Massachusetts
‘Animal lover’ wins $4 million lottery game, picks up prize with his dog named Raven
A lucky resident in the Bay State recently picked up his multi-million dollar lottery prize – and his best friend was with him when he did it.
Peabody resident Paul Riley won the $4 million prize from the Massachusetts State Lottery’s 100X Cash game, the state lottery announced on Tuesday.
Riley opted to receive a one-time payment of $2,600,000.
He bought the winning ticket at a convenience store called Summit Variety in Peabody.
In a post about his win, the Massachusetts State Lottery described Riley as an “animal lover.”
He brought his beloved pooch Raven when he went to pick up his money.
The two friends posed for a picture with his gigantic lottery check.
They were both bundled up for the wintry weather that hit Massachusetts this week.
Riley also told the Massachusetts State Lottery that he plans to donate some of the cash to the Animal Rescue League.
The prizewinner also plans to buy his wife a new car with his winnings.
Summit Variety will receive a $40,000 bonus for selling the lucky ticket.
According to the state lottery, the $4 million drawing from the 100X Cash game has 1 in 5,376,000 odds.
RANDOLPH, Mass. (WWLP) – A Randolph resident has won a $1 million prize through the final drawing of the Massachusetts State Lottery “$4,000,000 Monopoly Doubler” instant ticket game.
Brenda Mellor of Randolph claimed the game’s tenth and final $1 million prize.
She selected the cash option and received a one-time payment of $650,000 before taxes. Mellor said she plans to use the winnings to pay for home improvements, including renovations to her roof and pool.
The winning ticket was purchased at The Variety Store at 2 Mazzeo Drive in Randolph. The retailer will receive a $10,000 bonus for selling the ticket.
Local News Headlines
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Download the 22News Plus app on your TV to watch live-streaming newscasts and video on demand.
Massachusetts
Mass. is getting more granny flats. But it’s still hard to build them. – The Boston Globe
Massachusetts took a big step in 2024 when the Legislature legalized so-called “accessory dwelling units” statewide as part of an effort to rein in the state’s housing crisis. More than a year later, it’s clear that the law is working — but that it also needs tweaks before accessory units can meet their full potential.
These small units, nicknamed “granny flats,” can be constructed in someone’s backyard, or they can simply be renovated third floors, garages, or basements. They’re a popular option for seniors seeking to downsize and families looking for some rental income.
Prior to the state law, some communities allowed accessory units, but many did not. Even among those cities and towns that did tolerate accessory dwelling units, zoning often varied from one municipality to the next, making it difficult for builders who needed to decode each municipality’s rules. Some towns also included unreasonable restrictions, like requiring that only a homeowner’s family members could live in the accessory units.
Housing advocates viewed allowing accessory dwelling units statewide as a “low-hanging fruit” policy — a way to add housing that was relatively cheap and avoided some of the cost and political obstacles that housing measures often encounter. The state legislation also overrode some zoning restrictions, including those that limited accessory units to family, while leaving some other local rules intact.
One year after the law went into effect, this approach has proved fruitful: Towns across the state have approved 1,200 ADU permits and seen even more applications, in some cases up to a threefold increase from previous years.
A study published last week by Boston Indicators (the research branch of the Boston Foundation) and Abundant Housing Massachusetts found that forcing the hand of municipalities on accessory dwelling units accomplished more in one year than 50 years of zoning reform efforts at the local level.
The problem, though, is that municipalities retained too much power. As the study recommends, there should be clear, uniform state regulatory standards for ADUs, with minimal opportunities for municipal-level variation.
“A comprehensive agenda is needed to address regulatory barriers to housing production, spanning building, fire, energy, septic system, wetlands, and stormwater rules,” the study’s authors wrote. “The barriers include the fragmented complexity of the regulatory system itself.”
Making standards more uniform doesn’t have to mean lowering them — it just means moving away from patchwork rules that make it harder for companies to build accessory units at scale.
Chris Lee at Backyard ADUs, a company that designs and builds modular dwelling units in New England, says the report’s findings make sense. The inconsistent interpretations across 350 towns and cities cause builders and engineers to “struggle to design work for the town that will be accepted,” he said. (The state’s 351st municipality, Boston, isn’t covered by the law.)
The potential is significant. The report calculates that if just 2 percent of single-family homes in Massachusetts added an accessory unit, the state would see more than 30,000 new homes that advocates say are generally more affordable. Building an accessory dwelling unit inside a pre-existing house can cost between $75,000 and $100,000; and a detached unit usually runs between $250,000 to $350,000, making them much more affordable than purchasing a single-family home in most regions of the country.
“For developers of missing middle housing to benefit from an economy of scale, they have to undertake many projects, across jurisdictional lines,” according to the study. “The ADU case study has shown just how challenging this is.”
Lee estimated that he could reduce up to $30,000 of preconstruction costs such as surveying and architecture if his company could work with consistent regulations across towns, which he said could enable them to double their production.
Streamlining permitting for accessory dwelling units isn’t a panacea. Landlords still must be willing to actually build them and rent them to long-term residents. Retirees must believe it’s worth downsizing to one. But the fact that so many have been permitted over the last year point to the clear demand and makes the case for policy makers to keep refining the law.
There is precedent. California, for example, had an equally ambitious goal but has blown past it, going from only 1,300 permits approved its first year to more than 30,000 nine years later. “It is important to understand that California did not accomplish its ADU outcomes with one legislative reform,” the study’s authors wrote. “California’s success required sustained legislative attention.”
Massachusetts should be able to realize those kinds of results too. Conversely, if even the “low-hanging fruit” of zoning reform falters in the Commonwealth because of local red tape, then the state has bigger problems ahead to solve its housing crisis.
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us @GlobeOpinion.
Massachusetts
Meteor over Massachusetts causes explosion reports, sightings from Delaware to Montreal
Reports of an explosion from people across New England Saturday afternoon sent police agencies and others scrambling to understand what caused a double boom that shook buildings in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
The American Meteor Society said that the booms heard about 2:30 p.m. were actually caused by a meteor about 3 feet (nearly 1 meter) wide entering the atmosphere around the New Hampshire border with Massachusetts, north of Boston.
Fire program monitor Robert Lunsford said the society received dozens of reports from Delaware to Montreal with people either hearing the double boom, feeling the ground shake or seeing the fireball — which he said looked like a shooting star in the daytime sky.
“It was definitely bigger than a normal fireball, about a yard wide,” he said.
But Lunsford said it’s unlikely the meteor struck the ground.
“We would need more information about the trajectory the speed and other aspects to know for sure if it hit the ground, but if it didn’t burn up, then it would have landed in the ocean,” he said. “Most of them do burn up before they hit the ground.”
People in a handful of states posted on social media about feeling the buildings they were in shaking. Several videos on the X platform captured what sounded like two quick booms, with no fire, smoke or other visual causes.
Several people filed reports with the U.S. Geological Survey, registering the shaking they felt with the National Earthquake Information Center, agency spokesman Steve Sobie confirmed.
The agency opened an event page, based on the number of “Did you feel it?” reports it received on its website. But Sobie said there was no event registered on the agency’s seismographs. meaning the shaking was not due to an earthquake.
-
Politics1 minute agoDespite Trump’s recent insistence, in-person voting does exist in Los Angeles
-
Sports13 minutes agoYoshinobu Yamamoto helps Dodgers deliver a birthday win for Dave Roberts
-
World21 minutes ago“Crime hotspots”: Why violence at German stations
-
News46 minutes agoFamily visitation partly restored at New Jersey ICE facility after week of protests
-
Los Angeles, Ca2 hours agoMan found stabbed to death in Huntington Park
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoDetroit Grand Prix father-daughter volunteers help make winner’s circle moments shine
-
San Francisco, CA3 hours agoTony Vitello just lost the only Giants allies he has left
-
Dallas, TX3 hours agoFatal crash on LBJ Freeway in Dallas leaves 1 dead, multiple people hospitalized, police say
