REPORT: ZONING SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, (JANUARY 14) AND PLANNING BOARD MEETING, JANUARY 15.

Planning Board Zoning Subcommittee (January 14)
Present: Maria Chao, Janet McGowan, Christine Gray Mullen
Staff: Christine Brestrup (Planning Department Director)
Guests: Bob Greeney, Dorothy Pam, Maura Keene

Planning Board (January 15)
Maria Chao, Christine Gray-Mullen (Chair), Jack Jemsek, Daniel Levenstein, Janet McGowan, Michael Birtwistle
Staff: Christine Brestrup (Planning Department Director) and Pam Field-Sadler, (Administrative Assistant)

Highlights
The Board

• heard a report on small accessory dwellings from Backyard Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
• discussed protocols and timing for updating the Town Master Plan
• continued a hearing on a waivers request for Center East Common, a proposed mixed use development on Main Street
• heard additional complaints from residents from the Amherst Hills subdivision concerning the condition of their roads and requests for the Board’s assistance in resolving disputes with the developer over those roads
• noted that the public interviews to fill the vacant seat on the Planning Board will be held on January 22 from 6 to 8 p.m. at Town Hall’s Town Room

Planning Board Zoning Subcommittee (January 14)
The Zoning Subcommittee meeting began with a presentation by Chris Lee of Backyard ADUs, which builds accessory dwellings in homeowners’ yards. The modular designs have one or two bedrooms and cost $125,000 to $175,000 complete, with washers and dryers. They are allowed by the Amherst zoning bylaw (Article 5 section 5.011) in any residential area but requires a special permit in certain cases. Lee is hoping to construct some ADUs in town. He will also be making a presentation to the Amherst Municipal Affordable Housing Trust.

Maria Chao was elected chair of the Zoning Subcommittee and Janet McGowan vice chair.

Updating the Master Plan
A lengthy discussion about the process for updating the Master Plan took up the remainder of the Zoning Subcommitte meeting as well as a large part of the Planning Board meeting on January 15. The Planning Board has been asked by the Town Council to update the Town Master Plan, which was adopted in 2010 after a several-year process involving over 100 participants. Some goals of the Master Plan have been reached and some aspects of the Plan are out of date, such as the references to Town Meeting and Select Board, which have been replaced by the Town Council and Town Manager. Some goals or topics are not included, such as a clear statement of sustainability goals.  The Town Council would prefer that the Master Plan to be updated before the Zoning bylaws are changed. According to the Charter, the Council must adopt a new Master Plan at least once every 20 years. 

Gray-Mullen proposed that the Master Plan be reviewed and updated by Brestrup and the Planning Department staff with input from members of relevant committees whose members have expertise in certain areas, such as transportation, farmland, sustainability, and housing, and that the Zoning Subcommittee discuss the changes before bringing them to the full Planning Board. McGowan objected to interrupting the work of the Zoning Subcommittee has been doing  to increase affordable housing in town in order to work on the Master Plan. She wanted to plan a process for the update and had called staff at the Metropolitan Area Planning Council for advice. They recommended formation of a Master Plan Update Committee and to start by updating demographic information. The Citizen Planner Training Collaborative could provide a training class for Amherst outside of the Zoning Subcommittee.  This idea received some support and will be discussed further at a subsequent meeting.

Planning Board Meeting (January 15)

Master Plan Continued
There was a detailed discussion of a five-page memorandum sent by Community Resource Committee (CRC) Chair Mandi-Jo Hanneke (councilor at large) to the Planning Board regarding coordination of the Master Plan Process with the Town Council through the CRC. The five page memo asked that the Planning Board keep the CRC informed of progress on the Master Plan and receive feedback during the process to minimize amendments to the final draft.  Several members of the Planning Board thought the proposed process was needlessly complicated and could go on too long. McGowan suggested that the CRC and Town Council be involved during the Planning Board’s updating work but not at the end. Levenstein wanted to hear the Councilor’s specific suggestions. Birtwistle pointed out that creating the Master Plan is under the purview of the Planning Board according to state law and that the Council will ultimately review it before approving it. No resolution on this issue was reached. The Planning Board did not vote to accept the CRC memo, and might continue the discussion at its January 29 meeting.

Birtwistle also expressed hope that the Planning Board will be able to continue its discussions of certain zoning issues, such as the required number of parking spaces per unit in multi-family dwellings, and send recommendations to the Council, even though the Council has requested that no zoning proposals be sent forward until the Master Plan revision is completed.  

In a separate effort, Brestrup informed the Board that Building Commissioner Rob Morra is reviewing the Zoning Bylaw to correct inconsistencies.  Any zoning law changes he suggests must be approved first by the Planning Board and then by the Council. It was unclear whether someone tasked Morra with this project or he volunteered to do it, having done zoning law reviews in other towns and having had to deal with problems in the current bylaw in his job as Building Commissioner. Brestrup made clear that Morra would only clarify the bylaw, not make substantial changes.

Center East Commons
Developer John Wrobeleski requested a modification to his plans for Center East Common, a mixed use project at 462 Main Street. The previously-approved site plan was for a 16-unit apartment building with one-, two-, and three-bedroom units and one office. He now plans 24 units with 4 studios, 10 one-bedroom, 9 two-bedroom, and 1 three-bedroom apartments, in addition to the one office. The footprint would be 800 square feet larger than originally proposed and the number of beds would increase by five. The parking spots would remain at 32, including three handicapped spaces. This would require a parking waiver from the 55 parking spaces required by the bylaw (48 for dwelling units and the rest for the office).  The bylaw requires two parking spaces per dwelling unit. Also, the plan includes remodeling the back of the neighboring building, constructing a new shed for trash, recycling, and indoor bicycle storage. This would require a special permit because the current building is grandfathered in for a smaller setback (4.5 feet instead of 10), but new construction must meet existing requirements. 

The proposed mixed use building will have electric chargers for two vehicles and will use natural gas for heat and hot water. Wrobeleski does not plan to construct any affordable units.

Wrobeleski, who originally said that he would not rent to undergraduates, will now consider renting to “well-screened” undergraduates and would prohibit renters from subletting without his consent. The larger number of units triggered the requirement for a Group 2 accessible unit (fully accessible) in projects with more than 20 units. All first-floor units are Group 1 accessible by ADA guidelines. Estimated rents are $1,000 per month for a studio, $1,400 for a one-bedroom, $1850 for a two-bedroom, and $2,000 for the three-bedroom unit. Birtwistle pointed out that a recent Boston area parking study cited by Wrobeleski does not apply to conditions in Amherst. McGowan asked for data to support the request for decreased parking needed for tenants.  Several Planning Board members asked for a parking study. McGowan noted that when she visited a nearby apartment complex owned by Wrobeleski, 28 of 34 spaces were being used, and the complex had more than two spaces per residential unit. Chao proposed that Wrobeleski return on February 5 with a parking plan as well as the required special permit request. 

Amherst Hills Subdivision
Residents of the Amherst Hills subdivision (located east of the Amherst Woods subdivision, with access from Route 9 or Station Road) returned to the Planning Board for the fourth time to discuss their dispute with developer Tofino and Associates over finishing the private roads in that subdivision. On October 16, they had asked the Planning Board to rescind the release of nine unsold lots until the roads are finished. In response, the Board elected to ask the Building Commissioner to not issue any building permits on those lots until the matter is settled. Meanwhile, Tofino has sued the residents for arbitration in land court. In a letter to the Town, Tofino attorney Michael Pill stated that Tofino intends to finish the roads during the 2020 construction season but will bill the landowners for the extra maintenance work requested by the residents. Pill offered to replace the existing three-party security agreement between the Town, Tofino, and Greenfield Savings Bank, which says that the roads will be finished by Tofino with a liability of up $280,000. The new covenant would restrict the sale of the nine unsold lots but would revoke the security bond of $280,000.

There were several objections to this plan. McGowan stated that Tofino cannot unilaterally back out of the three-party security agreement. Several residents said that they worried that the $280,000 would not cover the needed work. They also stated that the security provided by prohibiting the sale of the lots would not be adequate because they conjecture that some of the lots are probably not buildable due to vernal pools or other factors. Also, until the matter is settled in land court, all Amherst Hills properties are encumbered and not allowed to be sold. One elderly resident who needs to sell his house cannot. The Planning Board agreed that the Town would not terminate the existing security bond, but would draft a new covenant that would prohibit the sale of the nine unsold lots until approval was granted by the Planning Board.

The next hearing date in land court will be on January 21. At that time, Tofino is supposed to have solicited bids specifying how much it will cost to finish the roads. The matter will be taken up at the February 5 meeting.

Old Business
In old business, McGowan reported that the yellow bollards in the parking lot in front of the Bank of America ATM on College Street have been removed.

New Business
The Board discussed new deadlines for submitting materials to be included in Planning Board meeting agendas. Levenstein suggested that the Planning Board not get new materials 2 days before meetings. McGowan suggested a deadline of 9 days prior to the meeting, but Brestrup said there are many complexities with applications and the staff vetting them. This matter will be discussed further at an upcoming meeting.

The project proposed by Barry Roberts for property on Route 9 and Snell Street, across from Ginger Garden, was introduced. The building will house a medical office and many small apartments and proposed to have less than two parking spaces per unit that are required by zoning bylaw.  The Zoning Board of Appeals will hear this application on the evening of January 23. A new trend seems to be emerging favoring studio and one bedroom apartments and with very little parking.

The next Planning Board meetings will be January 29 and February 5. The Zoning Subcommittee will meet on February 4. 

Interviews of applicants for the vacant seat on the Planning Board will be held Wednesday, January 22 from 6 to 8 p.m. in the Town Room of Town Hall. Members of the public are welcome to attend but will not be allowed to comment.