(12/20) For the second time in two months, the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed allowing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in Town. After a lengthy dialogue last month, the Commission agreed to ask Town staff to create a draft ordinance outlining all of the details discussed and researched from other municipalities.
The secondary housing units are gaining popularity for their affordability to rent or own, as well as for easy income opportunities. Also known as "tiny homes" and "in-law suites" amongst other names, they are placed on single-family residential lots and are currently allowed as conversions, not stand-alone dwellings, in Thurmont.
The Thurmont Master Plan recommends providing affordable housing to accommodate the Town’s changing housing needs as a long-term goal. This is one of the primary reasons for the Commission revisiting the topic. As before, commission members pointed out that the definition of affordable housing is vastly different for each person.
Another perk to ADUs is the ability to answer the affordable housing question without losing the "small town" feel. There is a financial benefit when renting them and the additional tax that the Town would receive when the ADU is added to a home increases the home's value.
The Commission has already decided on a couple of standards to follow: ADU size is limited to a max of 800 square feet, the max height of the ADU will be restricted, only one ADU is allowed per lot, the ADU must aesthetically match the existing dwelling, owner occupancy is required in at least one of the dwellings, at least one off street parking spot must be available, tree retention must be maintained on the property, and nearby neighbors must be notified of the intent to build an ADU. The Commission also discussed how corner lots will handle ADUs, how utilities will be handled, and building code requirements and how they would be implemented in an ADU. Staff also recommended zoning certificates be required for any ADU.
The Commission considered whether ADUs could have reduced impact fees because of their small size, similar to what efficiency apartments have gotten in the past. However, Chair Meredith Wivell suggested the use of the ADU should be considered before waiving the fees. Vice Chair Greg Goodhart added that the initial use of the ADU should also impact these fees. After the discussion, they decided to not completely waive the fees, but instead to reduce them and to consider the impact fees along with water and sewer connection fees suggested by Town Attorney Leslie Powell.
One suggestion was to develop a list of standards for ADUs; however, it was pointed out by Powell that by doing a needs analysis (where a caretaker dwelling may receive bigger fee discounts than an ADU built for income), the concept of a standard becomes hard to delineate.
Utilizing the examples from other municipalities as well as the meeting discussion points, Powell will be working on a mock ordinance for the Commission to review at a future meeting. The write-up will address the previously mentioned concerns as well as other questions directed at the Commission. Commission members will continue to research ADUs with other municipalities as well.
