Massachusetts State Seal An official website of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Here's how you know

Official websites use .mass.gov

A .mass.gov website belongs to an official government organization in Massachusetts.

Secure websites use HTTPS

A lock icon or https:// means you've safely connected to the official website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content
transcript

transcript  ADU Draft Regulations

ADU Draft Regulations Overview Webinar

Accessible Transcript with Visual Descriptions

Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (HLC)
September 10, 2026

  • Slide 1 — Visual Description: A title slide shows the Massachusetts state seal and the Executive Office of Housing & Livable Communities logo beside a photograph of the Massachusetts State House. The slide title reads “ADU Draft Regulations Overview Webinar,” with the date September 10, 2026.
    • Claire: “Thank you. Welcome everyone today to the ADU Draft Regulations overview webinar. We'll go ahead and get started.”
  • Slide 2 — Visual description: A slide titled “Accommodations Statement” displays the HLC accessibility statement, the contact information for ADU Coordinator Claire Morehouse, a note about ASL interpreter and CART requests, and a statement that the webinar will be recorded and posted to mass.gov/adu.
    • Claire: “I want to start off by briefly reading through this accommodation statement. The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, also known as HLC, does not discriminate on the basis of disability and is committed to providing accessible programs, meetings, and events. To request reasonable modification to participate in this program, please contact myself, Accessory Dwelling Unit Coordinator Claire Morehouse at claire.morehouse@mass.gov. Requests for ASL interpreter or CART services made after this date will be considered but may not be possible to fill. This webinar is also being recorded and will be made available on mass.gov/ADU. And I will pass it over to Filipe for a welcome and introduction.”
  • Slide 3 —Visual description:  A “Welcome and Introductions” slide shows headshots and names of Filipe Zamborlini, Claire Morehouse, and Roy Montoya, with their HLC roles and email addresses where provided.
    • Filipe Zamborlini: “Thank you, Claire. Hello and welcome everyone to this webinar about the draft Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations. My name is Filipe Zamborlini. I am the Community Assistance Unit Manager at the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities. Our team provides zoning guidance, technical assistance, and administers community investment initiatives that support the Commonwealth housing needs. On August 6, 2024, Governor Healey signed the Affordable Homes Act into law. It allowed accessory dwelling units, also known as ADUs, of up to 900 square feet to be built by right. 760 CMR 71, the ADU Regulations were originally published on January 31, 2025. And the law went into full effect on February 2, 2025. Today, we will provide an overview of proposed changes to the ADU Regulations. These changes are intended to address barriers, make it easier and more affordable to build ADUs across Massachusetts. In the year and a half since the ADU Regulations were originally published, HLC has conducted listening sessions, webinars, trainings, and listened to people throughout all of Massachusetts. We heard about how the regulations are working. And where additional clarity or changes may be needed. That feedback was essential to inform the changes you hear about today. Now, we want to hear from you on those proposed changes. A public comment period opens on September 11, 2026, and will remain open through October 9, 2026. We encourage you to review the draft changes and share your feedback through the public comment form at mass.gov forward slash ADU public comment. Again, that is www.mass.gov/ADUpubliccomment. Your input is an important part of helping us finalize these regulations so that they are clear, practical, and responsive to the challenges faced in communities across the Commonwealth. With that, thank you for joining us. And I'll now turn over the webinar to Claire and Roy to continue sharing details on the Draft Regulations”
    • Claire: “Thanks, Filipe. So brief introduction for myself. I am Claire Morehouse. I am the Accessory Dwelling Unit Coordinator here at HLC, and I will let Roy introduce himself.”
    • Roy Montoya: “Hi, I'm Roy Montoya. I'm one of the attorneys at HLC. I'm assigned to the ADU program.”
  • Slide 4 —Visual description: A “Contents” slide presents a page-numbered agenda listing Welcome, Background and Purpose, Changes to Definitions (760 CMR 71.02), Changes to Prohibited Regulations (760 CMR 71.03), and Public Comment Process and Timeline.
    • Claire: “Okay. So Roy and myself will be your guidance on this run of show today. We already covered our welcome and then we will briefly cover the background on the ADU law and regulations and purpose for HLC proposing draft changes. Then we will go over those draft changes which are proposed for the definitions section in the ADU Regulations and the prohibited regulations section in the ADU Regulations. Finally, we will wrap with an overview of the public comment process and timeline going forward.”
  • Slide 5 —Visual description: A section-divider slide titled “Background and Purpose” with the Massachusetts state seal and HLC branding.
    • Claire: “Background and purpose.”
  • Slide 6 —Visual description: A “Webinar Scope” slide lists the scope and limitations of the presentation, including that it covers only proposed changes, is informational rather than a public hearing, and is not legal advice. The public comment URL is shown on screen.
    • Claire: “The scope of this webinar will only cover the proposed changes to the ADU Regulations. It will not cover the ADU Regulations in their entirety. We want to note that these are draft regulations and subject to change after public comment. You'll hear this a lot from us today, but this webinar is purely informational, not a hearing or opportunity to provide public comment. To be considered by HLC as a public comment, please submit that comment through the comment form at www.mass.gov/ADUpubliccomment. This webinar is also not intended to be legal advice, so municipalities should consult their city or town council for legal advice, and other stakeholders should consult trusted legal, real estate, or building advisors.”
  • Slide 7 —Visual description: A “Background and Proposed Changes” slide presents a brief timeline beginning August 6, 2024 and February 2, 2025, followed by bullets describing HLC outreach and the purposes of the proposed changes. A photograph of a community/public meeting appears at right.
    • Claire: “A background on where we are and why we think the proposed changes are necessary. So as Filipe said, in August 2024, Governor Healey signed the Affordable Homes Act, and that established protected use ADUs as an amended portion of the Zoning Act and establish new requirements and protections for ADUs On February 2, 2025, the law and regulations promulgated by our agency took full effect, meaning that protected use ADUs are now and have been since then by right across the Commonwealth. Since implementation and the law and regulations going into full effect, our agency has conducted extensive outreach with various stakeholders, including many of you who are probably on call today, meaning planning and building officials, developers, property owners, academia, and many other stakeholders. Through this engagement, we've received lots of feedback and have used that feedback to inform the proposed regulatory changes that we are presenting to you today. The main purpose of these changes are to further address barriers and stakeholder-identified needs related to ADU development. So, to make these easier, more efficient, and more affordable to build. We also hope that these changes reduce confusion and clarify the intent of the ADU Regulations.”
  • Slide 8 —Visual description: A section-divider slide titled “Changes to Definitions 760 CMR 71.02,” with HLC branding.
    • Claire: “To start, we'll go over changes to the definition section in the ADU Regulations at 760 CMR 71.02. The first regulation HLC is proposing to change is the gross floor area definition. We have heard a lot of feedback over the course of the past year and a half on the implementation of the gross floor area definition at the local level, particularly from building officials, local planners, and property owners.”
  • Slide 9 —Visual description: A slide titled “Definitions – Gross Floor Area” cites 760 CMR 71.02 and lists the proposed clarification to Gross Floor Area, including common areas, enclosed exterior stairs, breezeways, and other means of egress. The right side displays the proposed regulatory redline; proposed deletions and insertions are shown in red.
    • Claire: “This change is intended to clarify how gross floor area is calculated. With the specific intention of maximizing protected use ADU living space. And so, as you'll see in the red lines to the right, this change excludes for the purposes of calculating the gross floor area of the protected use only additionally to what was already in the regulations, common areas, enclosed exterior stairs, breezeways, areas used primarily as means of egress. And so, this proposed change would exclude those areas from that calculation. You'll also see a small change at the top of the regulation where we struck out stories and replaced it with floor area. This is a minor clarification to hopefully additionally reduce confusion at the local level.”
  • Slide 10 —Visual description: A slide titled “Definitions – Short-term Rentals” cites 760 CMR 71.02 and states that the definition is clarified to align with M.G.L. c. 64G, § 3. A proposed redline of the definition appears on the right, with edits highlighted in red.
    • Claire: “HLC is also proposing amending and changing the short-term rental definition. And so, this change is a small change that clarifies the definition of a short-term rental in alignment with Mass General Law Chapter 64G, Section 3. This added language is important because it ties the definition of short-term rental in the ADU Regulations even more directly to Chapter 64G, which is what is cited in the statute and helps define the scope of short-term rental activity that municipalities may regulate or prohibit under the ADU law Those are the only changes to the definition section that HLC is proposing.”
  • Slide 11 —Visual description: A section-divider slide titled “Changes to Prohibited Regulations 760 CMR 71.03,” with HLC branding.
    • Claire: “We will now go over a proposed changes to the prohibited regulation section at 760 CMR 71.03. And I will pass it off to Roy.”
  • Slide 12 —Visual description: A “Use and Occupancy Restrictions” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(2)(c)(1). Bullets describe an exception for affordable housing restrictions and year-round occupancy restrictions tied to municipal financial assistance or land donation. The right side shows proposed redline text in red.
    • Roy: “Thank you, Claire. Use and occupancy restriction. All right. So, this creates, or what we've done essentially is add exceptions to the prohibition on use and occupancy restrictions. The first here allows a municipality to hold an affordable housing restriction in exchange for financial assistance or donation of land. It also includes the year-round housing occupancy restriction, which is allowed in the Seasonal Communities Law. The next slide [slide 13, Use and Occupancy Restrictions Continued]. Okay, so this is the second exception. There is a minor overlap with the Seasonal Communities Law whereby essentially any dwelling unit on an undersized lot is required to have a year-round housing occupancy restriction. So, this second portion of the of the exception is to leave room for that overlap between the two laws, and to try and clarify any confusion that may arise if you know, in a seasonal community.”
  • Slide 14 —Visual description: A “Unit Caps & Density” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(2)(d) and states that limits, quotas, or other restrictions on Protected Use ADUs, including those imposed by a comprehensive permit, are prohibited and that Protected Use ADUs are not counted in density calculations or unit caps. A redline appears on the right.
    • Roy: “Unit caps and density. So, this clarifies that any limit quota or other restriction applies. Comprehensive permit was added here as well. Essentially calculation or unit cap falls under this definition.”
  • Slide 15 —Visual description: A “Minimum Lot Area” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(2)(f) and states that a minimum lot-area requirement for a Protected Use ADU is prohibited. The proposed definition appears in red on the right.
    • Roy: “Minimum lot area. So this is not a change. Generally, this is just for clarity. A requirement for minimum lot area has been prohibited, but it was contained within the unreasonable section below attached to dimensional standards. This is the very end of the paragraph. So that was, it is relevant to the dimensional standards, but we removed it and added it here instead, so it's more clearly identifiable as a prohibition. This is minor clarification.”
  • Slide 16 —Visual description: An “Unreasonable Regulations” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(3)(b). It summarizes the relationship between the Dover analysis and the regulatory limits and includes the proposed amended regulatory language in a redline on the right.
    • Roy: “So, the way that the Dover analysis and the regulations are supposed to work, the way we intended it from day one is that you'll always do the Dover analysis. You're also going to take a look at your own zoning, and you take a look at some of the limits. So, for example, setbacks, right? You would take the lesser of the single-family home, or if you're looking at a principal dwelling and the principal dwelling that you're looking at in a single-family home, an accessory structure. So, the lesser of. But for example, the lowest setback in your community might be 40 feet. I don't know, just taking it as an example, if you run the Dover analysis, something less restrictive like 20 feet might be the most you can impose under Dover. Whatever is least restrictive is what you're supposed to impose, whether that's the Dover analysis outcome or the limit that we establish in the regulations for reasonable. This language is a little bit confusing, so we tried to simplify it to make it clearer that you're doing both things, and in no case is a restriction going to be reasonable if it exceeds the regulatory limit, but in no case is it ever going to be reasonable if it exceeds the limit below.”
  • Slide 17 —Visual description: A “Dimensional Standards” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(3)(b)(2). Bullets address moving minimum lot size to the Prohibited Regulations section and clarifying what counts as an accessory structure. The right side contains the proposed redline, including examples such as storage sheds, gazebos, and garages and exclusions such as fences, pools, and flagpoles.
    • Roy: “So here you'll see that we removed the lot size, the minimum lot size from here, so it was moved from this paragraph up into its own prohibition. We also added a little bit more clarity as to what was intended from accessory structure. And so certain things, such as pools, flagpoles, fences were not intended. But structures like storage sheds, gazebos garages, those were intended. So, there's more clarity here given, which is a big question that we received quite often.”
  • Slide 18 —Visual description: A slide titled “Utilities, Safety, Health, and Emergency Access” cites 760 CMR 71.03(3)(b)(3) and summarizes the proposed standards for utilities, safety, health, emergency access, stormwater, wastewater disposal, utility connections, lawful methods of compliance, and the specialized stretch energy code.
    • Roy: “So, there were some significant changes made to the utility, to this section, that involves health emergency access safety, utilities, stormwater, and on-site wastewater disposal. This slide is generally trying to get at what the intention here. Next slide.”
  • Slide 19 —Visual description: A “Utilities, Safety, Health, and Emergency Access Redlines” slide shows a dense proposed redline of 760 CMR 71.03(3)(b)(3), including language about state and federal minimum requirements, separate or common utility connections, onsite wastewater disposal, the specialized stretch energy code, and permissible methods of compliance. Additional notes indicate that the full redline is available at mass.gov/adu.
    • Roy: “So, these are the changes. So, a couple things, a couple of big things. The first is that septic systems, so additional septic rules would not apply under the revised rule. Municipalities can impose Title V, but not additional septic requirements. There are a lot of confusion over separate utility connection requirements. The original intention was to disallow the separate utility connections. We had left originally some room for a requirement if it was absolutely necessary, you know. But as a general rule, we've not found any situations where that would be true. And so, we clarified this to bring it back into alignment with our original intention that they not be required. There is also a requirement here that any method of compliance that complies with federal or state law can be used by a homeowner and that in enforcing Federal and state laws that municipalities will enforce the minimum required of those laws, not impose additional requirements. Next.”
  • Slide 20 —Visual description: A “Site Plan Review” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(3)(b)(4), notes the former subsection number, and states that site plan review requirements must be written, clear, and objective and consistent with an as-of-right process. Proposed regulatory language appears on the right.
    • Claire: “I think this goes back to me. Thanks, Roy. Oh, great. So, site plan review, HLC is proposing to add to this section that any requirement for site plan review concerning protected use ADUs would not be found reasonable if not written in addition to being clear and objective. So, the intention for this change is for any requirement for site plan review at the local level to be written in addition to clear and objective.”
  • Slide 21 —Visual description: A “Fees” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(3)(b)(5), notes the former subsection number, and explains that fees imposed on Protected Use ADUs are subject to the Dover test and covers impact analysis, studies, reports, impact mitigation, and utility connection fees. Proposed language appears in a redline on the right.
    • Claire: “HLC is also proposing a change to the fees section under unreasonable regulations. And so, this change clarifies that fees imposed on protected protected use ADUs are subject to the Dover test. So, we wanted to very much underscore that with this change. That was the intention We also clarified that this section applies to fees for impact analysis, studies, reports, or impact mitigations and fees for utility connections. For any of these examples that I just said for any of these examples that I just said are written out here. Fees not required for single-family residential development would not be found reasonable. And in addition to that, we wanted to underscore that all fees are subject to the Dover test. So, we set the bar here in this example, as well as localities should be evaluating those fees against the Dover test that is outlined in the section above this one.”
  • Slide 22 —Visual description: A “Historic Districts” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(3)(c), notes the former subsection number, and explains a grammatical capitalization change to the term “dimensional standards.” The proposed regulatory language is shown on the right.
    • Claire: “HLC is proposing a minor grammatical change for this section. We are uncapitalizing dimensional standards because we don't define it in the definition section.”
  • Slide 23 —Visual description: A “Pre-existing Nonconforming Structures” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(4), notes the former subsection number, and shows proposed language concerning nonconformity and Section 6 findings. A large redline occupies the right half of the slide; a note at the bottom says the change predates a more recent amendment to Section 6.
    • Claire: “Pre-existing nonconforming structures. This section clarifies that a municipality shall not prohibit the development of a protected use ADU due to nonconformance. The large block of red text as you see to the right, this is not new guidance. This has existed in HLC's frequently asked questions, as well as our model zoning. And myself and other HLC colleagues, in correspondence with questions from building officials, planners, etc. on non-conformance have been sharing out that FAQ and guidance that we have issued. But we wanted to put that guidance directly into the regulations. And so, this section clarifies that a Section 6 finding may be required where the development of a protected use ADU creates, extends, or increases nonconformity, but that finding shall be based on clear and objective criteria and done in an as of right manner. We also wanted to note that this change was proposed before the more recent change to Section 6 was passed. We invite comments on this section relevant to that more recent change.”
  • Slide 24 —Visual description: A “Short-term Rentals” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(5), notes the former subsection number, and shows proposed language allowing municipalities to prohibit or regulate short-term rentals of Protected Use ADUs under M.G.L. c. 64G, while limiting a requirement that an ADU be leased or rented for more than 32 consecutive days. The redline is shown on the right.
    • Claire . Short-term rentals. So in addition to amending the short-term rental definition and in the intended outcome of greater clarity, HLC is clarifying in this section that municipalities may choose to Prohibit or regulate the operation of protected use as short-term rentals as defined in Mass General Law Chapter 64G. This change largely came out of confusion and questions coming up from communities as to how a short-term rental was defined. And this change further clarifies that the intention of the statute was to define short-term rentals in alignment with Chapter 64G and hopefully clears up confusion on the local level as to how STRs are defined with relation to protected use ADU. So, this means that municipalities may continue to prohibit or regulate the operation of a short-term rental as defined in Chapter 64G, provided that municipalities shall not require a protected use ADU to be released or to be leased or rented for more than 32 consecutive days.
  • Slide 25 —Visual description: An “Enforceability of Prohibited or Unreasonable Restrictions and Regulations” slide cites 760 CMR 71.03(6), notes the former subsection number, and explains that the section applies to all Protected Use ADUs and addresses restrictions imposed in exchange for zoning or development approvals. A dense redline appears on the right.
    • Claire: “Enforceability of prohibited or unreasonable restrictions and regulations. So, we struck out pre-existing ADUs, as you'll see there at the top, to clarify that this section applies to all protected use ADUs. This change clarifies that, as I said, not just that [this, inserted for clarity] does not apply to not just pre-existing ADUs and emphasizes that municipalities may not restrict protected use ADUs in exchange for approval of development activities, including subdivisions, land disposition agreements, or development agreements, except for what is otherwise provided for in the use and occupancy provisions of the ADU Regulations including the newly added changes around affordable housing restrictions and year-round occupancy restrictions. That wraps up the proposed changes that HLC has put forth in the ADU Draft Regulations you can see the full version of that on our website and come up on this screen right here.”
  • Slide 26 —Visual description: A section-divider slide titled “Public Comment Process and Timeline,” with HLC branding.
    • Claire: “Now we want to go over the public comment process and proposed timeline.”
  • Slide 27 —Visual description: A “Timeline” slide presents a table with four dates and corresponding events: September 4, September 10, September 11, and October 9 at 11:59 p.m. The slide includes the webinar posting information and public comment submission methods.
    • Claire: “So on September 4th last week, HLC released the ADU Regulations on our website. As I said, you can find those at mass.gov/ADU. And you can look at them in their context. We are recording this webinar today, and we will post it online likely not this week, but next week as we need to follow accommodations procedures and have an official transcript. So, we will post that as soon as we can next week. And on September 11th, so tomorrow, the public comment period officially starts. You may submit a comment. I know we've said this link a few times, but we really want to make sure you know it. [www.Mass.gov/ADUpubliccomment](http://www.Mass.gov/ADUpubliccomment). If you don't want to use the forum, you can also email that comment to EOHLCRegulationComments@mass.gov. The public comment period will be open for four weeks and on October 9th at 11:59 PM, the form will close and any public comments sent to the email as well will not be accepted. After the public comment period closes, HLC will review the comments, consider any changes to the draft regulations based on the comments, and then publish the final regulations.”
  • Slide 28 —Visual description: A “FOR MORE INFORMATION” slide lists the ADU webpage, public comment form, and questions email address. The right side shows a photograph of the Massachusetts State House with a blue information panel over the image and HLC branding.
    • Claire: “Thank you for attending this webinar. You may visit the ADU webpage to review the draft of the proposed regulations, and we hope that you submit a public comment using the public comment form or email. You may also email questions you have to [EOHLCADUHomes@mass.gov](mailto:EOHLCADUHomes@mass.gov). A reminder that this webinar is purely informational, not a hearing or opportunity to provide public comment. For your comment to be considered by HLC, you must submit it through the formal comment form. We will now take clarifying questions from the chat, but a reminder that if you have submitted a question through the chat, it is not considered a formal public comment, and we really encourage you to submit that via the formal mechanisms.”
    • Claire: “I will also, I'm going to stop sharing, but I will put all of those links in the chat. So taking a look at the chat now. The first question we have received is, Is the minimum lot area intended to be interpreted as disallowing FAR or other lot size related regulations? I will start off by saying that HLC plans to post an FAQ on FAR very soon, and so I encourage all folks on the call to check out our FAQ website. I'll also put that link in the chat before we log off. I'll do that in a few moments. The minimum lot area, change is not, as Roy said, it is not a change from the existing regulations. It's just moving it to its proper section under prohibited regulations.”
    • Filipe: “There's also a few questions in the chat, in the Q&A about some additional things regarding wastewater to the folks that are asking these questions, they're pretty robust. These are great comments they were proposing for us to consider. There's the changes that are related to wastewater, as was explained are alignment to the existing standards. And that's the intent there to clarify that alignment. But I think anything beyond that would highly encourage folks to have a comment that goes beyond the scope of what was explained today to provide public comment using the public comment form.”
    • Claire: “Thanks, Filipe. Another comment we have received is, can towns still regulate short-term rentals? Yes, so the changes proposed simply clarified the definition of short-term rental as intended by the statute. We've gotten a lot of questions on that definition. And so HLC’s changes merely further opine on what is in Chapter 64G and that definition. And so towns and cities can still choose to regulate or prohibit short-term rentals as protected use ADUs. That is not a change from merely further opining on what HLC intended to mean as a short-term rental, and how that's defined.”
    • Roy: “I think, Claire, there's some confusion over the time I think many towns had longer periods of time than what a short-term rental is defined in 64G, and that was struck by the AGO. And then there was some confusion given Seasonal communities, right? Year-round restrictions, year-round restriction is not a short-term rental restriction. And so you can't regulate short-term rentals that are a year or six months or doesn't work that way, just because of the definition 64G, so trying to really clarify that definition, given other changes in the law..”
    • Filipe: “That’s a great clarification, Roy, but I think, and I think again, back to the original question, that like we're not changing anything as it pertains clarifying. Yeah. The intent is clarification. It is not a modification of the original purposes and mechanisms available to cities and towns.”
    • Claire: “So we received another question where the new regulations state, quote, a municipality may require a finding under Mass General Law Chapter 40A, Section 6, quote, Does this mean an ADU could be sent to the Zoning Board of Appeals to determine those findings through a special permit or a public hearing.”
    • Roy: “No. They cannot. So, this was in the model bylaw already. So, which was language we worked out with the Attorney General's office when the model bylaw was written. So, we've carried that over to the regulations to clarify this issue. Section 6 gives municipalities the option, they have an option of pursuing a finding through the permit granting authority or the special permit granting authority. It's an option. I think as a practical matter, many towns choose the special permit granting authority. But we also have to read that law in combination with the Dover Amendment, which says that you cannot ever subject a protected use ADU to any special permit process. So, when it comes to Section 6 findings You can still have, there may still be a need for Section 6 finding. You don't have to have Section 6 findings for protected use ADUs. You may choose to in certain circumstances where it's appropriate, but, you would have to go through the permit granting authority, have to be a by-right process for the ADU, so trying to clarify that for people given the option, and they need to read these laws together.”
    • Claire: “Thanks, Roy. Another question per 310 CMR 15.203, the allowable septic flow for a parcel is what is listed on the septic permit. My town has septic regulations that are more restrictive in general than Title V. Are you suggesting that the local septic regulations do not apply?”
    • Roy: “The change will limit, Sorry, Claire, the change will limit additional septic regulations would not apply to protected ADUs. Only Title V.”
    • Claire: “Another question. What is considered to be, quote, reasonable terms of an affordable housing restriction?”
    • Roy: “Well. So that language was adopted in conjunction with 40B/LIP/LAU folks, and it's important because. Well, I mean, so this is a good issue for comment if that's something that you have some suggestions to make on it. The difficulty with an affordable housing restriction, I'll tell you, when it comes to protected use ADU is that they often require things like a fair marketing plan. Right, they require affordable tenant selection, monitoring, affordable income over time. It may be a good pairing with a nonprofit organization working with municipalities, which we've seen this is something that has come up recently, several organizations have come to us working with affordable trust funds to try and have these things developed who have a process for handling this kind of thing. But you know, an individual land homeowner may not be as capable of handling a lot of those issues. So when it comes to looking at the affordable housing restrictions in these circumstances, I think there has to be some room for trying to determine what the terms are, whether they're reasonable, whether reasonable in terms of who the homeowner is, that sort of thing. And it certainly something that we're keeping in mind, but just trying to be fair and make sure that we're not setting homeowners up for failure. So what the terms are for those sorts of things, I think, for specifically for protected use ADUs, is something that you know, is subject to development as well as we see more projects come forward.”
    • Claire: “So we have the question for the utility section. Are private utilities able to require separate utility connections or municipal utilities cannot? And so our regulations, they oversee and impact the powers of municipalities over zoning, including where, and Roy, you can explain this better than me, but where they use their zoning authority to limit the development of protected ADUs, and so this change would, or clarification, it's more of a clarification than a change, it's just further clarifying our intention that municipalities would not be able to require either a separate or a common utility to directly answer your question, our regulations don't apply to private utilities, so there are cases where private utilities will still require separate connections, whether that has to do with the distance of the ADU or flow rate or the, you know, the wattage rate of if you're doing electrical utilities. So all those things will impact private utilities, decisions of whether or not they can or they will be requiring separate or common utilities. As a side note, we have heard from a lot of utility companies that they prefer common utilities in general, unless there is a circumstance where they have to do a separate connection based on the site. And so short answer to your question, this just impacts whether municipalities can, and not private utilities.”
    • Roy: “The only thing I would add, Claire, is it's not just zoning. So the interesting thing about the protected use ADU law is In the Dover context, right, the statute applies to things like Title V. It talks about reasonable regulations of municipalities, including but not limited to Title V, which is not zoning. So the application of this law applies a little bit beyond sort of some of the traditional pieces that we would normally see. And yeah, there are engineering reasons why you might have a requirement for one or the other, but that's allowed for by the statute.”
    • Claire: “By the private utility company, not the municipality?”
    • Roy: “Right.”
    • Claire: “Another question is, what about a finding that is not a special permit? I'm not quite sure what this means, but just to further clarify our new proposed regulations or HLC's new proposed regulations clarify that a Section 6 finding can be required for protected use ADU on the basis of creating, extending the nonconformity. Roy, do you want to go into you have a great example you use, which I think could be useful to use, where that section six finding may not be required. For example, with a, I think it's a garage I've heard you use before a few times.  I can also, well, I think the--”
    • Roy: “Yeah, well, I think it's… if you have a non-conforming garage, right, but the garage itself conforms to… so the structure that the structure conforms to what would be required of the ADU And you're building, you're going to change the garage, you're going to turn it into an ADU. It would be a conforming structure, so I don't… there wouldn't be a need for a Section 6 finding for that, for the ADU that is going to be within the setbacks, the height, and all the requirements. So yes.”
    • Claire: “So basically, if you're converting a structure that's now a protected ADU and now it meets reasonable protected use ADU setback, height, et cetera, there may not be a need for Section 6 findings. So while our regulations clarify you can require Section 6 finding. Also encouraging on this webinar for municipalities to look at the case at hand and whether that requirement is necessary.”
    • Roy: “Right, and there will be something also I'm really interested to get comments on a lot of things I'm hoping he comments on, but the… as you all know, the Section 6, the section has been amended, right? So, there's a new the fiscal year budget had a new some new language as well that exempts certain residential uses that meet certain requirements. And so that's something that we need to also take a look at, make sure that we're hitting all of the points we need to.”
    • Claire: “There's a question on what Section 6 findings consist of I would point you back to the Zoning Act”
    • Roy: “Yeah, I mean, a lot of towns default to special permit, but that is not the requirement under the law. It gives the towns an option.”
    • Claire: “We have a question, Title V doesn't establish a bedroom definition for privacy, which is a way we have been reallocating bedrooms. I think this is coming from a developer. Will there be more clarification on this? That's certainly something I would encourage you to submit a public comment on.”
    • Roy: “There's also great guidance. There's a DEP, there's great guidance on Title V septic requirements as they apply to ADU protected use ADU specifically. So, there is a guidance document about attached detached distance, all of it and explaining what's possible, what would work under the law?”
    • Claire: “We have a comment that Title V contemplates more restrictive local septic regulations with a citation.”
    • Filipe: “Yeah, that question is a great possible public comment itself. There are framings that the law and the regulations together ensure that state standards are met and so if there is a comment about this, this is a great question that if somebody has a question about the specificity of what another regulation does and says, and how it might relate to the ADU Regulations and you see something and you would like to make a comment. This is a great question to guide you towards putting forward a public comment.”
    • Claire: “This is a great question. Do you have recommendations for towns working to ensure local bylaw compliance with the rapidly changing state expectations? Updating via town meeting even twice a year isn't keeping up. So, I would just like to point out that the ADU law does not require for cities and towns, although HLC heavily encourages it, we do not require compliance with compliance doesn't even It's not in the ADU realm, that word. And so we encourage cities and towns to update their zoning with the current ADU law and regulations. And we certainly considered the burden on municipalities who are working to ensure and reduce confusion at the local level by having their local zoning bylaws align with The ADU Regulations and so when we looked at these proposed changes, we really went in with a fine-tooth comb. It didn't take us very long to get through the proposed changes, because we knew that we didn't want to have also, in addition to really evaluating what were the fine points that, based on outreach we received, that we wanted to pursue changing, and where we really thought there was a need for clarification, in addition to weighing the burden on municipalities who will likely look to go back to town meeting and make those adjustments based on these changes. So, we appreciate the comment. And I don't think we will have any formal guidance. My colleagues can jump in on that. But I wanted to let you know that we did consider that as part of these proposed changes.”
    • Roy: “I would just say that it's self-executing, right?  So, a requirement, for example, for a separate utility connection would not be enforceable. So, it should be changed, I hope, in your bylaws in the future, but it's a requirement for immediate compliance under the law. It simply just won't be enforceable If that change is made to the regulations. As an example.”
    • Filipe: “And in addition to both what Claire and Roy are bringing to the top on this, there are state resources to help communities do this kind of work if it is needed, regional planning agencies have district local technical assistance funding to help communities and many have helped. We have a model by law that pending the final changes in the regulations, we will look into it and see if it requires additional changes to the model zoning, model by law. We have grants through the Community One Stop for Growth, such as Housing Choice grant program and community planning grant program that provide cities and towns funding to be able to hire someone to provide them support through the process. We have technical assistance through Claire and our team to provide guidance. We will probably resume office hours post the final process of the regulation. We will continue to have webinars and outreach sessions to explain the final changes once they are completed and we have the public comments reviewed and have published new final version of the regulations. So, we intend, as you all saw us go through the whole Commonwealth through info sessions, listening sessions, road tour, virtual and in-person road tour, we intend to have something very similar that we provide information on the modifications to the regulations.”
    • Claire: “Are protected ADUs the only ones that are subject to seasonal community regulations for year-round deed restrictions? I think this question relates to the changes to the use and occupancy definition section. Are other accessory dwelling units subject to this as well? I think referencing local accessory dwelling units that don't meet the definition of protected ADU.”
    • Roy: “Yeah. This is all dwelling units. I mean, there's really two different ways you can read the seasonal communities law when it comes to ADUs, how do they interact is a real question. There are, I think, minds can differ. Reasonable minds can differ on a few different very nitpicky minor points. So, I think it's, you know, trying to use the regulations to provide clarity where we can. So, in the seasonal communities law you have a right to acquire a year-round restriction. Require one. So, there's a this is the first exception. It's not a mandatory thing. There's making room for municipalities that are requiring them from, people, you know, homeowners who have these Protected use ADU doesn't mean they can't acquire them of any local ADUs. Any time you can require them within whatever the bounds of the law is.”
    • Roy: “The second part is sort of this mandatory provision that, you know, municipalities are required… seasonal communities have to adopt zoning to allow attainable housing on undersized lots, right? And there's a sub provision in there that any dwelling unit Developed under the Seasonal Communities Law on an undersized lot is, you know, shall have a year-round restriction. So, you know, if you have an attainable house, a home, and there's an ADU protected use ADU built as accessory to an attainable home, it's arguably developed under the seasonal communities law as well as protected use ADU law. And so, under the regulations, it would be required to have this Year-round restriction to it. So, we're making room for seasonal communities to require this of these protected ADU developed accessory to and attainable home. So, trying to add clarity to it, it does not impact any other ADU that might be developed or anything like that under the seasonal communities law.”
    • Claire: A lot of these, so are the current regulations meant to enable each dimensional requirement to be evaluated separately? For example, can an ADU use the more permissive accessory structure setback and the more permissive principal dwelling height, meaning use one standard application. So, we get this question a lot. The question is essentially can is the intention of the law to cherry pick each separate standard and evaluate against the protected use ADU for what would be most permissive. And the answer is yes. So, this doesn't change that answer. We're only further opining on the definition of an accessory structure and what municipalities should be looking for in their own zoning to evaluate what is the most permissive restriction to apply to the protected use ADU for each dimensional standard. There are quite a few questions in here that Would be great as public comments.
    • Claire: “I just, there are certain questions I think if you look at your question and you think it would be it's less about clarification and more about the impacts of the particular proposed changes. That's something that HLC would like to hear as a formal public comment to be able to evaluate as we look towards final publication. So impacts, for example, separate utility connections and background on that from a municipality. That's something we want to hear as a public comment. Additional wastewater and septic impacts on your community, and how these proposed changes will impact that. That's also something we would like to hear as a public comment. There are also general questions on the ADU law and regulations that are not impacted by these proposed changes. And so those questions you are welcome to email me directly. I will put my email in the chat ([Claire.Morehouse@mass.gov](mailto:Claire.Morehouse@mass.gov)). So, questions on, for example, how gross floor area is calculated that does not change from the further excluded areas in the proposed changes. Or attics, for example, you are welcome to email me directly.”
    • Filipe: “There are also some questions that are kind of outside the scope of the law, including how do you handle converting an existing dwelling into an ADU and then build another principal dwelling. There are communities that are looking into this idea, but it is outside the scope of the law as the law itself and the regulations are focused on the creation of an ADU which requires there to be a principal dwelling in a lot in a single family residential zoning district, and also a few questions about Section 6 findings that I think I want to repeat a little bit of what Claire said and add an additional caveat. If you are a municipal employee, a building permit authority, building a permit issuance authority, highly encourage folks to speak to your municipal council and understand the specifics of what you need to do for a Section 6 finding requirement. There are some questions around whether a specific space can be counted towards the gross floor area, again, highlight Claire's point, highly recommend folks to look at our existing FAQs and also to reach out to Claire with any of these specific questions that are not related to these specific and fine-tuned proposed edits.”
    • Roy: “There's also, yeah, there's also the FAR question again, which. That's a great one to tackle. Yeah, that's been resolved by the Attorney General's Office. It's in multiple opinions by the municipal law unit. You know, FAR is not applicable to a protected use ADU.”
    • Filipe: “Correct.”
    • Claire: “We have a question on when we expect for the regulations to go into full effect. This is dependent on a lot of factors. What I can tell you is the public comment period will last for four weeks and wrap up on October 9th, commencing on October 10th, HLC will review all public comments and go into a final regulations process by which our agency council will review. Governor's office will review, etc. And that timing, can be a length of time that we are unsure of as of right now, but I can tell you that public comment process will wrap up on October 9th, and we'll be working as quickly as possible for final publication.”
    • Filipe: “I'll also note that there are a few questions about possible changes to laws that have not yet materialized. We really can't comment on that. If it is not yet a law, we really can't take it into significant consideration, but as laws change, we will, of course, continue keeping looking into how they interact, as you all heard from Roy and Claire with the seasonal communities law, we took a very fine comb approach to see how they interact to better clarify that interaction, so if there are further changes to the MGL, to Zoning Act, the Massachusetts General Laws, or anything else, we will, of course, continue looking at how those laws interact with ADU as well, protected use ADUs especially.”
    • Claire: “Yeah, there's a few questions on attics and gross floor area. I would encourage folks with thoughts on the implementation of this on the local level And given our proposed changes to submit a public comment on what you have submitted in the chat. Alrighty.”
    • Filipe: “Not seeing any additional questions yet that we can address as they are related to the changes. But we can give an additional minute to see if anybody has any final questions. If not, we are coming to a close. Okay. Well, thank you everybody for joining us. As Claire has mentioned, we will be posting this webinar on [www.mass.gov/adu](http://www.mass.gov/adu). For folks to be able to review, submit a public comment. And again, highly encourage folks to submit your public comment at mass.gov forward slash ADU public comment. Thank you all very much Thank you. Thank you.”

Resources:

General Website: www.mass.gov/adu

Public Comment Form: www.mass.gov/ADUPublicComment

Video: ADU Draft Regulations

Skip this video ADU Draft Regulations.
You skipped the video, ADU Draft Regulations.