The Mattapoisett Planning board once again took up the matter of drafting new bylaws governing accessory dwelling units and cottage communities.

            The purpose of including ADU regulations as a new bylaw comes after the state of Massachusetts allowed this new type of residential building ostensively to increase housing stock in the Commonwealth.

            In Mattapoisett the Planning Board, over the past decade or so, has been lobbied by the citizens in the town to find a way to add affordable housing as housing costs soared pricing out young families and people looking to downsize.

            As housing prices escalated the board heard time and again, especially during the drafting of the Master Plan residents call for more housing and affordable housing. While the jury is out on just how impactful ADUs will be in providing long term housing solutions the board labored on.

            During the early phases of drafting local ADU standards the Planning Board studied the state’s language under MGL40A and 760 CMR 71.00. The ADU Draft notes, “…this zoning provides for by-right ADU to accomplish the following, increase housing production to address local and regional housing needs across all income levels, development of small scale infill housing that fits in context of zoning district housing while providing gentle hidden density, provide a more moderately priced housing option to serve smaller households with lower incomes seniors and people with disabilities and enable property owners to age and place or downsize or earn supplemental investment in their properties. An ADU is a self-contained housing unit inclusive of sleeping, cooking and with sanitary facilities.

            Recognized in the ADU draft are regulations covering protected use ADU are attached or detached or internal Adu that is located or is proposed to be located on a lot with a single- family residential structure and is not larger than 900 square feet. It also recognizes non-conforming structures.

            The Planning Board has also taken into consideration during the many months they have labored in an effort to get the language right, with notations regarding short-term rentals, and guest houses and family apartments are mentioned. However, no changes are anticipated at this time for those bylaws.

            Another type of dwelling unit known as cottage communities was suggested by board member William Wennerberg. Wennerberg’s experience in building cottage communities in the northeast struck a chord with the Planning Board who pursued this housing concept as a good fit for Mattapoisett.

            In a follow-up with Planning Board Chairman Tom Tucker, Tucker said from his perspective these units might prove attractive to those seeking to downsize or own a home in a small neighborhood setting.

            “These units might be helpful for people looking to age in place or who are just starting out.” Tucker continued saying “It’s an alternative to other types of housing.” He said cottage neighborhoods are walkable, low maintenance…an alternative type of dwelling which he noted might be more attractive than ADUs.

            The draft bylaw for cottage communities states that these community developments represent an alternative form of detached housing and are a critical component for the town’s comprehensive housing strategy.

            Wennerberg has noted during the months of writing and rewriting the cottage bylaw that cottage units would provide housing types that are responsive to the changing household demographics of age and interests and would encourage the creation of more usable open space while promoting the efficient layout of dwellings on parcels being developed.

            The footprint of the overall cottage development and the dwelling units therein remain smaller causing less visual impact than the standard size single family dwelling. The board conjectures that cottage developments would foster a sense of community openness and interaction among residents, it would minimize the visual impact of vehicles, it would maintain a single-family character along public streets while ensuring compatibility with neighborhoods.

            The board will continue to encourage the public to participate in public meetings in an effort to gather as much public feedback as possible before presenting the new bylaws at Town Meeting in May.

            The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, March 16.

Mattapoisett Planning Board

By Marilou Newell

Rochester’s Select Board and the Rochester Memorial School Committee on Monday reviewed a budget proposal that includes a plan to cut four instructional staff positions in the next fiscal year.

            That part of the $8.5 million proposal for the Rochester Public Schools’ FY27 packed the meeting room with concerned residents as Director of Finance Howard Barber explained the department is dealing with a 7.3 percent budget increase over FY26. Two new students with expensive out-of-district special education needs have entered the school system, he explained. That’s what had causing the budget increase that staff reduction would offset.

            Attendees made it clear that seeing three regular teaching positions and one special education position is not what they want to see happen. “These reductions is not what I want to see,” Kate Duggan, School Committee chair, said, speaking on their behalf. “I want to know how we can take these back.” She wanted to know if the money for these positions could still be found or raised in some other way.

            The basic answer from officials: it is a hard gap to fill. Select Board Chair Adam Murphy said school special education costs will go up. That factor is never going to change. Town Administrator Cameron Durant said state contributions to the town will only be $35,000 more this year than last year. Spending for special education needs is a mandate the state doesn’t fund well.

            “If a need like that is enough to wreak havoc on us, then the system is broken,” Committee Member Robin Rounseville said.

            Durant agreed, but noted the current proposals are just estimates. Full estimates will come later. Murphy asked audience members to hold off on asking budget questions until the school committee holds its FY27 budget review meeting later this month.
            Earlier in the meeting, the two groups appointed former school committee candidate Barbara Lee to the Rochester Memorial School Committee to replace Anne Fernandes, who resigned in November. Before this result, audience members objected to the two board’s first motion, which was to table a decision to a later meeting. They wanted to be sure proper procedures were being followed in replacing Fernandes.

            The motion to table was rescinded. Two candidates presented their credentials: Lee and finance committee member David Arancio. Lee won the majority in a roll call vote.

            The next meeting of the Rochester Select Board is scheduled for Monday, March 16 at 6:00 pm at Town Hall, 1 Constitution Way.

Rochester Select Board

By Michael J. DeCicco