[Massplanners] [EXTERNAL] Specific ADU Question

[Maria De La Fuente]

Same-- our accessory setbacks are 12 to the side and 20 to the rear, which
is what we're using for ADUs. For all other setbacks, we're defaulting to
the principal dwelling setbacks, as our accessory structure bylaw doesn't
clarify the others (except the front setback, which is stricter in
accessory structures than in principal dwellings--- so I'm using the less
strict of the two in every case).

Maria De La Fuente
Medfield Director of Land Use and Planning
459 Main Street
Medfield, MA  02052
(508) 906-3027
mdelafuente at medfield.net <sraposa at medfield.net>


On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 8:52 AM Michael McCarthy via MassPlanners <
massplanners at masscptc.org> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
>
>
> We are proposing to use the accessory structure setbacks and height
> restrictions. That’s a foot and half in the rear and 6 ft on the side. If a
> detached ADU is in the side yard, it also has to be setback 5 ft from the
> façade of the principle dwelling.
>
>
>
> Mike McCarthy
>
> Asst. City Planner
>
> New Bedford
>
>
>
> *From:* MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> *On Behalf Of *Ryan,
> Christopher via MassPlanners
> *Sent:* Friday, February 28, 2025 8:13 AM
> *To:* 'Mass Planners' <massplanners at masscptc.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [Massplanners] Specific ADU Question
>
>
>
> Happy Friday Planners We have our Special Town Meeting on Monday related
> to the ADU law and some Planning Board members and a wider swath of the
> public are still not happy with using current accessory building setbacks
> to allow for new ADUs
>
> Happy Friday Planners
>
>
>
> We have our Special Town Meeting on Monday related to the ADU law and some
> Planning Board members and a wider swath of the public are still not happy
> with using current accessory building setbacks to allow for new ADUs and
> conversions. They want us to use the setbacks for the principal buildings
> and frankly some of those setbacks are 30’ or more in the rear.
>
>
>
> Not only would that effectively nullify the opportunity to site such units
> in these areas but, IMPO, would also likely run afoul of EOHLC and the AG.
>
>
>
> Can you let me know if your provisions, if you have them, also use
> accessory building setbacks for new ADUs and what that setback is?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance and hope you will have a good weekend.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Chris R.
>
>
>
> ==========================================
>
> *Christopher J. Ryan, AICP*
>
> Director of Planning & Building
>
> Town of Belmont, MA
>
> 19 Moore Street
>
> Belmont, MA  02478-0900
>
> 617.993-2650
>
> cryan at belmont-ma.gov
>
> https://www.belmont-ma.gov/1451/Planning-Board
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.belmont-ma.gov/1451/Planning-Board__;!!HrHZwXtSIu7ehiYZ!oSA-JNICIhVJyErKBd37JtJ0Vpav_pH7gysNSGFX50KFS2RWT8KQm6t40hF7LvWsV6yingR6r8CLV2fr_G4iiltF-PrAO43BAWSkQyFx$>
>
> ===========================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> MassPlanners mailing list
> MassPlanners at masscptc.org
> http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org
>

-- 
This email is intended for municipal use only and must comply with the Town 
of Medfield's policies and state/federal laws. Under Massachusetts Law, any 
email created or received by an employee of The Town of  Medfield is 
considered a public record.  All email correspondence is subject to the 
requirements of M.G.L. Chapter 66. This email may contain confidential and 
privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review 
or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the 
intended recipient please contact the sender and delete all copies.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://masscptc.org/pipermail/massplanners_masscptc.org/attachments/20250228/fe557196/attachment.htm>