Will The Town Build A Parking Garage Behind CVS?

 Report on the Meeting Of The Planning Board of July 7, 2021

The meeting was conducted over Zoom and was recorded. The video can be viewed at here.
Present
Planning Board members: Jack Jemsek (Chair), Maria Chao, Andrew MacDougall, Doug Marshall, Janet McGowan, and Joanna Neumann. Absent: Thom Long
Staff:Christine Brestrup (Planning Director), Rob Morra (Building Commissioner), and Pam Field-Sadler (Assistant)

Highlights

• Discussed a proposal to rezone the town-owned parking lot behind CVS, a necessary precursor to constructing a parking garage there
• Heard considerable public comment on the parking lot rezoning
• Continued a public hearing on construction of an ATM at Newmarket Square
• Recommended against town purchase of the “Mitchell property,” the anticipated site of the Eruptor Project in North Amherst

Public Hearing On Rezoning Of The Town Parking Lot Behind CVS
Much of this meeting centered on a discussion of a proposal by Town Councilors George Ryan (District 3) and Evan Ross (District 4) to rezone the town-owned parking lot behind CVS from General Residential (RG) to General Business (BG), which would be necessary to permit future construction of a parking garage at the site. This issue was previously discussed at the council meeting on May 24 and was referred to the Planning Board (PB) by a vote of 11 to 2. However, the Planning Board (PB) apparently had not received formal notification of the Council’s referral until it appeared on its agenda as a public hearing.

Ryan made the presentation, during which he pointed out that a second parking garage is one of the projects in the Business Improvement District’s “Destination Amherst” plan. He said the rezoning does not mean the town will build a parking garage at that site, but would simply permit it, which its current RG zoning does not. According to Ryan, a parking lot at that location would give easy access to an expanded Jones Library as well as the Amherst Cinema and the North Common, which currently has a large number of parking spaces, but is planned to be reconfigured as a park. 

Preliminary ideas for a parking garage, Ryan said, call for a public-private partnership to construct it, with the town providing the land and a private developer doing the construction and presumably managing it and collecting the revenue.

McGowan objected to having a public hearing take place without prior discussion of the rezoning by the PB. She said the required process was not followed as the PB never received a formal submittal from the council. She said she does not consider the council vote on May 24 as a formal submittal. Brestrup replied that she thinks the proper process was followed. According to the flow chart approved by the council and the PB in May of 2020, the PB has 65 days from the submittal from the council to hold a public hearing. McGowan asked for an opinion from the town attorney as to the correct dates. The 65 days from May 24 would be July 28. The Community Resources Committee (CRC) will hold its public hearing on July 13. The PB can continue its hearing if it does not feel it has enough information to make a recommendation. Chao agreed with Brestrup that the flow chart adopted for referrals  was followed. She said the dashed boxes were optional.  After a discussion, the PB voted to continue the public hearing by a 5-1 vote (McGowan voting no).

Marshall asked about the current revenue from the lot that the town would lose if it leases the land to a private developer. He was also concerned about the exit from the lot on North Prospect Street, which currently passes through the lot belonging to CVS. Ryan was unable to answer these questions, but repeated that this proposal is not a plan for a garage, but only the first step in a process. Jemsek agreed that it makes sense to rezone.

Public Comment
Councilor Dorothy Pam (District 3) was an original sponsor of the measure, but “realized that she had made a mistake”. She thought the zoning should be changed to Limited Business (BL), not BG; BL limits buildings to three-stories, BG allows five-story buildings. She noted that the lot borders a local historic district and that an additional curb cut, which would probably be needed to access and leave a garage, could greatly impact the narrow street and surrounding neighborhood.

Janet Keller expressed concern that this matter did not come to a public hearing in the usual way. She pointed out that it is the middle of summer vacation season, so public input is limited, and she shared Pam’s concern for the surrounding local historic district.

Jones Library Trustee Bob Pam said he has mixed feelings about the rezoning. While he thinks it is important to have more parking near the library, he does not understand why the matter should be moved ahead now. He noted that the town lot is frequently empty because most people park in the free CVS lot, so he is “not sure” how much revenue a parking garage will bring in. He also expressed concern that the construction of a parking garage may interfere with the upcoming construction of an addition to the library. He did advocate for some free spaces in a garage to be reserved for library patrons. He added that in the past, the neighborhood vociferously objected to rezoning the nearby Strong House lot, but now the town proposes rezoning in the middle of the block. He asked why, if there are no actual plans for a garage, do we need to rezone the site now?

Sandy Muspratt asked if Ryan had reviewed the 2019 Nelson-Nygard report on parking. This report noted that, although there was a perception of a lack of parking, mostly by outsiders, there is actually sufficient parking in downtown Amherst. It recommended better signage, lighting, and maintenance of existing parking. Muspratt asked what data the supposed need for a parking garage is based on?

Hilda Greenbaum voiced concerns about the entrance and exit to the future garage and the disruption of the traffic patterns via the very narrow Hallock Street, Cowles Lane, and the existing entrance on North Pleasant Street. She asked how many parking places would be lost by eliminating the current spaces on these three streets for accessing the garage. She also pointed to the 1996 compromise in Town Meeting at which time it was said that additional stories could be added to the Boltwood underground garage. She wanted to know if this is possible, and also asked if the lot between People’s Bank and the Amherst Cinema had been studied as a possible location for a garage.

Mary Sayer pointed out that changing the zoning of this parcel to BG could open the door to uses not anticipated, such as an apartment building. She urged the town to discuss the most appropriate place for a garage before changing the zoning on one parcel.

Ann Streit said she moved to North Prospect Street in the past year. She was aware of the parking lot across the street, but said it is currently screened from the street by trees, and the traffic flow is manageable. She worried about the changes a multi-story parking garage would bring to the local historic district. 

Ryan said that there is “zero interest” in doing anything to the Boltwood lot. but “lots of” interest in the parcel behind CVS. Chao pointed out that a garage at that site has been discussed for a long time, but she did not have time to research previous deliberations. She said it makes sense to concentrate cars in one place, rather than the numerous parking spaces around town. McGowan countered that none of the three parking studies done in the recent past have shown a need for a new parking garage. 

Brestrup pointed out that the limited building coverage of lots that is allowed in the BL zone would make an allowed parking structure too small to be economically viable if the parcel was rezoned to BL.

McGowan said that the town paid $485,000 to Louis Foods for the land containing the parking lot in 1989. It is now assessed at about one-third that value. She asked whether part of the CVS lot is on town property Brestrup said she does not  know what agreements exist between the town and CVS. MacDougall said that it makes sense to build a parking garage at the site but it would be “a problem” if “some other structure” got built there. However, he said that the town owns the land and is in control of its disposition.

The PB voted 6-0 to continue the public hearing until August 4 at 7:30 p.m.

ATM Proposed For Corner of University And Amity
Greenfield Savings Bank submitted an application to build a stand-alone ATM kiosk at the Northwest corner of the parking lot of Newmarket Square, where the bank already has a branch with a 24-hour ATM in the lobby. Engineer Tom Wonseski of SVE Associates and Jim Loynd of Greenfield Savings Bank presented the plans.

The kiosk will be 8 foot 6 inches in height and almost 11 feet in width with room for three cars in the surrounding drive. Because the drainage for the existing parking lot is in that area a six-foot asphalt berm will be needed to maintain adequate drainage. There will be no change to lighting or existing trees and minimal change to vegetation. Eight parking spaces in the existing lot would be lost. The Conservation Commission has approved the wetlands protection plan. The sign for Newmarket Square at that corner would be removed.

No PB members were available to make the site visit due to short notice and poor weather, but Brestrup did examine the site. Marshall worried about placing a prominent sign for a commercial business at a major intersection, and said, “People will see this and think we made a big mistake.” McGowan asked if the applicants have spoken to any of the other businesses in the shopping center. Loynd responded that they have only spoken to the owner of the land. 

When asked about the impact of losing parking spaces, Morra indicated that the nearby Hangar is planning to reconfigure the restaurant and it will have  about 50 fewer seats, so the loss of eight spaces should not be a problem.

Although Neumann wanted to approve the project with some conditions about lighting and landscaping, most members of the PB felt they should conduct a site visit and obtain more information before making a decision. The PB voted 6-0 to continue the hearing to August 4 at 6:30 p.m.

Planning Board Recommends Against Town Purchase of North Amherst Property For The Eruptor
Marshall recused himself from this discussion because of family ties to the Eruptor project. 

Attorney Tom Reidy of Bacon, Wilson presented the proposed sale of 18.5 acres of land between Sunderland and Montague Roads for construction of the Eruptor incubator project. Because the land is now under chapter 61A protection as farmland, the town has the right of first refusal on the purchase. Developer Barry Roberts has offered to purchase the property for $1.6 million, and the town would have to match that purchase price. Reidy said the land now contains hayfields with a perennial stream.

The PB was asked to give a recommendation to the council regarding the disposition of this land. The land is currently zoned mostly as Professional Research Park. McGowan said she feels she does not have enough information to make a recommendation. She would like to hear from the Conservation and Agricultural Commissions, and she wanted to know if the town has an inventory of farmland. Reidy pointed out that the Eruptor project needs approval from other entities, including the State Bureau of Forestry, PB, town manager, and the assessor. Jemsek said that Amherst has “more open space than most towns,” so he does not see a need to purchase this parcel.

The PB voted 4-0-2 (Marshall and McGowan abstaining) to vote against town purchase of the land. The council will vote on the matter at its July 12 meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 10:15. The PB will discuss zoning amendments on mixed use-buildings, apartments, and parking at a meeting on July 14 at 7 p.m.

\