Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 4/6/2023
HAMPDEN — The Hampden Planning Board conducted a public hearing regarding an addition to the zoning bylaws. The new bylaw section would allow for “accessory apartments” to be built within or as an addition to an existing single-family residence, for occupation by a relative, while also “protecting the stability, property values and the single-family residential character of the town.”
Selectman John Flynn, who attended the meeting, remarked that he had long been pushing for a bylaw of this type and saw it as a benefit to seniors who may need to live with family, as well as adults who may move back in with parents in a difficult economy.
The Planning Board members went through the document section by section, tweaking and tightening the language. Board member Jason Barroso said he did not want “ambiguity” in the intent of the bylaw. He cited a portion of the document that required any addition to a home under this bylaw to be “sufficiently modest,” and asked who decides what is sufficiently modest. The Planning Board would have the final say on any questionable elements.
As drafted ahead of the hearing, the bylaw spelled out several criteria for the accessory apartments. A defining feature of these apartments is that the occupants must be specific relations of the people living in the primary residence, limited to parents, adult children, siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, grandparents or grandchildren and their spouses. The owner of the property must live in either the primary residence or the accessory apartment. A notarized letter disclosing the intended occupants and their relation to the residents of the primary home is required.
Board member Heather Beattie pointed out that the term adult used in the description of allowed occupants may not cover all applicable situations. She gave hypotheticals in which an adult daughter might want to move in with her 10-year-old child or a parent may wish to have their 17-year-old lives in an accessory apartment rather than completely separate.
Barroso said minors should not be allowed to live in apartments “by themselves,” but an adult with a minor child would be acceptable. Beattie responded, “It’s not our job to decide where a minor lives.” After discussions of the legalities involved and the issues around emancipated minors, Barroso said he was convinced and agreed the term was excluded.
The board considered changing the maximum number of occupants from two people to three people to consider situations in which there may be two parents with a child or a single parent with two children. However, it was decided to leave the cap at two individuals with a hardship exemption available from the Planning Board on a case-by-case basis.
Flynn noted that the Board of Health would be required to verify that the accessory apartment had adequate sleeping and bathroom facilities for the number of occupants.
There physical aspects of the apartments were also discussed. The accessory dwelling must “retain the appearance of a single family residence” and have adequate off-street parking for all residents. The apartment could consist of a group of existing rooms within a house altered to create a separate living space or an addition to the existing home, and the entrance should be on the side or rear of the structure.
Only one accessory apartment would be allowed per single-family home, with a maximum of two bedrooms in the apartment. The bylaw had been written with a maximum apartment size of 700 square feet, however, Barroso noted that the second floor of his own home was about 800 square feet and contained two bedrooms and a bathroom, which would leave “not much space” for a kitchen. The board agreed to set the maximum size to 800 square feet of “total finished floor space.”
Homeowners would be required to obtain a special permit for the apartment with a list of occupants and their relation to those living in the primary residence. An annual notarized document would be required to update this list.
Upon the sale of the home, the new owners would have 90 days to either obtain their own special permit for the apartment or dismantle the “cooking facilities.” There was much discussion regarding the meaning of “dismantle.” Barroso explained that the bylaw specifies the space must be returned to a single-family residence and that two stoves are not allowed in a single-family home in Hampden. However, he pointed out cabinets could remain as they are not specifically cooking facilities.
Resident Ted Zebert asked if a separate septic system would be required, but Barroso explained that if the system is sufficient for the number of individuals living in the residence, it can run on a single septic tank.
Planning Board Chair Madison Pixley noted that the Fire Department had expressed no concerns regarding the bylaw. The board voted to recommend the bylaw to the Board of Selectmen for inclusion in the spring Town Meeting warrant.