Massachusetts
This Bedroom Activity is Very Risky in Massachusetts
Massachusetts is home to some strange laws. Many of the laws were passed years, and years ago so they don’t hold up or are enforced today, yet they are still on the books.
There’s One Bedroom Activity That’s Technically Illegal in Massachusetts
One particular Massachusetts law I found interesting is something that people do every day in the privacy of theirhomes: snoring. Believe it or not, there’s a law in Massachusetts (according to multiple sources) that prohibits snoring in your home unless all bedroom windows are closed and securely locked.
Is There Any Logic Behind This Massachusetts Law?
Okay, in one small way I get that you don’t want to disturb the peace hence, the closing of the windows, but does one snore so loudly that neighbors throughout the neighborhood are disturbed by it? I find that hard to believe but then again maybe it has happened. Laws are formed for a reason. Furthermore, is the locking of windows really going to make that big of a difference?
Another question I have about this is what if I fall asleep in my kitchen, living room and/or basement and those windows are open but the bedroom windows are closed and locked? Is the act of snoring still illegal? Technically the state of the bedroom windows would be following the law.
This is a lot of silliness but it is fun to examine these strange Massachusetts laws and poke holes in them. Residents of Boston, Worcester, the Berkshires, and everywhere in between better take note and keep the snoring to a low roar.
Could you imagine if this Massachusetts snoring law was strictly enforced? Oh, my word. Many of my family members would be paying a fine or spending a night in the big house. This includes me. I wonder if it would be illegal for them/us to snore in jail…lol.
LOOK: 15 formerly popular foods in America that are rarely eaten today
Gallery Credit: Stacker
LOOKS: Things you’d likely see in an awesomely ’80s garage
From scandalous bikini calendars to your dad’s AMC Gremlin, ’80s garages were a treasure trove of adventure, good fun, and sometimes downright danger.
Gallery Credit: Stephen Lenz
LOOK: 35 Vintage Cereals That Perfectly Captured Pop Culture Moments
Movies and TV shows have always found ways to partner with cereal companies as part of their promotion strategy. While some may have come up with a giveaway in boxes, others went big by having their own cereal connected to the movie or TV show title. Here are vintage cereals that were used to promote some of pop culture’s biggest moments (and some you probably forgot about).
Gallery Credit: Rob Carroll
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.
-
News7 minutes agoVideo: Another Night of Violent Protests Outside a Newark ICE Detention Center
-
Lifestyle40 minutes agoTrump floats MAGA rally instead of concert after musicians drop out of Freedom 250
-
Technology52 minutes agoAMD’s new pitch: our old tech is so good you should just keep using it
-
World55 minutes agoHezbollah’s ‘game changing’ night-hunting weapon punches through Israel’s defenses: expert
-
Politics60 minutes agoHasan Piker says UK has barred him, trashes ‘unbelievable…power’ of pro-Israel groups
-
Health1 hour agoQuitting smoking could offer a major benefit beyond heart and lung health, study finds
-
Sports1 hour agoRoman Reigns domesticates Jacob Fatu to retain World Heavyweight Championship at WWE Clash in Italy
-
Technology1 hour agoQR code email scam targets employee reviews
