Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Braintree council adopts bylaw changes to implement state ADU law after lengthy debate
Summary
After an hour-long public discussion and two council amendments, the Braintree Town Council voted 5–3 to adopt exhibit B changes to local zoning that add accessory dwelling units (ADUs) into the town's accessory-use rules consistent with the Massachusetts Affordable Homes Act.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Town of Braintree Town Council voted 5–3 on Sept. 16 to adopt revised zoning text (Exhibit B) that adds accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, to the town's accessory-use rules to comply with the Massachusetts Affordable Homes Act.
The vote followed a public hearing, staff presentations and more than an hour of council debate about setbacks, height limits, parking and how ADUs should be treated relative to other detached accessory structures.
Council President Ryan opened the public hearing and noted the item had been continued from a prior meeting; town staff circulated a legal memo from Town Solicitor Rossetti and the Planning Board had recommended changes, including an 8-foot side/rear setback. Planning Director Maciek, Building Inspector Clark and compliance official Russell Forsberg answered council questions on existing setbacks, parking rules and how the state law interacts with local standards.
Councilors pressed several technical points: the town's current side setback for single-family principal structures is 10 feet while accessory detached structures (sheds, garages, cabanas) were enforced at a 5-foot setback; existing rules allow up to four detached accessory uses on a lot, and the proposed ADU change increases that to five. Forsberg told the council the zoning currently requires two off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit and allows one vehicle per licensed driver who resides at the property plus one additional space; he also confirmed there is no absolute cap tied to a flat number of cars. Councilors noted state law exempts ADU parking requirements if the ADU is within a half-mile walking distance of an MBTA station.
Councilor Warren moved an amendment to change the proposed 5-foot side and rear setback in Exhibit B to 8 feet; the amendment was debated and failed on a roll call vote (3 ayes, 5 no). Councilor Morin then moved and the council approved unanimously an amendment that replaced a note in the dimensional table to read: “An attached garage, accessory dwelling unit or other attached structure shall be considered part of the main building or principal dwelling and shall comply with all the dimensional and density requirements for that building.”
After consideration of amendments, the council approved Exhibit B as revised, 5–3. The record shows the majority voted to adopt the Exhibit B text (which implements 5-foot setbacks for detached accessory structures and reduced height standards closer to property lines) with the Morin amendment clarifying attached structures are part of the principal building for dimensional rules. The council's roll-call votes and the successful amendment are recorded in the minutes.
Supporters and staff framed the vote as necessary to make local bylaws consistent with the Massachusetts Affordable Homes Act, which allows ADUs by right on single-family lots and limits how municipalities may regulate them. Several councilors said the town needed clearer dimensional rules and predictable review standards; others pressed for larger setbacks citing fire safety, privacy and neighborhood character. Members of the public who spoke at the hearing raised concerns about drainage, parking and fire-department access; those concerns were addressed during staff Q&A and in council discussion.
The council did not finalize every detail tonight. Councilors said additional zoning refinements could return later, and that separate building-code and inspection questions should be addressed outside the zoning amendment process. The Planning Board's earlier recommendation (not adopted) for an 8-foot side/rear setback remained part of the record and could inform future changes.
The ordinance change is intended to align town zoning with state law; staff and councilors said they expect the town clerk and planning staff to publish the final adopted language and to coordinate any implementation steps with the building and planning departments.

