Planning Board Searches for Consensus on Two-Family Zoning Issues

July 19, 2022

The Planning Board met on July 12 and searched for consensus on potential zoning bylaw amendments that would facilitate more two-family dwellings as part of the town’s housing inventory.

After a range of recommendations, questions, and objections, the board ultimately determined to continue the discussion during their next meeting after they review additional data.

According to the current bylaw, two-family dwellings are limited to residential districts and restricted to conversion of pre-1945 single-family dwellings (by special permit) or new construction on a lot that existed in 1992 and is one-and-a-half times the minimum lot area.

Editor’s Note: Read the Planning Board’s companion article

Get The Bedford Citizen in your inbox!



Per a 2019 housing study, there are only five vacant and developable residential parcels in Bedford that meet or exceed the minimum lot size and have sufficient frontage.

Tuesday, Board Chair Steven Hagan asked members if they supported the suggestions raised during the last board meeting to make all of the town’s two-family residential zoning laws uniform, merge all four residential districts, and make all lots conforming.

Chris Gittins emphasized that he is primarily concerned with ensuring housing is affordable and stated that homeowners should be able to modify their lots if they have become non-conforming due to zoning changes. Jacinda Barbehenn agreed with Gittins’s focus upon affordability and emphasized a need to increase housing stock.

Amy Lloyd opposed making the residential zoning laws uniform. Todd Crowley confirmed that he is not in favor of merging districts or making all of the zoning laws uniform.

Lloyd presented a proposed revision to the current bylaw that would allow a one-family dwelling to be converted to a two-family, provided that such conversion only requires minor modifications. She also recommended requiring any proposed addition of more than 300 square feet be subject to review.

She suggested that a two-family dwelling may be proposed on any conforming lot in Residence R, A, B, or C districts, subject to current zoning restrictions. Her revisions also stated that there cannot be an existing or proposed accessory dwelling unit and a requirement of at least one off-street parking space per dwelling unit.

She additionally proposed allowing two-family dwellings to be constructed on undersized lots with a special permit. Barbehenn took issue with that requirement and opposed the restriction on accessory dwelling units

Gittins was hesitant about the revisions and noted that they would greatly reduce residents’ ability to construct two-family dwellings. Crowley supported the limits upon conversion to two-family dwellings, citing the difficulties that the town would face in processing an influx of conversion requests.

Barbehenn suggested making a decision on whether to move forward with the proposed revisions during the board’s next meeting July 26. Crowley requested that more data be provided, but also hoped that a final decision could be made during the next meeting. However, Gittins asked that the plan be “pushed back to 2023”.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Subscribe
Notify of

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

All Stories

What’s Bedford Thinking about the Red Sox?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Junior Landscaping
Go toTop