Land Court notice invites Amherst residents to weigh in on ‘jumbo ADU’ case
ADU currently under construction at 27 Newell Court. Photo: amherstma.gov
Editor’s note: Amherst Indy has been following a dispute over the interpretation of Amherst’s zoning bylaw as it applies to certain accessory dwelling units (ADUs), including a project at 27 Newell Court. The dispute centers in part on whether finished upper-level space containing bedrooms and a bathroom may be excluded from the calculation of an ADU’s gross floor area, allowing a structure with roughly 1,200 square feet of usable space to qualify under provisions applying to ADUs of 900 square feet or less. In August, Amherst’s Zoning Board of Appeals voted 5-0 to uphold an abutter’s challenge to the Newell Court project.
The developers and related property owners subsequently filed suit in Massachusetts Land Court challenging the town and the ZBA. The case could affect not only the Newell Court property but a number of other Amherst properties involving similar ADU designs. Amherst Indy has reported on the Land Court lawsuit and the properties named in it, as well as the broader question of how the town’s ADU and gross-floor-area provisions should be interpreted. The Indy has also published commentary from residents, including Ira Bryck’s argument that the Land Court should uphold the ZBA decision. Attorney Michael Pill, who represents the plaintiffs, previously wrote in the Indy about the effects of the state’s new ADU law on Amherst zoning.
Pill has now provided the Indy with the Land Court’s approved public notice and asked that we make it available to Amherst residents. The notice is directed to “all persons with an interest in the validity, meaning, or extent” of Sections 5.011 and 6.18 of Amherst’s zoning bylaw as they affect ADUs. It advises people with such an interest to take whatever action they believe necessary to protect that interest before December 9, 2026, including, where appropriate, seeking to intervene in the case under Rule 24 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure.
Pill told the Indy that he stated in open court that he would not challenge the standing of Amherst residents who seek to participate in the case, describing the notice as an invitation to residents who have something to say about what have come to be called “jumbo ADUs.” Whether a person is permitted to intervene, however, is ultimately a matter for the court.
The court-approved notice follows and is attached here.
Amherst needs to fix its ADU bylaw — not abandon ADUs, but close a student-rental loophole.
Protected ADUs have a 900-square-foot ceiling; larger local ADUs, up to 1,200 square feet, require an owner-occupant in either dwelling.
Calling finished upstairs bedrooms and a bathroom an “attic” has let developers claim nearly 1,200-square-foot, four-bedroom dwellings qualify under the smaller-unit rules. A bedroom is still a bedroom under a roof.
The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, which wrote the state ADU regulations, says an attic converted into ADU living space “ceases to be an attic.”
The bylaw calls for “smaller units in existing residential neighborhoods” — think granny flats and incremental housing, not student-stuffer business plans.
Why should a student landlord get a 1,199-square-foot ADU for four or more students without an owner-occupant in either house? Add the main house, and we risk eight students and eight cars on half an acre. I worry most about our smallest lots: neighbors there have the least breathing room to absorb the impacts.
I encourage small lots and attainable starter homes at Hampshire College, thoughtfully planned — not a landlord rampage through Amherst’s single-family neighborhoods.
Count finished living space. Require owner occupancy for larger local ADUs. Let 900 square feet mean 900 square feet.
MAKE YOUR COMMENT TO THE TOWN COUNCIL TONIGHT (OCT 22, 6:30PM on zoom https://amherstma.zoom.us/j/85656347328#success