Councilors Voice Opposition To Temporary Building Moratorium, Consider Relaxing Parking Regulations For Downtown Buildings, Recommend Extension For CSWG To Complete Its Work

Report on the Meeting of the Amherst Town Council, June 28, 2021

The meeting took place on zoom and was recorded. The recording can be viewed here.

Present
Councilors: Lynn Griesemer (President, District 2), Alisa Brewer, Mandi Jo Hanneke, and Andy Steinberg (At large), Cathy Schoen and Sarah Swartz (District 1), Pat DeAngelis (District 2), Dorothy Pam and George Ryan (District 3), Evan Ross and Steve Schreiber (District 4), Darcy DuMont and Shalini Bahl-Milne (District 5). Bahl-Milne joined the meeting at 8 p.m.

Staff: Paul Bockelman (Town Manager), Athena O’Keeffe (Clerk of the Council)

Also: Christine Brestrup and Maureen Pollack, Planning Department and Rob Morra, Building Commissioner.

Highlights

• Executive session explores town purchase of Mitchell parcel in North Amherst
• Town Council President Griesemer confirms that the town will not be ready for ranked choice voting in the November election
• Participatory Budgeting Commission presents final report
• First readings of proposed Inclusionary Zoning revision and Temporary Downtown Building Moratorium are discussed
• Planning Department presents proposed changes to zoning bylaws for Mixed-Use Buildings, Apartments, and Parking
• Appointments to the District Advisory Board are approved; members from District 4 are still needed.
• Alisa Brewer announces that she will not run for reelection
• Term of the Community Safety Working Group extended to November 1, 2021

Council Considers Purchase of North Amherst Parcel 
The meeting was preceded by an executive session regarding the town’s right of refusal on a parcel of land in North Amherst, between Cowls Road and Sunderland Road, which is now designated as farmland but is slated to be purchased by developer Barry Roberts for the planned Eruptor project. for manufacturing and research. Roberts offered to buy the 18.6 acres from the Mitchell family for $1.6 million, but the town has the opportunity to purchase it for the same price if it wishes to exercise that right. The council will vote on whether to purchase the land at the July 12 meeting. 

Rank Choice Voting Implementation Delayed
The regular Town council meeting was called to order at 6:36 p.m. In the only opportunity of the evening for public comment, Andy Anderson of District 5 pointed out that the study and implementation of Rank Choice Voting (RCV) was part of the Town Charter passed in March of 2018, but will not be implemented for the election this November. He noted that Easthampton used RCV for an election two and a half years after approving it. If Amherst does not implement RCV until the elections in November of 2023, it will be 4.5 years since it was approved.

Later in the meeting, Griesemer said that she testified at a meeting of the State Board of Elections Commission along with Hanneke, State Senator Jo Comerford, and State Representative Mindy Domb, on behalf of Amherst’s plan to use RCV. Griesemer said that the whole process was delayed by Covid in the past year, and she is not sure when the town will hear of the commission’s decision to allow Amherst to implement RCV. Also, the chips needed to adapt the voting machines for RCV are on back-order and probably will not be received until fall. Even if they are received before the election, there will not be time to educate the poll workers and the voting public. She said the delay is not due to anything in the Council’s power.

Report from Participatory Budgeting Commission Presented
Meg Gage, John McCabe, and councilor Cathy Schoen, members of the Participatory Budgeting Commission (PBC), presented their report to the Council . Participatory budgeting (PB) sets aside a certain amount of money in the municipal budget for programs to be voted on directly by citizens. There are 250 to 300 PB programs in existence in the US. With PB, Citizens propose projects that can be completed in one budget cycle and are aligned with town goals. Then voters choose among the proposed projects and allocate the available funds. In some towns, residents as young as 12 can vote on the projects.

Due to the pandemic, the PBC was on hiatus between February and September of 2020, and when it began to meet again, members realized it would be “tone deaf” to introduce another line item expense into the already stretched capital budget. Therefore, they concentrated on increasing public participation in the three existing programs that accept proposals from the public: the Community Preservation Act, the Joint Capital Planning Commission, and Community Development Block Grants. The PBC proposed that applications for these programs be centralized through a single portal on the town website and that the windows for accepting proposals be extended. They also recommended staff support for those wishing to apply for those funds to guide applicants to the program best suited for their projects.

In the future, the PCB would like to see the town explore different funding sources for PB outside of the town capital budget. The committee suggested obtaining help from faculty and staff at UMass and the colleges as consultants and to help secure grants to develop a robust PB program.

The council then turned to discussion of  several proposed zoning amendments. The changes to the Inclusionary Zoning Bylaw (Article 15) and the proposed Temporary Building Moratorium (Article 16) had previously been discussed at a Public Hearing on May 19 and received a first reading at this council meeting. They are scheduled to come to a vote at the July 12 council meeting.

Proposed Zoning Amendment 1: Require More Inclusionary Dwelling Units
Planning Department Director Brestrup pointed out the relative ineffectiveness of Amherst’s current Inclusionary Zoning Bylaw. First instituted in 2005, it only applied to projects requesting a Special Permit “for use.” No affordable units were created under the bylaw until 2013. In 2018, Town Meeting voted to expand the bylaw to apply to projects requesting a Special Permit “for dimensional waivers.” Since then, only 20 affordable units have been added.(54 affordable units have been or are planned to be built in projects that have comprehensive permits for affordable housing.)

The proposed change obligates any project creating 10 or more new dwelling units to make 12 percent of the units affordable for residents earning 80 percent or less of area mean income. It also mandates that preference be given in the first round of qualifying applicants to people living or working in Amherst, or who have children in the Amherst school system.

The developer would be responsible for marketing the affordable units as well as certifying households for them. The usual cost for marketing and certification of renters is about $3,000-$5,000 per unit. The affordable units would remain so in perpetuity, even if the property were sold.

Both the Planning Board and the Community Resource Committee (CRC) voted unanimously to recommend the bylaw revision. It will come to the full council for a vote on July 12.

Proposed Zoning Amendment 2: Temporary Building Moratorium for Large Downtown Projects
A petition proposing a six-month moratorium on building permits for residential projects with three or more units near the center of town gathered more than 900 signatures, and many of the supporters have written to the Council. The idea of the proposed moratorium is to give the town a chance to complete the zoning and design changes now being discussed. 

Schoen spoke in support of the moratorium, saying it would give the town an opportunity to think about “where we want to go” and to develop standards for design, affordability, and sustainability. Pam stressed the heartfelt nature of many of the letters received by the council—letters written by people who care about the town and fear they might lose what they love about it. She added that the Planning Department is working hard on updating the Zoning Bylaw and is hiring a design consultant, so the moratorium would give them time to complete their work.

At previous discussions, the Community Resources Committee voted 4-1 against the moratorium, and the Planning Board voted 6-0 against it.

In council discussion, Hanneke stated that “length of [someone’s] residency in town is not a way to gauge support” for the town and that “certain people” understate the population of Amherst, which she claimed is “over 40,000, many of whom are students, and students can live wherever they want.” She felt the moratorium would not accomplish the goal of allowing time for the Planning Department and the consultant to update the Zoning Bylaw. It only halts the issuance of building permits, not the approval of projects now being proposed. And she added that the council can fix the narrow sidewalk near One East Pleasant that is decried in so many of the letters received, since the council is in charge of the public way.

Steinberg said he is “sympathetic” with those supporting the moratorium, but worries that developers would think Amherst is “anti-business.” And he said he thinks it is unlikely that the town could (adequately) address all issues of zoning in the proposed amendment within the 180 to 270 days allowed by the proposal. 

Ryan said he thinks the amendment is aimed at a few developments in downtown Amherst that have “increased housing in town, lessened conversions of single-family homes to student apartments, and increased property tax collections.” all of which are beneficial to the town.

According to Bahl-Milne, “a community exists because of people, not buildings,” implying that the town should not be overly concerned about buildings, and she worried that passing a moratorium might somehow have an unintended consequence impacting Amherst’s ability to get grants from the State.

Brewer said that a “significant number of people” who wrote letters to the council “have not been involved with town government or attended Planning Board meetings, and… they don’t understand what a moratorium can accomplish.” Rather, she encouraged “public participation in revising the zoning bylaw.” Ross called the moratorium an “anti-housing policy proposed in the midst of a housing crisis,” although others have pointed out that the housing crisis in this town is its lack of affordable housing, not high-rent “luxury” apartments marketed as student apartments.

The proposed downtown building moratorium will be brought to a vote at the July 12 council meeting.

Proposed Zoning Amendment 3: Loosen  Parking and Other Regulations for Mixed-use Buildings and Apartment Buildings
There are few standards for mixed-use buildings in the town’s existing bylaw, and as a result, developers have been able to construct “mixed-use” buildings that relieve them of many requirements for “apartment” buildings, with as little as two percent of their first-floor area to nonresidential use. The changes proposed by the Planning Department recommend that a “mixed-use building” must devote a minimum of 40 percent of the ground floor to nonresidential, commercial uses. The changes also call for diversity in unit size in all buildings with more than ten units, so no more than half of the units can have the same number of bedrooms. 

Currently, an apartment building is limited to a maximum of 24 units. Developers can avoid this restriction by constructing a mixed-use building with a small, nonviable commercial space. The proposed changes eliminate the 24-unit cap on the number of units for apartment buildings. In the center of town, apartment buildings would require a Special Permit; they would only need a Site Plan Review in village centers.

Changes in required parking for multi-unit buildings were also proposed (Article 7). The current bylaw mandates two parking spaces per unit outside of the downtown area. This has been a frequent area of controversy for the Planning Board, with developers often asking for waivers. The proposed revision states that parking should be “adequate” and the Planning Board should evaluate such factors as size of the units, availability of public transportation, walkability, nearby parking lots or on-street parking, and parking restrictions on leases.

The council voted to refer each of the three proposals to the CRC and Planning Board for a joint public hearing. (All three votes were 9-4 with Schoen, Swartz, Pam and DuMont voting no.) 

 The Planning Board will discuss them on July 14 and the public hearing is likely to be held on July 21. 

It is important to note that previous specifications regarding building heights, open space, and setbacks had been removed from the final versions of the proposals, which Pam pointed out. According to Brestrup, the design consultant who will be hired will work on guidelines appropriate for different zoning districts, which have a range of height and setback requirements. 

The dissenting councilors also objected to the decrease in the amount of nonresidential space on the first floor that is required to qualify as a mixed-use building, to 40 percent rather than the  60 percent in an earlier draft. Swartz said that the town is “giving up” on brick and mortar retail, even though Hadley and Northampton prove that vital businesses can thrive. Schreiber agreed that the nonresidential space in mixed-use buildings should specify retail businesses. He said he doesn’t accept that there is no local retail, and cited retail businesses above Hastings and the bike shop behind La Veracruzana. 

Bahl-Milne said it would be helpful to talk to developers since “they are the ones who actually do the research.” Other councilors said that the high rents and perceived lack of parking in downtown Amherst make  it difficult to attract retail businesses.

Brewer, too, thought that retail should be required on the first floor of mixed-use buildings, and said that if the developers can’t provide a viable retail space, they shouldn’t build apartments downtown. Steinberg said that the mixed-use building guidelines were intended to attract developers, who would use the attractiveness of building apartments to lower the rents of the businesses on the first floor, but it hasn’t worked out that way.

Hanneke said, “People are saying we need x, but what we want is a financially viable project. If we make requirements too onerous, we’ll get nothing, and we still need housing.” She said that the zoning bylaw doesn’t have to be “perfect.” “It just needs to be acceptable enough for the public hearing.

As for the change in parking requirements, DuMont asked, “Can ‘adequate parking’ be no parking?” Pam felt the number of spaces should be linked to the number of adults residing in the building. She said if the building does not supply parking for its tenants, they will continue to park on the residential streets nearby. Brestrup said that the Planning Department is currently studying parking in town.

District Advisory Board Appointed
The Governance, Organization and Legislation Committee (GOL) recommended seven members to the District Advisory Board (DAB) The residents appointed to the DAB are: Mahek Ghelani and Irene Dujovne from District 1, Marilyn Blaustein and Tammy Parks from District 2, Joseph Gordon and Tracy Zafian from District 3, and Peggy Shannon from District 5.

The DAB was to have had nine members representing all five districts, but there were no applicants from District 4 and only one from District 5. There was some debate about whether the two other applicants from District 1 should be appointed to fill out the board, but most felt that that would give too much weight to one district. Ryan, chair of GOL, said he feels that seven strong members with a diversity of age and backgrounds is sufficient, and the appointments were approved unanimously. The councilors expressed a hope that two more people from Districts 4 and 5 will apply.

Liaison and Town Manager Reports
Brewer reported that the Board of Licensing Commissioners approved four temporary liquor licenses for concerts on the Common over the summer.

Schoen said the elementary school building project is moving ahead, and that building committee members are working on three proposals: a renovation, a partial renovation, and a totally new building. Still to be decided is the site of the new school and whether the sixth grade will move to the middle school.

Bockelman reported on the success of mobile COVID vaccine clinics. A state public health bus went to several apartment complexes to administer vaccines. A cooling center was opened at the Bang’s Center during the extreme heat of the past week. He also said that the shipment of granite for the Kendrick Park Playground was received, so the playground is expected to be completed by the third week in July.

Brewer Announces That She Will Not Seek Reelection
In a moving speech, Councilor Alisa Brewer announced that, after more than 20 years in town government, she will not seek reelection. She was first elected to Town Meeting in 1999 and has also served on the School Committee, Select Board and Town Council. 

Council Recommends Extension of CSWG Until November 1
Swartz proposed that the Town Manager extend the Community Safety Working Group until November 1. The group has been tasked with proposing alternatives to the police for many safety calls and for developing independent oversight for the police department.  As of now, it is supposed to complete its work by September 1, but members of the group have said that that is not enough time to complete the second part of their charge, which is a review of Amherst police policies and recommendations for a Citizens’ Oversight Board. And they have expressed a wish in communication to the council to begin work on the implementation of the programs they have recommended. The CSWG is a Town Manager’s committee, so Bockelman determines how long its term lasts.

Bockelman said he is looking toward creating a standing committee to continue the work that the CSWG has started, but for now, he and its co-chairs  are working on the Community Responder (CRESS) program as well as establishing the Department of Equity and Inclusion with Director of Senior Services Mary Beth Ogulewicz.

The vote to recommend continuing the CSWG for an extra two months was 10-1-2. Ryan voted no and Pam and Brewer abstained. Brewer said that the  issue is not time sensitive and was not posted on the council agenda, and thus should not have been put to a vote at this meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 11:55 p.m.

The next Town Council meeting is July 12, the only meeting in July.

The CRC will hold a public hearing on July 13 at 2 p.m. on rezoning of the public parking lot behind CVS to permit construction of a parking garage there.