By DAN TOMASELLO
LYNNFIELD — Voters overwhelmingly approved two warrant articles associated with an updated Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Bylaw during Fall Town Meeting on Monday.
Select Board Chair Phil Crawford said Fall Town Meeting needed to approve Articles 7 and 8 in the wake of Gov. Maura Healey signing the $5.1 billion Affordable Homes Act into law last year, which now allows ADUs by right in single-family zoning districts across the state.
“We want to have some restrictions on site plan review, design, setbacks, height restrictions and water,” said Crawford. “The broad brush they have given us doesn’t have those types of restraints in place. What we are doing is making restrictions that will work in the best interest of the town.”
Planning Board Chair Page Wilkins agreed.
“There was a change in state law at the beginning of this year that allows 900-square-foot attached or detached accessory dwelling units in town and the entire state as of right as long as certain criteria are met,” said Wilkins. “Under this new state law, these ADUs are allowed in Lynnfield. This proposed Zoning Bylaw set forth in Article 7 is in compliance with state law, but also provides some permitted limitations and oversight by the Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Board, Building Department and Health Department. The intent of this bylaw is to provide some guardrails for the new state law.”
Wilkins said the proposed bylaw will only allow property owners to have one ADU by right.
“The accessory dwelling unit must be in compliance with all applicable codes and town bylaws,” said Wilkins. “There will be no short-term rentals allowed and importantly, a limited site plan review is required with particular criteria aimed to consider the impact on neighbors, the neighborhood, the environment and adequacy of utilities. While we must permit these ADUs, we want to make sure they are the best they can be in town for the property owners, neighbors and the neighborhood. If we don’t pass this, ADUs will be built in Lynnfield but we won’t have these protections in place.”
Summer Street resident Rose Macone urged Fall Town Meeting to vote against Articles 7 and 8. She said the new law change permitting ADUs as of right across the state was “developed by developers.”
“I feel like we need time to go over this,” said Macone.
Macone also said the town should call a Special Town Meeting to overturn the multifamily overlay zoning district that the 2024 Fall Town Meeting approved in order to comply with the MBTA Communities law.
Wilkins said the ADU Bylaw is needed due to “a state law that is in place now.”
“They are already permitted,” said Wilkins. “We are not deciding whether they can be built in Lynnfield or not tonight. That is already the case and there is nothing we can do about that, but what we can do is put some protections in place so the people of Lynnfield can review the plans for these ADUs and make sure they work on that lot, they have the required setbacks that we require in town, that water and septic is appropriate and there is not insufficient grading or other things that could be detrimental to the neighbors or that property. If we don’t vote ‘Yes’ on this, ADUs will be allowed but we won’t have this extra oversight.”
Willowby Way resident Rob Look asked about the ADU Bylaw’s component pertaining to driveways.
“You would need to provide a parking spot for a resident of that unit in the driveway that you already have,” said Planning and Conservation Director Emilie Cademartori. “The idea being we didn’t want a proliferation of multiple driveways per property.”
Saunders Road resident Sam Dowd asked, “How is the current limit on number of bedrooms per lot size impacted by the addition of an entire ADU on the property?”
“Septic capacity is always determined by the Title 5 regulations in the state of Massachusetts,” said Cademartori. “If you have a septic system, it should be sized based on the number of bedrooms in your house. If you are adding an ADU that presumably has a bedroom, the Board of Health as part of this regulation needs to assess your system to make sure it has the capacity. If it does not have the capacity, the system will have to be upgraded.”
In response to a question from Dowd, Cademartori said the proposed ADU Bylaw does not change the state’s Title 5 regulations.
“The state has provided guidance on how to implement Title 5 in this case,” said Cademartori. “ADUs are new construction, therefore they have to meet Title 5 with no waivers.”
Pine Street resident Brendan Cooney asked what does the ADU Bylaw’s proposed language in Section 8.3.9 that states “protection of adjoining premises against seriously detrimental or offensive uses on the site” mean.
“Generally, when the (state) Zoning Act refers to offensive uses, they are getting at the idea of nuisances such as people operating piggeries on their property,” said Town Counsel Tom Mullen. “That was a big, big deal in the 19th century. Thankfully that is less of an issue in Lynnfield right now.”
After the discussion, Fall Town Meeting approved Article 7 by a vote of 199-18.
Fall Town Meeting also approved Article 8, which amended the Zoning Bylaw’s Accessory Use definitions in order to eliminate a tool shed as being considered as an accessory structure. Cademartori said Article 8 sought to close a potential “loophole” by making sure an ADU is not built 5-feet or 10-feet from a single-family home.
“By changing the definition of accessory structure to exclude tool sheds, we can now require new ADU units to have the same setbacks as single-family homes do now,” said Cademartori. “The intent is to ensure that ADUs meet the same setbacks as single-family homes do now.”
In response to a question from a Mansfield Road woman, Cademartori said an ADU will be required to meet setback requirements regardless of whether they are attached or detached.
“If you can’t fit a structure within the setbacks, then you do not qualify to get one,” said Cademartori. “It doesn’t matter whether it is a detached or attached. If you build something within your home and if you modify the interior without changing the dimensions and you are already nonconforming, then yes you can convert that nonconforming structure as long as you are not changing the footprint.”
Fall Town Meeting approved Article 8 by a vote of 211-10.