Beverly ADU Ordinance Change Spurs New City Council Public Hearing

BEVERLY, MA — Residents will have another chance to weigh in on proposed zoning changes allowing for expanded accessory dwelling units in Beverly at a City Council meeting next month.

The public hearing was requested after the Planning Board recommended what was described as "material changes" to the proposal that was before the joint public hearing of the City Council and Planning Board last month.

The changes largely increase homeowner flexibility when it comes to creating an ADU — or so-called "in-law apartments" — removing the requirement for a designated parking space for each ADU and allowing property owners looking to create an ADU the ability to seek a zoning variance on a non-conforming property.

"The nuts and bolts of the changes are that a person looking to do an ADU should have the same rights to seek a variance or special permit (as someone seeking one for their own residential use)," Beverly Director of Planning and Development Darlene Wynne told the Legal Affairs Subcommittee on Monday night.

Beverly City Solicitor Stephanie Williams said the additional public hearing will give the City Council a chance to discuss the changes and allow for public comment both on the changes and the overall ordinance change given that the ordinance is not particularly time-sensitive.

"That seems like a big enough change to allow the public more time to weigh in," Legal Affairs Subcommittee Chair Estelle Rand agreed in affirming the public hearing for 7:30 p.m. on Nov. 20.

City Councilor Hannah Bowen, who wrote the original letter to the Council proposing expanding ADU options in the city as a way to create more affordable housing units and allow homeowners a means to downsize and potentially draw an income from their property, told Patch she agrees with the changes and additional public hearing.

"The changes are basically a response to the first public hearing," she told Patch late Monday night, "and I think they really strengthen the ADU ordinance further."

Supporters of expanded ADUs cite it as a way to increase housing inventory using existing infrastructure without substantial new construction during an affordable housing crisis, as well as a means for older residents to potentially create income that allows them to stay in their homes.

Those who oppose ADUs generally share concerns about increased traffic and congestion and possibly changing the character of established residential neighborhoods.

The Beverly proposal — which appeared to enjoy widespread support among Council members in September — would require the owner to live in either the main dwelling area or the ADU itself on any property and would be in line with city bylaws banning short-term, or transient, rentals.

The proposal did not include the strict affordability requirement that a similar ordinance in Salem includes after it was deemed a potential impediment to residents in taking advantage of the ADU provision.

Wynne said in September that a survey shows that most ADUs — given their relatively diminutive size — tend to be more on the affordable scale anyway and while 7,510 Beverly homes will be eligible to create ADUs, including 4,617 with detached structures, a more likely expectation based on area communities with ADU ordinances is that between five and 10 will be created per year.

(Scott Souza is a Patch field editor covering Beverly, Danvers, Marblehead, Peabody, Salem and Swampscott. He can be reached at Scott.Souza@Patch.com. Twitter: @Scott_Souza.)