Regarding the column “Support South Hadley’s Accessory Dwelling Unit bylaws,” [Gazette, May 6], the problem is not attached ADUs, which by the way, can be prefabricated with a firewall. Attached ADUs would clearly solve the poignant problems outlined in the commentary.

But the proposed bylaws are deeply flawed to allow detached accessory dwelling units. This is a misnomer that has been repeated so many times it’s becoming a believed falsehood. Nine hundred square feet of living space, plus a possibly paved driveway, garage and a porch is a small house, it is not an accessory to anything. They can and will be rented at market rate. The proposed bylaw doesn’t require “affordability.”

Detached ADUs are second, revenue-generating homes that will forever alter neighborhoods and residents’ lives.They are an end-run around existing zoning.

The flawed proposed bylaws are not the way to create affordable housing as detached ADU owners can charge whatever they want. Detached accessory dwelling units must not be allowed in advance of the completion of an expert, unrushed, unbiased, sustainable Housing Production Plan that serves South Hadley, not the powers-that-be in Boston.

The May 6 column says: ”Aesthetically, ADUS can be made to look attractive.” But there’s nothing in the proposed bylaws that says they have to be. Attractive is not mandated. Plus, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the proposed bylaw to guarantee that these second houses be “accessible, sustainable, beautiful or in keeping with the character of our beloved neighborhoods,” as the column states. These are laudable goals that will not be met by allowing detached ADUs.

Town Meeting members should vote against these proposed ADU bylaws.

Linda Sachs

South Hadley

]]>