I am writing after Hadley Town Meeting’s defeat of the “tiny house” proposal and the Gazette’s following editorial on May 10.
The editorial cited Nantucket as having recently passed a tiny house bylaw, and Fresno, California, for allowing them under its zoning. However, you missed Shutesbury, right in your backyard.
In 2008, Shutesbury passed an entirely overhauled zoning bylaw which included provisions for detached accessory apartments. Instead of just being within a single-family residence, the “apartment” can be within an existing barn or garage, or within a new structure near the principal dwelling.
There is a limit of one per lot, and either the accessory apartment or the principal dwelling must be owner-occupied. The total living area may not exceed 800 square feet, which allows for much smaller, tiny structures if that is the preference.
The town at this point is probably looking at more of these types of living accommodations than new single-family dwellings. Accessory apartments, both internal and detached, allow residents to provide housing for family members or caretakers, or generate extra income through rental.
The additional dwelling units address local housing needs for diversity and affordability without creating new roads, driveways, or building lots.
Jeff Lacy
Shutesbury
The author is a member of the Planning Board in Shutesbury.