On August 6, 2024, Governor Maura Healey signed into law legislation intended to tackle what she calls “the state’s greatest challenge” – housing costs. The governor’s office claims the law will create, preserve or rehabilitate more than 65,000 homes over the next 5 years.
The largest housing initiative ever passed in Massachusetts, the Affordable Housing Act is expected to cost taxpayers more than $5.1 billion over five years, with funds flowing to public housing authorities (more on that below), programs for first-time homebuyers, and incentives for developers to build low-income housing and convert commercial office space to housing.
Also in the bill is a sweeping statewide zoning change related to Accessory Dwelling Units, or ADU’s. ADU’s are small, separate living spaces on the same property as a single-family home. They are often located in a backyard, garage, or attached to the main house.
Prior to this act passing, the construction of ADU’s was governed by a patchwork of local zoning laws that were often designed to be prohibitive to the builder / homeowner. With this legislation, ADU’s are now allowed “by right”, meaning no special permit or approval is required to build one.
Hopkinton’s notoriously tight zoning laws around ADU’s will now need to be rewritten to comply with the new state law, and there are several changes.
Before this law, if a property owner in Hopkinton wished to build an ADU, they’d first be required to appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals. This is no longer the case, as the Act explicitly states that “No zoning ordinance or by-law shall prohibit, unreasonably restrict or require a special permit…for a single accessory dwelling unit”. Now, a property owner simply needs to request a building permit to begin construction of an ADU.
Previously in Hopkinton, ADU’s had to be attached to a house. The state law makes no such requirement, therefore they may now be freestanding.
As a further impediment to constructing an ADU, Hopkinton Zoning Bylaws Chapter § 210-126. (C) required that the occupant of an ADU be “related by blood, marriage or adoption to the owner of the premises” or be 60 years or older. The new state law allows anyone to occupy an ADU; relation is not required.
Hopkinton’s zoning bylaw also requires that, if granted, the occupancy permit for an ADU is only valid for the person who applied, and it is not transferrable upon sale of the property. This is nullified.
Finally, the new state law expands the maximum size of an ADU to 900 square feet, whereas Hopkinton’s upper threshold is 800 (raised from 600 square feet at the 2000 Annual Town Meeting).
What does it mean for Hopkinton?
Many Hopkinton homeowners live on parcels large enough to support a freestanding structure like an ADU, and it’s important to note that square footage is typically calculated as “heated space”. This means a 900 square foot ADU could be built alongside a 400 square foot garage and it would be in compliance with the law.
With this Act, some homeowners may now contemplate staying in their homes longer. ADU’s can be built with wheelchair access, and Hopkinton may see parents welcoming their adult children home only to later swap houses with them as they age. This could potentially reduce the number of real estate transactions in town as more families choose multigenerational housing.
This act removes the red tape for homeowners wishing to construct an ADU. There were many hurdles to jump through prior to its passage – the Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Board, Building Inspector, etc. These meetings are all public, which means abutters had the right to express their opinion about their neighbor constructing an ADU. Because this act makes ADU construction “by right”, homeowners simply need a building permit, and abutters no longer have a say.
The Act also opens the door to investors who see the opportunity to extract more revenue from a property. A single family home with an ADU could mean as much as double the rental revenue – in a desirable town with arguably the best school district in the state. While it’s impossible to predict the impact this change may have on school population, it’s possible we may see an increase in enrolled students as ADU’s are built.
And while these are possibilities, one thing is a certainty: If Hopkinton property owners start building ADU’s the town’s population will rise.
In the state’s press release, Housing and Livable Communities Secretary Ed Augustus (our guest on the Episode 15 of The HopTake) was bullish on the law. “From ADUs to seasonal communities, this administration in partnership with the Legislature has now adopted some of the most forward-looking and proven practices to not only meet this moment, but also set a course to meet the housing needs of our communities for years to come,” he said.
No Pork for Hop?
A significant portion of the Affordable Housing Act is devoted to spreading money around the Commonwealth to benefit local public housing authorities. In total, the state committed $425,756,900 to several cities, yet Hopkinton was notably absent from the largess (though our neighbors benefited mightily).
“I’m certainly going to advocate with the Executive Office to get money to our local housing authorities…(in this case) the town didn’t approach me on it,” said State Representative James Arena-DeRosa.
From the Act:
- $500,000 shall be expended for the Westborough affordable housing trust for capital improvements and new housing production, and $1,000,000 shall be expended for sewer, septic, water, storm water management, roads, sidewalks, traffic controls and public safety infrastructure upgrades and expansions that advance projects that support housing development, preservation or rehabilitation in the town of Westborough
- $500,000 shall be expended for the Southborough housing authority for the purchase, acquisition, development and site preparation of new affordable housing projects, and $500,000 shall be expended for the Southborough Housing Authority
- $500,000 shall be expended for the Northborough housing authority for capital improvement projects and other projects
- $500,000 shall be expended to the Upton housing authority for building upgrades and general improvements, and $500,000 shall be expended to the town of Upton for housing infrastructure improvements
- $1,000,000 shall be expended to the Milford Housing Authority
- $1,000,000 shall be expended for the Marlborough Housing Authority
- $500,000 shall be expended to the town of Northbridge for housing redevelopment projects
- $1,000,000 shall be expended for sewer, septic, water, storm water management, roads, sidewalks, traffic controls and public safety infrastructure upgrades and expansions that advance projects that support housing development, preservation or rehabilitation in the town of Grafton
Peter Thomas is a special correspondent for HopNews.
Total BS that Hopkinton was left out. Maura Healy is destroying this state
While there will no longer be a special permit required to HAVE an ADU, any new building project that is proposed to be sited within property setbacks would still require ZBA approval. Or did the ADU ruling negate property setbacks at all if the structure is to be used as an ADU? If setbacks are still enforceable, the ZBA process allows for abutter feedback and requires a board approval.
Property setbacks must be enforced still, and you are correct that if the ADU is built within the setbacks it would require a ZBA variance.
Apparently Hopkinton forgot to genuflect to its State Representative to be included in this “largesse.”
Many properties in town are on private sewer and water. I assume that would impact the feasibility of adding an ADU for a good percentage of residents.
Hopkinton has never in my 30+ year history of living here, been very financially astute – I would be willing to bet we didn’t ask/apply for any of the funds. We have a structural deficiency in finance/budgeting and it keeps getting worse. We need the Town Manager to form, focus and implement a vision for the town which will mean adding more businesses, slowing development with a housing moratorium, correcting financial leaks – I believe it was $900,000 in investment to stop $1 million in lost water and sewer revenue, etc. I understand from a 20 year forward view that the town will need much more investment in water/sewer and other infrastructure improvements of $1Billion+, in a period that is already seeing taxes increasing rapidly due to past votes with overrides, exclusions or poor forethought on what it means to the future. Like homeowners in financial jeopardy, its time to focus on basics to get our accounts in line with reality. I would love a monument to green initiatives in the way of public building construction but not at hugely increased costs and people forced to live in their cars to afford them!