By Adam Swift
City Councillors want Revere to take a closer look at a proposed state-mandated change to the city’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) ordinance.
Last year, Governor Maura Healey signed the Affordable Housing Acts. Part of that act requires that all municipalities allow the construction of ADUs, sometimes known as in-law apartments, in any zone that allows single-family homes.
At last week’s meeting, the city council approved two separate motions related to compliance with the state ADU ordinance.
One filed by Councillor-at-Large Michelle Kelley asks the city solicitor to draft a potential home rule petition for the state legislature that would make Revere exempt from the state ordinance.
The second, filed by Ward 4 Councillor Paul Argenzio, asks the solicitor to look into the feasibility of challenging some of the aspects of the state ordinance in court.
“I am asking for an exemption by way of a home rule petition from Section 8 of the Affordable Homes Act on accessory dwelling units and (to) allow us to keep our ordinance under Title 17 rather than seeking a modification,” said Kelley.
Kelley said the city’s current ADU ordinance is a common sense approach which fits Revere’s unique needs and dynamics.
“For example, we require owner occupancy for two years, the state has no such requirement,” she said.
The city ordinance also restricts ADUs to single-family homes only and prohibits enlarging the principal dwelling to create the units. She said the state ordinance does not.
“Let’s keep in mind that our ADU ordinance was intended to help single-family homeowners, many of (whom) are senior citizens, many of whom had unpermitted inlaw apartments that were built decades ago,” Kelley said. “It allows these units to remain, bringing them up to code, and only requires one off-street parking spot, instead of the required two spaces.”
However, she said the state ordinance does not require any parking as long as the unit is within half a mile of any transportation center, a definition which includes bus stops.
Kelley said the state-mandated ADU requirements will hit the densely-built and populated Revere harder than other communities that have more space for the ADUs. She added that it will also put undue pressure on city and emergency services.
“By approving this tonight, we are not asking the state to exempt us from creating additional housing, merely asking to keep our common sense approach, protecting our single-family neighborhoods, and preserving the quality of life for our residents,” said Kelley.
Argenzio said his motion was slightly different from Kelley’s, but that it sought to achieve the same goals.
In addition to the issues raised by Kelley, Argenzio said he also had issues with the possibility of allowing the ADUs to be built in flood zones, as well as the definition of reasonable restrictions that the city could place on the building of the units.
Director of Planning and Community Development Tom Skwierawski said the city can continue to work on refining the ADU ordinance, and said there were issues that need to be cleared up by the state, such as the definition of reasonable regulations.
“I’m not convinced a home rule petition so soon after this legislation has been passed would be fruitful at the State House, nor do (I believe) challenging in court as a municipality might be the right way to go,” he said. “What I am committed to doing with everyone on the council here is putting forth a set of, as Councillor Kelley mentioned, common sense regulations of what we all thought ADU development was going to look like, and putting that and codifying it in our ordinance.”
Skwierawski said the city could take steps in its ordinance to make sure there are no ADUs allowed in basements below flood elevation and to limit some of the zoning districts they would be allowed in by right. The state ordinance calls for allowing the ADUs by right in all zoning districts that allow the construction of single family homes, but Skwierawski said the city might be able to remove the ADUs by right in districts that are more geared toward business.
“What my position is is that rather than trying to come up with modifications and trying to piecemeal this, I really think it is better for us to say we have something on the books,” said Kelley. “We are not trying to block the creation of these ADUs where it is reasonable within our city.”
