Seashore Commission Explores Impacts Of ADUs

EASTHAM – Residents and local officials across Cape Cod and the islands have high hopes that the new Affordable Homes Act will usher in the creation of more and different types of housing for those who most need it. But for members of the Cape Cod National Seashore advisory commission, there’s concern about how the incentives for creating more housing could conflict with its core mission of protecting the federal park.

The commission on April 7 entertained a lengthy discussion about how allowances for the creation of housing under the new legislation could impact the Seashore, which spans 40 miles of ocean-lined property from Chatham to Provincetown.

“We have to look at the impact of what this is going to do,” said Sheila Lyons of Wellfleet, a county commissioner and member of the advisory commission.

Signed into law by Governor Maura Healey in October, the Affordable Homes Act commits approximately $5.1 billion toward the creation of housing statewide over the next five years. It also includes close to 50 policy initiatives in service of the goal. One of them is a provision allowing the creation of accessory dwelling units, secondary structures to a property’s primary residence that can be used for housing, to be allowed “by right” without the need for a special permit from local zoning boards, as is currently the case in most Cape towns.

A subcommittee of the commission has been looking into how the allowance of ADUs would impact property within the Seashore. According to the Cape Cod Commission, there are seven private properties within the Seashore on which ADUs would be allowed in Orleans; zero in Chatham; 88 in Eastham; four in Provincetown; 178 in Truro; and 211 in Wellfleet.
 
Heather McElroy of the Seashore commission, who also works for the Cape Cod Commission, said that in order to be eligible for an ADU under the act, a property must be zoned for a single-family home. An ADU can either be part of the main dwelling or a free standing structure, she said, and there is no requirement under the act that the property be owner-occupied.

McElroy said that in a subcommittee meeting earlier this month to discuss ADUs, staff from three Seashore towns indicated that they “would likely permit requests for ADUs” within the Seashore.

“So the long and the short of it is our initial take is the potential for change could be significant,” she said.

But the advisory commission last week wrestled with the question of whether the state’s allowance of ADUs by right under the new act extend into Seashore property, or if the Seashore should be exempted.

“It really is a shame that the state didn’t realize there’s a National Seashore here,” said commission member Lili-Ann Green of Wellfleet.

Richard Delaney, who chairs the advisory commission, said the act’s allowance of ADUs by right runs counter to the advisory commission’s overarching charge of protecting the Seashore from future development.

“It’s a classic case of a direct conflict between two public goods,” he said following the meeting. “Both the Seashore’s mandates to preserve and protect the character and open space in the park and the state’s equally important mandate to increase housing, in this case [through] ADUs.”

George Meservey, director of planning and community development for the town of Orleans, said interest in ADUs has increased in town since voters opted to allow ADUs in town by right ahead of the Affordable Homes Act. Whereas he used to field two to three applications per year to build an accessory unit, that number has increased to between five and seven per year.

But while there are by his count five private properties on Seashore land in Orleans that could accommodate an ADU, he said there are questions as to whether or not such construction would be allowed despite the town’s local regulations. Language in the legislation that established the Seashore in 1961 puts limitations on the ability to further development within its boundary, Meservey said.

“It puts some real restrictions on the ability to change or add onto any existing dwellings that were located within the Seashore boundary,” he said.

The threat of potential development within the Seashore is not new. Sarah Korjeff, historic preservation specialist with the Cape Cod Commission, said a landscape study funded through the National Park Service in 2004 warned of the potential for development to encroach beaches and waterways within the park, as well as the decline of natural landscapes.

“I think we can agree that many of those have carried forward,” she said.

Current threats to the park include the potential for large additions, structures of increased heights and pools and other outdoor recreational spaces, Korjeff said. There’s also concern about the potential loss of historic buildings, she said, noting that there are few areas within the park where demolition is disallowed and few existing protections for properties on the National Register of Historic Places.

Members of the advisory commission on April 7 voiced support for crafting an amendment to the Affordable Homes Act to exempt the Seashore from its ADU provisions. Delaney said the idea appears to have the support of Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll, based on conversations had between Driscoll and Lyons on the matter.

“The lieutenant governor was surprised by the conflict, and suggested it was perhaps an oversight by the state legislature not exempting the park to begin with,” he said.

Delaney said the advisory commission would seek the help of local legislators including State Senator Julian Cyr, D-Provincetown, and State Representative Hadley Luddy, D-Orleans, in helping put together an amendment. But he said other steps need to be taken first, including further discussion with officials from towns within the Seashore.

In Truro, officials are in the process of crafting their own regulations that would allow the construction of ADUs by right, noted Michael Lee, an alternate member of the advisory commission. He advocated for allowing ADUs within the Seashore in Truro, citing the need for housing in town.

“Truro does not want to be a museum,” he said. “There are people here now that are in need of housing.”

But others on the advisory commission disagreed, including Mark Robinson. He said there are “hundreds” of properties outside of the park that can be considered for future development.

“Why not just recognize that the Seashore is a special place?” he said.

“I don’t doubt for a minute that year-round housing is a crisis,” said Park Superintendent Jennifer Flynn. “But I doubt that the Seashore is the solution.”

Despite the back and forth, Delaney said he’s optimistic that some closure on the issue can be reached.

“There will be two or three more steps, but I think this particular conflict is resolvable. It’s a policy conflict.”

Email Ryan Bray at ryan@capecodchronicle.com