[Massplanners] How to convince voters to allow accessory apartments?
Carolyn Britt
cbritt at communityinvestment.net
Mon Oct 18 13:36:41 EDT 2021
All,
I had to present an article to Town Meeting this past saturday on
allowing a detached accessory dwelling unit in our downtown residential
area on lots of a certain size, and a maximum sf area of 1000sf. An
earlier article removed a density bonus in the same area, still allowing
multi-family units but reducing additional density that could be applied
for. By doing this, we will give up some payment in lieu for affordable
units, but we almost never got an actual unit from this.
We had nine articles on the warrant, and virtually all of them passed
with a 90/10 vote, including all the zoning articles. The major article
was to authorize money for a new public safety building, so the bulk of
voters came out for that article.
You all had me quite concerned that the ADU would never pass without a
lot more groundwork, but it was almost too easy. Maybe the answer is to
assess the other articles to see what large interest group might attend.
But I would not have guessed that supporters of a new public safety
building would also support an ADU by-law.
In addition, we got the Town to commit to building the new building
fully electric with ground source heat pumps and net zero. The tour of
the new police station in Beverly that is also electric/ground
source/net zero helped a great deal. Thanks Beverly!
Wishing you all well with your ADU efforts, and similar success.
Carolyn
Carolyn Britt, AICP
Community Investment Associates
P.O. Box 235
Ipswich, MA 01938
(978) 356-2164
(978) 317-2145 (cell)
(978) 356-9881
On 10/13/2021 11:35 AM, Rachel Nadkarni via MassPlanners wrote:
> Hi Paige,
>
> I was with the City of Newton during the adoption of the Accessory
> Dwelling Unit changes. Part of the discussion we had with the
> community then was that each aspect of an accessory dwelling unit was
> already allowed in another form.
>
> * The ADU didn't allow for more square footage than was already
> allowed on a property
> * By-right ADUs in accessory structures had to fit into existing
> by-right accessory structure sizes
> * Renting rooms to unrelated individuals was already allowed, and
> the same limit would apply whether or not those individuals were
> in an ADU or not
> * Having a second kitchen in a home was already possible, and not
> unprecedented
>
> The focus then was on the flexibility this allowed families to layout
> their interiors as works for them, since the true distinguisher of an
> ADU would then be the key-locked door between the spaces. Without the
> locking door, everything else about the ADU would be compliant with
> zoning.
>
> The other thing we discussed, was that the rights allowed to the
> accessory unit were limited compared to the second unit on a 2-family
> home. In the accessory unit, there was no possibility of
> condo-ization, whereas 2-family homes could have two separate owners
> with each unit having all the related property rights. Under the
> pre-existing rules on renting rooms, in a 2-family condo, each unit
> could rent rooms to unrelated individuals, and that wouldn't be
> possible in an ADU.
>
> Hopefully this is useful to Foxborough's discussion. We were able to
> build off of the existing renting of rooms allowance, and that may not
> be the case in some communities.
>
> Best wishes,
> Rachel
>
> Rachel Nadkarni
> Senior Planner - Urban Revitalization Specialist
> City of Somerville, Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development
>
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 10:33 AM Anthony Flint via MassPlanners
> <massplanners at masscptc.org> wrote:
>
> The experience of Durango, Colorado might be instructive:
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-17/how-one-colorado-city-instantly-created-more-affordable-housing-by-relaxing-rules-on-accessory-dwelling-units
>
> Newton has also had some success in an environment of occasional
> skepticism:
> https://steveworks.com/2019/05/everything-you-need-to-know-about-newton-accessory-apartments/
>
> Anthony Flint <http://anthonyflint.net/>
> Senior Fellow
> Lincoln Institute of Land Policy <https://www.lincolninst.edu/>
> 617-930-1044
> @landpolicy <https://twitter.com/landpolicy>
> /Finding answers in land/
>
> *From:* MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Kristina Johnson via MassPlanners
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 13, 2021 10:05 AM
> *To:* Paige <paigeplanner at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* massplanners at masscptc.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Massplanners] How to convince voters to allow
> accessory apartments?
>
> Hi Paige,
>
> As Planning Board Chair for Framingham, I have been helping
> advance an ADU ordinance, and it’s not easy! Here’s what I have
> learned being on the other side of the table:
>
> You have to engage the folks who would be positively affected by
> this by-law and have them tell the story for you whether it’s at
> the hearing or through the local newspaper. All this chatter
> about “who’s living next door,” and “stranger danger” gets quelled
> when you have brave folks make a public plea about how an ADU
> By-law would help a family member age in place, or take care of a
> permanently disabled child. During a Zoom workshop hosted by the
> Planning Board early this summer, we had community members talk
> about how an ADU ordinance would allow them to take care of a
> disabled child without resorting to institutionalization, or keep
> “Nana and Fluffy” in the household with their grandchildren,
> saving on nursing home/assisted living and child care costs. Some
> of the testimony got me misty eyed and definitely quieted the
> relentless voices who kept insisting that an ADU ordinance will do
> nothing but create illegal apartments, etc. We are still in the
> ordinance drafting stage and have not started the official
> amendment process.
>
> Does Foxborough have a local newspaper? Get an article posted!
> There must be elected officials, including the Planning Board, who
> are champions of this effort, and if there are, let them do the
> “selling.” Here’s a link to the story the Framingham local paper
> ran, and it was blasted all over local social media.
> https://framinghamsource.com/index.php/2021/06/26/framingham-planning-board-takes-temperature-of-residents-on-in-law-apartment-ordinance/
>
> Good luck Paige!
>
> Kristina
>
> Ps. Planning Staff in Framingham has done an amazing job with this
> effort,
>
> /Kristina Johnson, AICP/
>
> Director of Planning &//Community Development//
>
> Town of Hudson, MA
>
> President, Mass. Association of Planning Directors
>
> Tel: 978-562-2989
>
> Cell: 857-939-3427
>
> Email: kjohnson at townofhudson.org <mailto:kjohnson at townofhudson.org>
>
> “Like” Hudson Planning and Community Development on Facebook
> http://blogs-images.forbes.com/peterhimler/files/2014/02/high-res-logo_facebook1.png
> <https://www.facebook.com/HudsonRecreation>
>
> *From:* MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Paige via MassPlanners
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 13, 2021 8:48 AM
> *To:* massplanners at masscptc.org
> *Subject:* [Massplanners] How to convince voters to allow
> accessory apartments?
>
> Good morning all,
>
> Here in Foxborough we are going to be voting on whether to expand
> the current inlaw apartment bylaw to allow non-relatives to rent
> an ADU. Sounds simple, right? NOT! Folks insist this is
> creating multi-family housing in a single family district.
>
> We have been engaged in a conversation on housing for 2+ years now
> and I know we will get push back on this effort. I'm not sure we
> will get the required 2/3 vote (since we allow over 900 SF for our
> ADUs we don't qualify for the majority vote).
>
> Does anyone have any outreach, PR or data that I could use at the
> public hearing tomorrow night to inform residents on why allowing
> attached ADUs to be rented to non-relatives would be wise for
> Foxborough?
>
> Any case studies on how many ADUs were created once a
> similar provision was adopted in another town?
>
> I think the "selling" of housing solutions is the hardest part of
> all of this. Folks are so resistant, at least out here in the
> suburbs. Any information or handouts or anything to make
> residents less afraid of this change would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Paige Duncan, AICP
>
> Planning Director for the Town of Foxborough, MA
>
> --
>
> *****************************
> Paige E. Duncan, AICP, Planning Director
> Foxborough Town Hall, 40 South Street
> Foxborough, Massachusetts 02035
> Ph: 508-543-1250
>
> pduncan at foxboroughma.gov
>
> --
> MassPlanners mailing list
> MassPlanners at masscptc.org
> http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org
>
>
--
Carolyn Britt, AICP
Community Investment Associates
P.O. Box 235
Ipswich, MA 01938
(978) 356-2164
(978) 317-2145 (cell)
(978) 356-9881
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://masscptc.org/pipermail/massplanners_masscptc.org/attachments/20211018/56c23db5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 930 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://masscptc.org/pipermail/massplanners_masscptc.org/attachments/20211018/56c23db5/attachment.png>
More information about the MassPlanners
mailing list