Planning Commission Regular Meeting/Work Session

James FeatherIt's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as issued. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Extensions? Passes unanimously. Next order of business is presentations by the public on any matter not calling for a public hearing. We have one public hearing this evening on proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance related to accessory dwelling units. So there will be an opportunity to speak to that later. But if anyone would like to address the commission on any other matter, you're welcome to do so at this time. Seeing none, we will move on. I guess we do not have minutes to approve. Is that correct? Okay. Making sure that wasn't missing. So we have no public hearings. We have no items not requiring a public hearing this evening, so we'll move on to our public hearing.

James FeatherThis is on proposed amendments to the Code of the City of Fairfax, Chapter 110, Zoning. of the articles and sections contained therein, including introductory provisions, zoning districts, and regulations and definitions relating to detached accessory dwelling units. Mr. Foreman, it's good to see you back.

ForemanstaffGood to be here. Thank you very much. So this agenda item is a public hearing, and it's for a series of zoning text amendments that would permit detached accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, in Fairfax City. if you recall the planning commission held a work session in april to discuss this topic and at that work session we reviewed a series of draft amendments city council held an equivalent work session in may and we've we've held quite a few meetings on the topic of adus they've been in various amounts of detail we held some high level work sessions and a community meeting in 2024 Last year, we held work sessions with Planning Commission and with City Council, where we reviewed options to potentially accommodate detached ADUs.

At those meetings, both Planning Commission and City Council recognized the importance of guardrails to reduce the potential negative impacts on surrounding properties, and that's something that's really guided further work on this topic. At the conclusion of City Council's work session in the fall, Council asked staff to draft potential amendments to modify our existing ADU standards in order to permit detached units. And that's what we discussed back in April, focusing on potential amendment details for detached accessory dwelling units. Like I mentioned, City Council held an equivalent work session in May, and at that meeting, Council requested a public hearing to be held to consider these amendments, and also Council

requested additional analysis on certain topics. So tonight, we'll discuss both the proposed amendments and also the pieces of analysis that City Council had asked for. So as you likely know, accessory dwelling units are currently allowed in the city under certain conditions. Now, specifically, ADUs currently need to be within the home itself or attached, so rather than detached. In order to permit detached accessory dwelling units as well, what's needed would be a zoning text amendment that would modify our existing ADU standards, which are already in the zoning ordinance. Now, the idea of detached accessory dwelling units didn't just pop up out of last year's work sessions. The comprehensive plan references ADUs as a potential way to support a wide variety of housing types.

that we're talking about tonight recommend setbacks that really correspond to those affordable dwelling provisions. And really for the same reason, this is a way to balance that flexibility. some preference to accessory dwelling units, but still recognize the guardrails that are in place to reduce negative externalities on neighbors' properties. And like it shows here, those recommended setbacks, and this is what's in your packet, the recommended setbacks for accessory dwelling units are 20 feet from the rear lot line. So that's as opposed to 25 feet for general house construction. And about a 20% reduction of, let's say, two to three feet reduction on the side lot line, so eight feet here. Twelve feet in RL district, eight feet in residential high

structures are permitted to be closer to the lot lines than the dwelling itself so in in this case a minimum of five feet from the side or the rear lock lines for accessory structures or for garages on the right here this is what's attached accessory dwellings. And again, this mirrors the ordinance's existing standards for affordable dwelling setbacks. Again, it recognizes that accessory dwelling units have similar levels of intensity as other dwellings, but it provides more flexibility, and it permits these structures to be a little bit closer to the lot line than the main house can be. so this is a comparison of the uh of three setback examples and then just one more slide on on setbacks here uh at at its fall work session city council had mentioned that detached accessory dwelling

James FeatherI think the side comment I heard was about legally. detached accessory dwelling units it's going to be hard to build a detached accessory dwelling unit and somebody not noticing and doing it illegally yeah