May 27, 2026 – By Tim Hundt
VIROQUA Wis. – The Viroqua Common Council took a major step toward expanding local residential options by advancing a new draft ordinance to regulate and allow accessory dwelling units across the city.
Accessory dwelling units are small secondary residential structures built on the same lot as an existing primary dwelling. They operate as an extension of the property and can not be separated or sold off from the primary parcel. Housing advocates point to these units as a tool to relieve local housing shortages because they provide affordable living options for renters or extended family members. They also offer supplemental rental income for homeowners and allow older residents to age in place by moving into the smaller auxiliary structure.
Alderperson Tanja Birke presented the draft ordinance during the May 26 regular council meeting explaining that the Housing Advisory Board spent over a year developing the rules. She noted the board gathered extensive public input and reviewed data to find alternatives to traditional housing units that could alleviate the severe local housing shortage.
“There is a high demand for affordable housing there is a high demand for smaller housing and there is a high demand for alternatives to the traditional housing units,” said Birke. “ADU ordinances are recommended anywhere you look in municipal guidance as one of the solutions to the increase in housing pressures and they are being passed in cities all over the country.”
During public comment residents voiced strong support for the measure. Tom Wilson a former Viroqua resident explained that accessory dwelling units allow aging residents to stay on their property while also providing affordable options for young people entering the workforce. Elijah Griner read a statement on behalf of housing board member Aaron Parker urging the city to adopt the rules and eventually create a toolkit with pre approved building plans to help citizens navigate the construction process.
As the council reviewed the details Birke clarified that the new units must be at least 250 square feet but the maximum size will be dictated by existing lot coverage and setback rules. Alderperson Todd Spaeth questioned whether property owners could eventually divide their lots and sell the secondary structures independently. Birke and housing board member Shauna Anderson assured the council that the units would remain permanently tied to the primary parcel.
“We did talk about that and agreed that it is part of the parcel,” said Anderson. “And so it would go with the parcel and not be separated.”
The council also debated parking logistics. Alderperson Kyle Bartelt asked how the city would handle extra vehicles if residents construct new units without adding driveway space. Anderson explained the board intentionally avoided forcing homeowners to pour expensive new concrete parking pads to keep the projects affordable.
“We did talk about that and looked at other cities and what they have done and we did not choose to enforce any additional parking spots for the additional dwelling unit,” said Anderson. “However, of course the snow event things would still be in effect whether you have an ADU or not.”
The conversation then shifted to whether these new units could be utilized as short term vacation rentals like Airbnbs rather than permanent local housing. Spaeth expressed concern that allowing short term rentals would defeat the goal of providing housing for local workers. Birke admitted the current draft does not prohibit short-term rentals but noted the housing board is finalizing a separate ordinance to strictly regulate the vacation rental market.
City Administrator Nate Torres stepped in to explain that state law allows municipalities to heavily regulate or even ban rentals that last fewer than seven days.
“Anything that is less than seven days consecutive rentals by one person or group of people can be heavily regulated,” said Torres. “If you do have concerns about ADUs, and potentially I am not saying you do or do not Todd, but let us say somebody did because I am guessing that is why you asked about it, there are potential ways where we can further limit it.”
A final major point of discussion involved fire safety and the cost of sprinkler systems. Birke emphasized that the board strongly recommends against forcing homeowners to install expensive fire sprinklers in the small units because the massive cost would financially ruin most projects. Spaeth asked if commercial building codes might automatically require the sprinklers regardless of the city ordinance. Mayor Krista Browne who has a background in building design clarified that as long as the property remains a single family home or duplex it falls under standard residential codes rather than the stricter commercial building codes that trigger sprinkler mandates.
“If you have a duplex and that is residential code but if you have anything three or more you get into commercial code,” said Browne. “In a situation where you have commercial and residential combined you go with commercial code because it is the higher bar.”
Following the lengthy discussion the council agreed the draft was ready for formal legal review. Alderperson Cyndy Hubbard made a motion to send the ordinance to the city attorneys to pressure test the language and format it into a final legal document. The motion passed unanimously.
Add comment