Arlington County Board members on Saturday (Oct. 19) voted 4-1 to amend zoning rules allowing more people to occupy addiction-recovery residences in the community.
The new rules allow up to eight people by-right for recovery residences located in single-family neighborhoods. A local-government use permit will be required in other zoning areas or if more than eight occupants are sought.
The immediate effect will be to bring six existing Oxford Houses in single-family neighborhoods into compliance with county zoning ordinances. Until the vote, the county’s zoning rules limited homes to no more than four non-related individuals.
“We have taken this issue very seriously,” said County Board Chair Libby Garvey. She said the Board had used the past three months to understand the matters and legalities involved, in an effort to get its decision right the first time.
At the same time, Garvey encouraged Oxford House representatives to be more proactive with neighbors than seems to have been the case. “Better communication might help,” she said.
Moving to eight occupants puts facilities for those in alcohol and drug recovery on par with the requirements for Arlington group homes focused on those with mental illness and intellectual and developmental disabilities, county officials said.
“We are talking about Arlington residents — our residents, our neighbors, our family members,” said Suzanne Somerville of the county’s Department of Human Services.
Those residents “are in need of support,” Somerville said. “Recovery residences provide that support.”
The lone vote against the measure came from Susan Cunningham, who had offered an alternative that would have required a government use permit for any recovery residence seeking to serve more than four people — putting the rules on par with those other residents must live with.
Her Board colleagues voted that amendment down, leading Cunningham to vote against the overall package.
While those with significant concerns about the proposal did turn up at a recent Planning Commission hearing on the matter, proponents were in more abundance than critics at the County Board meeting.
Among those who came to testify in support of the proposal was Joshua Cook, an Arlington resident and one-time Oxford House resident who discussed the impact it had on him:
“It was the springboard for my life — a total shift,” Cooks said. “It taught me responsibility. It helped me be around people who were doing positive things.”
But Terri Armao, while not opposing recovery residences in general, said the county government was abdicating its oversight responsibility.
“I’m asking that you allow only four [residents],” said Armao. “Allowing eight by-right gives the county no mechanism to walk back if there are any problems. It’s easy to see how a good situation could get out of control.”
The new rules do not require additional availability of off-street parking for the properties. And as proposed by staff and approved by the County Board, the measure does not require physical separation between homes used as recovery residences.
Two of the houses are located next to one another on N. Stuart Street, although a representative from Oxford House’s Virginia operations said such proximity was not typical and, he suggested, would not be duplicated in Arlington.
County staff said that, from mid-2022 to mid-2024, there had been 55 calls for police service at the eight existing Oxford House properties, and a total of three arrests. Staff said there was no data available to compare those figures with more traditional home uses in the county’s single-family neighborhoods.
The proposal had received backing from the Community Services Board, Planning Commission and Housing Commission, and informal support from the Disability Advisory Commission.
Northern Virginia localities have a patchwork of zoning regulations on recovery-residence properties, ranging from no limitations (Alexandria) to significantly more restrictions (Prince William County). Arlington’s new policy aligns closest with two downstate communities, Harrisonburg and Chesterfield County, staff said.
While the county government has oversight of zoning regulations, actual operation of group homes largely is regulated at the state-government level.
“Folks may want to have a continued conversation at the state level,” Cunningham said.
Photo via Google Maps
