A significant portion of the meeting concentrated on the proposed changes to the accessory apartment bylaw, transitioning it into a more comprehensive ADU bylaw. The modifications aim to align with current state regulations, which include defining ADUs as either detached or attached units, with specific size restrictions. The board acknowledged the need to replace the existing bylaw entirely to reflect these changes, reducing the maximum allowable size from 1,000 square feet to 900 square feet or half the gross floor area of the principal dwelling, whichever is smaller. The necessity of this update stems from recent state-level legislative changes that dictate definitions and requirements for ADUs, emphasizing the need for local bylaws to comply.

Concerns were raised about the feasibility of constructing ADUs in areas like Plum Island, where existing lot coverage and floor area ratio restrictions could limit potential development. The board noted that while Newbury does not currently have bus routes, the inclusion of relevant definitions in the bylaw was considered essential for future planning. The proposed process for ADU approval involves a shift from requiring zoning board approvals to a more streamlined approach allowing the Building Commissioner to review and approve applications that meet established standards. However, special permits from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) would still be necessary for certain cases requiring further review.

Board members discussed the implications of allowing only one ADU per lot, with the possibility of multiple units in certain scenarios, particularly in two-family homes. The conversation revealed concerns regarding the approval process, particularly whether abutters should have an avenue to appeal decisions made by the Building Commissioner. Suggestions were made to consider a mechanism for appeals to the ZBA as a solution.

The board expressed a preference for taking time to gather public input, acknowledging that discussions might extend into the summer to refine the bylaw further.

In addition to the ADU discussions, the board addressed the implications of short-term rentals and the town’s existing regulations. Concerns were raised about the impact of short-term rentals on local housing markets, noting that properties rented out on a short-term basis do not contribute to long-term housing availability. The potential revenue from short-term rental taxes was discussed as a means to fund affordable housing initiatives, a resource Newbury has yet to capitalize on.

The board also considered the implications of new state requirements for annual inspections of ADUs, raising concerns about the town’s capacity to manage these inspections. There were questions about the feasibility of passing inspection fees onto ADU owners and the authority of building inspectors to access properties to verify compliance. The potential for collaboration between assessors and building inspectors was suggested to alleviate workload issues.

The board’s agenda included updates on local projects, such as the Cricket Lanes 40B project, which has begun the process of requesting building permits. This project is viewed as a positive step in affordable housing initiatives, with efforts among various town departments to ensure compliance with conditions, particularly regarding stormwater management.

Further discussions touched on stormwater regulations, addressing necessary changes to comply with EPA requirements under the MS4 permit. The Planning Director provided updates on housing projects and announced a forthcoming Merrimack Valley Housing Summit aimed at fostering discussions on supporting affordable housing development. The board commended neighboring Newburyport’s advocacy efforts in converting the Brown School into affordable housing units.