Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Dwelling Units topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board presses for local ADU rules as state’s Act No. 4977 advances
Summary
The Otis Planning Board continued review of accessory dwelling unit provisions in Act No. 4977 and discussed how ADUs intersect with the town’s short-term rental rules; members said the town must draft local ADU bylaws once state definitions are finalized.
The Otis Planning Board continued its review of accessory dwelling unit (ADU) provisions under Act No. 4977, the Affordable Homes Act, and discussed how the state-level changes will interact with the town’s short-term rental (STR) bylaw.
Mark Anthony, chair of the Planning Board, said the board needs to determine how the state’s ADU definition aligns with local zoning and permitting. He told the board that once the state finalizes definitions the town will have to adopt its own ADU bylaw to ensure local zoning requirements are consistent with the new law.
"We need to think about how that portion of it relates to STR bylaw," Mark Anthony said, urging the board to clarify whether some STRs classified as ADUs would require additional regulation.
A participant, Stacy, recommended that the town limit the number of ADUs allowed on a single property and require permits for them. "Right now you can have multiple ADUs on a single property — we will need to include restrictions and permit requirements to the bylaws," Stacy said, adding concern about how existing ADUs will be recognized.
Hal Kobrin, a Planning Board member, noted legal and infrastructure issues the town should consider: if multiple units share septic or water, the situation may trigger subdivision rules or require public water supplies and associated regulation. "It’s unlikely people will be sharing septic systems, and shared water supplies would become public water supplies anyway and is regulated," Kobrin said, recommending the board specify expectations in building permits.
Board members agreed to continue the ADU discussion at the January meeting to allow time for review of the state’s final language and to assess how local bylaws should be written to prevent conflicts with existing town rules.
The board also noted the need to consider whether some ADUs should be subject to special permits rather than allowed by-right, and requested staff prepare draft language options for future meetings.
