into a neighborhood characterized by low-cost rentals and transients.

If anyone wants to make it legal to have accessory apartments in NEW neighborhoods, that's just fine; people moving in will know into where and what and which kind of neighborhood they will relocate.

However, changing established neighborhoods of single-family homes into neighborhoods of flophouses and speakeasys, that's one of the most sad and despicable "bait and switch" tactics ever pulled off by any government anywhere.

For shame!

by Thomas Hardman on Jul 18, 2008 10:06 pm

Thomas: As the original article points out, Arlington's proposed rule only allows accessory dwellings when the owner continues to live in the house, and limits the accessory dwellings to one unit of two people. Therefore, it's impossible for this change to create "boarding houses", "worker barracks", or "flophouses".

by David Alpert on Jul 19, 2008 10:51 am

Look at it this ay: a house gets converted to have an accessory apartment by some elderly folks and either their kids or other caretaker lives in the accessory apartment. The elderly people pass on or move to a retirement community, the property goes on the market. Now it is sold as a duplex, more or less; two fully equipped living units under one roof.

So, what happens then? Can the new owner rent out both units? Or can only one be rented out and only as long as the new owner lives there?

I admit that I haven't read the law, and if this sort of thing is properly addressed, that's not a bad thing. The case for having elders "age in place" with their kids or a caretaker on-site in a separate living unit, that's actually ideal in my opinion. But let's always keep in mind that there will be people trying to take advantage of this.

by Thomas Hardman on Jul 19, 2008 11:41 am