ADUs are now allowed by right under state law.
Ray Ewing

Edgartown Wrestles With Limits on Accessory Dwelling Units

A disagreement over whether to allow new accessory dwelling units to be used for weekly rentals bubbled up this week.

A new state law that makes it easier for homeowners to build accessory dwelling units has Island towns considering whether they want to allow the additional housing to be used for vacationers.

Starting this week, the state will allow homeowners to build accessory units without a special permit, as long as the property meets other wastewater and building codes. The Affordable Homes Act also lets municipalities block the new units from being short-term rentals, a lucrative business on the Vineyard. 

A disagreement over whether to allow new accessory dwelling units to be used for the weekly rentals bubbled up in Edgartown this week. On Monday, members of the Edgartown affordable housing committee expressed dismay that a spring town meeting article on accessory dwelling units would allow the extra housing to be used as short-term rentals.

Committee members had hoped to see a restriction on short-term rentals and worried that the town could see even more vacation properties instead of year-round or seasonal residences as the Island attempts to deal with its housing crisis. 

“We’re opening a barn door that’s never going to get closed again,” said committee member Melissa Vincent during Monday’s committee meeting.

Edgartown is the only town with an accessory dwelling unit bylaw set to go to town meeting that isn’t considering the restriction, which a planning board member said was an instruction from the select board. 

Oak Bluffs, West Tisbury and Chilmark are all considering not allowing the accessory dwelling units to be used as short-term rentals. Tisbury already passed an article that prevents accessory dwelling units from being used as short-term rentals. Aquinnah has not yet taken up the issue. 

Members of the Edgartown affordable housing committee said they will push for changes at town meeting.
Maria Thibodeau
Members of the Edgartown affordable housing committee said they will push for changes at town meeting.
Maria Thibodeau

The Edgartown affordable housing committee met with planning board member Julia Livingston on Monday to talk about the proposed regulation. The committee wanted to offer an amendment to the article, but Ms. Livingston said it was too late to make language changes ahead of town meeting and the only way to make an amendment was by proposing one on town meeting floor. 

The proposed article came from the town’s zoning bylaw review committee, an ad-hoc committee of the planning board. Ms. Livingston said that the select board had also formed a short-term rental committee, which was looking at the potential for regulations but had not come up with anything yet.

“I was told, in no uncertain terms, not to get involved with [short-term rentals,]” Ms. Livingston said. “The select board created a different committee to deal with short-term rentals, and they asked me not to get involved.”

Ms. Vincent was upset that the select board was getting involved in the planning issue. She noted that the Edgartown planning board is made up of elected members and is not under the auspices of the select board.

“I don’t believe we will ever have another shot at restricting it from short-term rentals again and I am disgusted with our select board,” Ms. Vincent said.

Edgartown has the most short-term rental units of any community on the Island and the seasonal rentals bring in millions of dollars in tax revenue to the town. Housing advocates have pointed to the rentals’ rise as a contributor to the lack of affordable housing on the Island, and are worried that the new accessory dwelling unit law would be used in Edgartown to create even more short-term rentals.

Under the new state law, signed in August 2024, the small independent living spaces located either within an existing house or separately on the same lot were allowed by right, easing the red tape needed to make the structures. Garages, attics and basements could all be converted into accessory dwelling units, or homeowners can build entirely new small cottages. 

The new housing units, often called ADUs, have to be less than 900 square feet to be built within single-family zoning districts, and municipalities can impose other limits, including on parking. 

Housing advocates have said that accessory dwelling units could be useful to keep Islanders on the Vineyard by expanding the use of already existing properties. Laura Silber, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission’s housing planner, said that accessory dwelling units by right have proven to be an effective tool in other states, such as Maine and Vermont, by allowing the private market to provide small-unit housing. 

The MVC crafted a model bylaw for towns to look at, and Ms. Silber said that organizations such as the AARP have been advocating for accessory dwelling units by right nationwide. 

“ADUs are an important tool to create opportunities, and allow a renovation tool for over-housed seniors to stay in their homes by converting use of the existing space,” she said. 

Ms. Livingston said the proposal for town meeting was designed to be “vanilla,” and that further regulations could come to the next town meeting if the affordable housing committee’s amendment didn’t pass muster at town meeting. 

At the planning board meeting Tuesday, both Ms. Livingston and planning board member Michael Shalett seemed to support Ms. Vincent’s idea of an amendment on the town meeting floor in the face of the current constraints on changing the bylaw language.

“I think it would be very appropriate that when this bylaw comes up for a vote on the floor of our town meeting that you once again bring your very valid points up for the voters of Edgartown,” he said.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 02/05/2025 - 15:54

Permalink

Compromise West Tisbury

Would it be fair to say, people who reside on the property as their primary residence can choose to live in the ADU and rent out the main house, or live in the main house and rent out the ADU, but you can't rent the ADU and the main house at the same time. That seems to be a compromise that encourages year round use of the property but allows the year round homeowner to be able to afford their existence here with the supplemental rental income.

Charles VH

I like that. Seems like a good compromise which achieves the goals of maintaining year round residents and the ability for those year round residents to make life on the vineyard at least a bit more affordable.

Kyle

Good compromise and idea, but new state law does not allow towns to regulate occupancy like that. Basically only thing town's can regulate is the STR component

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 02/05/2025 - 17:44

Permalink

Amy Edgartown

I certainly hope none of those new committee members have short term rentals - as that would be clearly be a huge conflict of interest. What an opportunity to utilize AUD's for a constructive purpose, to sustain our MV year- round community. To provide year round housing to teachers, EMS workers, those in the trades, health care providers. This is not the time to turn our residential neighborhoods into more transient, commercial areas just to make a few extra dollars! 4th generation islander here - blue collar family. Believe me, I see that the opportunity to make money is there. But money is not why we live here on this beautiful island - or is it?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 02/05/2025 - 19:14

Permalink

Yes! Edgartown

We are so in the weeds on housing x short term rentals when in reality this move (to be approved/denied) by voters creates an opportunity to - EARN. We have a 2bed 2ba house on R20 and we rent every summer to make it work. The $ is too good to pass up so our small family of 3 lives with family for the summer. If we could build a 1 bed ADU and rent (short-term) as if a hotel suite for income we would be able to stay in our home, to then offer that same unit to a 9 month rental (friend, family, nurse etc) and voila we just solved multiple housing demand / rental issues. Wake up everyone because Edgartown sees / has a vision and it’s worth voting for.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 02/06/2025 - 22:18

Permalink

NYC NYC

Many (many!) years ago it was not uncommon for island residents to rent out extra space to summer workers. Scoring a spot from a bulletin board notice was sometimes challenging but never impossible. Then town government got involved and well… you know the rest. Then came the internet and investors and second home owners who stayed some summers and rented at prices not manageable for seasonal workers.
Yes by all means allow accessory dwellings and let folks do what they can to make a life on this obscenely expensive island more feasible.
But there is a small question I’d like ask Yes! And that is: while you stay in your home, offering the ADU as a summer rental switching at seasons end to a 9 month rental to a “friend, family, nurse etc” in the off-season, where does the “friend, family, nurse etc” go in June July and August? Voila! Another problem created from one being solved.
That is the unfortunate crux of the housing issue. You may no longer be doing the Island shuffle but some friend, family member, nurse or etc will still be forced to live that untenable lifestyle.
ADUs are a small step in the right direction but they are not the magic bullet. Not everyone needs a house. Some folks would be happy with an affordable year round apartment not tied to the rental market. Until housing diversity is embraced there will still be those that own and those that do the shuffle and those who struggle to keep a roof over their heads. Towns and their voters need to wake up and realize until they are committed to providing diverse housing solutions for the diverse needs of the island community there will be no “voila” solution. If you build only for the rich then it is the rich who will be housed and the struggle for affordable housing will be doomed to continue.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 02/07/2025 - 08:09

Permalink

Inde West tisbury

The compromise above does nothing at all to bring more island housing to the people who need it. It puts more money in the bank for people who already have housing. I’m sympathetic to those that could use help paying their large mortgages, but I think logic dictates that whatever compromise we come to, it should lead to more year round housing. This one will not.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.