Planning Board Discusses 40R Overlay Zoning And Zoning Bylaw Revision

Report On The Meeting Of 8/19/20

Attending: Planning Board Members Jack Jemsek (Acting Chair), Michael Birtwistle, Maria Chao, Doug Marshall, and Janet McGowan. Absent: Christine Gray-Mullen. Staff, Planning Director Chris Brestrup and  Administrative Assistant Pam Field Sadler

ThePlanning Board reviewed the proposed Chapter 40R Overlay Zoning Bylaw presented by consultants Karen Sunnarborg and David Eisen at the May 6 meeting .

Brestrup gave a brief summary of the background on 40R. In 2018, at the behest of the Affordable Housing Trust, the Town applied for and was awarded a $40,000 grant to hire consultants to evaluate the appropriateness of 40R zoning for Amherst. After talking to about 30 residents, the consultants held three public meetings to present their findings. These were on April 4, June 4, and December 19, 2019. 

At the December meeting, the consultants recommended the downtown area north of Main Street as the most appropriate for 40R.  This zoning bylaw allows developers to circumvent many approval processes by following the design guidelines created by the Town and by including 20 percent affordable units in newly-constructed buildings for 30 years. There are also financial incentives from the State for developers.

In May, the consultants presented a more detailed plan and a proposed zoning amendment to the Planning Board. After that discussion, Marshall , Chao, and McGowan submitted their feedback to the consultants and the Board. Several community members also submitted comments. The consultants plan another public forum, tentatively set for September 23, taking into account the feedback from the Planning Board and the public. The discussion at this meeting was to gather more opinions about the use of 40R overlay zoning in Amherst. No final decisions were decided at this meeting. The Planning Board will give its recommendations to the Town Council Community Resources Committee, which will present their recommendations to the full Council for a final vote.

In general, Board members were not favorably disposed to putting a 40R district in the Town Center. Marshall stated that developers do not need incentives to build housing downtown, but it might be valuable in another part of town, such as East Amherst Center. Jemsek said he would like to promote more housing for young families, not more units for students and singles. He felt family housing would be more appropriate outside of the downtown area. Birtwistle felt that the type of development encouraged by 40R would not fit with the goal of the Master Plan to maintain Amherst’s existing community character, especially exemplified by the west side of East and North Pleasant Streets, with their small shops and small-scale architecture.

Chao said that 40R could bring diversity to downtown housing, especially in the B-L district, but she wanted to see more detail in the proposed streetscapes. “McGowan felt the Bylaw was overly complex and that a simpler solution to promote housing diversity would be a zoning amendment requiring 10 percent affordable units in any building with more than ten apartments. “

Public Comment
In public comment, Councilor Cathy Schoen (District 1) pointed out the shade cast on the street from Kendrick Place and One East Pleasant. She feared five story buildings on both sides of the street would make the center of town very dark.  She suggested a need for wider sidewalks for each story added to a project. Former Zoning Board of Appeals Chair Ken Rosenthal recommended reading Essays on Amherst History by Theodore P. Greene, which was published in 1978, to understand the evolution of building in downtown Amherst. Jeanne Hardy who lives near the downtown area, asked the Planning Board to take into account the families who already live near the center of Town. Increased density would increase traffic and decrease the walkability of the neighborhoods surrounding downtown, she said. 

Brestrup and Field Sadler will summarize the remarks from this meeting to present to the consultants. Brestrup said that this zoning may not be appropriate for Amherst. It has worked well in more urban areas outside of Boston and in Northampton where, for example, few developers were interested in building on the grounds of the old State Hospital until given the incentives from 40R. Northampton also used 40R zoning for a single building on Pleasant Street, but not for the downtown as a whole.

The Planning Board agreed to discuss 40R again in October after the final public meeting with the consultants.  The recommendations of the Board will most likely be forwarded to the Town Council after that discussion.

Zoning Subcommittee
The other major item on the agenda was discussion of the fate of the Zoning Subcommittee (ZSC). Chao summarized the priorities for amendments to the Zoning Bylaw as developed at the August 5 Planning Board meeting: 1) improve downtown zoning; 2) unlock housing, increase diversity of housing stock; and 3) recodify the Zoning Bylaw. The question was, should these issues be dealt with by the Community Resources Committee, the ZSC, or by the Planning Board as a whole. 

Chao expressed frustration that the ZSC had worked hard over the past year on developing policies for increasing housing density and diversity, inclusionary zoning, and mixed use buildings. But the ZSC was told that the Council was not ready to act on zoning matters. Now, the Planning Board is being told that the CRC will be developing new zoning initiatives. Therefore, Chao did not want to put more of her own and staff time into the ZSC. 

Birtwistle felt the Planning Board was a more appropriate place to originate most zoning changes, since Planning Board members are more familiar with the Bylaw than the Council. Similar sentiment was voiced in comments from residents Maurianne Adams and Pam Rooney.  McGowan said that the idea of eliminating the ZSC actually originated with Assistant Town Manager Dave Ziomek, liaison to the CRC. This was discussed at a CRC meeting until Brestrup pointed out that the ZSC was part of the Planning Board, and it was not up to the CRC to decide its fate. 

No decision was made at this meeting.  Ziomek or CRC Chair Mandi Jo Hanneke will be asked to come to a meeting in the near future to clarify the role of the Planning Board in zoning.

New Planning Board members will be recommended to the Council by the CRC after interviews with the six candidates on August 26. The next Planning Board meeting is scheduled for September 2.