ZBA: We Don’t See How The Hanneke–DeAngelis Zoning Proposal Helps Amherst

Report on the Meeting Of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting February 16, 2023
The meeting was held over Zoom and was recorded. It can be viewed here.

Present
Full members: Steve Judge (chair), , Dillon Maxfield, Craig Meadows, Tammy Parks, John Gilbert (arrived late)

Associate member: David Sloviter

Absent members: Associate membersJordan Helzer, Sarah Marshall, Vince O’Connor

Also present: Christine Brestrup (Planning Director), Steven McCarthy (Licensing Coordinator); and Mandi Jo Hanneke (Town Councilor, at large and co-sponsor of proposed zoning bylaw proposal)

The Zoning Board of Appeals acts on zoning related applications and appeals, often involving Special Permits for residential or business uses that are not allowed simply By Right. Section 10.38 of the Amherst Zoning Bylaw outlines the Special Permit process and requirements. Members are appointed by the Town Council. 

The meeting started with an announcement that the public hearing about a Canton Avenue property and the Wilson Property Group has been rescheduled and will take place on March 23. Chair Steve Judge welcomed David Sloviter as an associate member of the ZBA, taking care to articulate that it is very important for all members of the board “to understand how significant it is when somebody appears before the ZBA. A lot of times, it’s their most important asset that they are talking about, whether it’s their home, their business, their neighborhood” and every board member needs to take what “[the person] is saying very, very seriously” and that “at the end of the day, people need to know that they were heard, they were listened to, they had a fair shot.” He also spoke about civility and the importance of coming to meetings well prepared. 

Proposed Changes To Zoning For Duplexes, Triplexes, and Townhouses
First on the agenda was a presentation from Town Councilor Mandi Jo Hanneke (at large) about her proposal with Councilor Pat DeAngelis (District 2) to change permitting regulations for duplex, triplex, and townhouses. While waiting for her to arrive from her meeting with the Community Resources Committee (CRC),members commented on their current understanding of the proposal. 

“We don’t know what would actually happen, right, but maybe by changing from a special permit to a site plan [review], a little more housing might be built. We can only say that it streamlines the process and might result in more housing, so we’re trying to encourage it. We want to address some of the demand by adding the supply.”
—Mandi Jo Hanneke, co-sponsor of the proposal

Tammy Parks said she is particularly interested in whether, and how, this proposal would actually improve housing in Amherst. She also asked what the next steps for the zoning proposal are.

Christine Brestrup said that the Town Council had already referred the proposal to the CRC and the Planning Board. Next, each of those groups must hold a public hearing, with the Planning Board’s starting on March 1 and the CRC’s on March 2. The hearings are not limited to a particular number of sessions, and with considerable public interest, this can take a long time. Ultimately, each group will make a recommendation or a set of recommendations to the Town Council, which will make a decision. The ZBA, meanwhile, can provide feedback to the co-sponsors, and its members can comment as individuals. It is possible that it can make a formal statement. However, it does not set policy nor have jurisdiction over zoning changes.

“I don’t think this plan has demonstrated that the reason you don’t have enough housing in town is because of the special permit process. And I think that’s kind of the basis of a lot of this proposal.”
— Steve Judge, ZBA Chair

Craig Meadows said that looking at the constant flow of requests the ZBA gets to convert single-family homes into student housing, it appears that this trend is driving people out of town, and he worries that it is unrealistic to think that houses that can easily be converted into student houses won’t go to “the highest possible bidder”, and that it is also unrealistic to think Amherst won’t “continue to get more and more investor groups coming to buy up properties at high cost in order to convert them into student rentals.” But he said he was looking forward to hearing the proponents make their case.

“I see two buckets of questions,” he said. “The first is, ‘What’s the reason for the change? What in the special permit process is a problem or needs to be revised, or needs to be abandoned?’ Those are sort of process questions. And the second set of questions are sort of housing and economic policy questions, ‘what are going to be the effects of these changes?’ The first I think is core to the ZBA and we can provide some valuable information and insight, as to the current permitting process. The second is informed by our experience doing this job, being on this board.”

Hanneke said she wanted to focus on why they created this proposal and how they went about it. “We all recognize we don’t have enough housing,” she said. “We all recognize we have expensive housing, both rental and homeownership, and we know we’ve been building a lot of apartment complexes, and that single-family homes are regularly built.” She mentioned affordable housing projects being built, residences being converted into duplexes, and the fact that triplexes and townhomes are permitted, but cautioned that “that isn’t enough to bring prices down” or provide housing for all of the people who want to live in Amherst.

“And so, what can we do?” she and DeAngelis asked themselves. “What can we propose that would encourage more housing opportunities from a zoning perspective? And the key word is ‘encourage’. We don’t know what would actually happen, right?, but maybe by changing from a special permit to a site plan [review process], a little more housing might be built. We can only say it streamlines the process and might result in more housing. We want to address some of the demand by adding supply.”

She related their hypothesis to the fact that zoning has historically been used to exclude groups of people, so maybe Amherst could become more diverse if the process for building duplexes, triplexes, and townhouses is easier. Duplexes, which are already permitted, should be treated as single-family houses, and triplexes, which aren’t much different from duplexes, should be treated like duplexes, and townhomes, which aren’t much different from triplexes (some having as few as three units) should be treated like triplexes, she argued.

Judge appreciated the work Hanneke and DeAngelis have put into the proposal and said they built it in a logical way. “ But then he added, “One thing that strikes me is that this proposal really does reduce…special permits as a pathway, and I’m wondering what it is in the special permit process that you feel is inappropriate? We do a lot of permitting of these now — what is it in the special permit process that causes you to believe that that is unworkable?”

Hanneke responded that “it’s not necessarily that we believe the special permit process is unworkable or is particularly problematic on a general scale. It goes back to that a special permit is discretionary. A site plan review is technically by right [not discretionary]. So, from an outsider looking in, or looking in and saying, ‘What does this town of Amherst want to build or want to allow to [be] built?’ and when they see a special permit on the use tables they say, ‘Oh, they don’t really think it’s entirely suitable in that zone, maybe they don’t want it.’ It makes it a little less sure that the permit will be granted. I know you grant a lot [of permits] but I also know that there are applicants that withdraw their applications after a month — and dollars as well — because [they think you might not] grant it.” She continued, “What message are we sending to the community when we say a duplex needs a special permit in the RG [general residence] zone, our most dense, that’s supposed to be the densest residential zone? [But] when we say site plan review, we’re saying we want [more] duplexes in our RG. Chris Bestrup said that the Planning Board does not consider everything that the ZBA can consider, including suitability of location “…and Pat [DeAngelis] and I have concluded that a duplex is suitable everywhere.”

Tammy Parks said she was trying to figure out how a duplex on a property makes rents more affordable. “In my mind, it makes it more affordable for the owner to own their property” but it doesn’t lower the cost to rent in Amherst. The housing in Amherst is so extremely high because…if you put four [renters] in one spot, that’s four times more [rental income] than if you put one family there.”

Tammy Parks said she was trying to figure out how a duplex on a property makes rents more affordable. “In my mind, it makes it more affordable for the owner to own their property” but it doesn’t lower the cost to rent in Amherst. The housing in Amherst is so extremely high because…if you put four [renters] in one spot, that’s four times more [rental income] than if you put one family there.”

“It’s hard to describe,” Hanneke said. “And we don’t know whether it would immediately affect affordability, right? Part of affordability is supply versus demand — the more supply you have to address the demand in theory…the less high rent you can charge or purchase price you can charge, but if you’re looking at a duplex versus say a single family home, if a builder buys a plot of land for $200,000 or $150,000 and can only build one house on that plot of land, they have to recover that cost with just one unit of dwelling units. Say…if they build it and sell it, they can sell it to exactly one person who has to be able to [buy it, but] with more than one family or set of units right who have to be able to pay all of those costs but if you can build two units on that piece of land, that land cost has now been split in half, the land cost is now distributed over more dwelling units, and so it can be slightly cheaper..”

Parks wasn’t satisfied. “I don’t think that makes housing here more affordable. If you have a choice between renting to a four-person family or to four students, you’re going to rent to four students. My son, who is not a student, says there’s nothing available for rent here because that apartment can have four people in it. I don’t see this proposal as helping that situation. I see it as not-helping.”

Dillon Maxwell said he has lived in some of the off-campus student houses and “there are a lot of student dumps…landlords coming to Amherst and renting to students and just packing them in there.” As a result, he said, “I worry how this [proposal] would expand, giving these people even more incentive to make even more money off students.”

Hanneke responded that the council has been working on revamping the rental permit registration laws, and adding inspections and enforcement of regulations that should take care of these problems.

“Those are good intentions,” said Meadows, “but it will raise prices, particularly for students.” He said that a duplex might already house eight people and a triplex might house 12, “but the building department doesn’t have time [for so many inspections] and in no way will be able to keep up.” He expressed concern that “no one looking for affordable housing will be able to live here.”

John Gilbert said he appreciates all of Hanneke and DeAngelis’s work on this big undertaking, and that housing is a big nut to crack. “You’ve done a great job here but…I almost do believe there’s a middle ground between this pretty heavy-handed transition from ZBA to site plan review,” he said. “The intention is well received, basic supply and demand is [useful]…but when you open the doors, how wide do you open them? It does have some consequential impacts — like changing the demographics” and would especially impact current long-term residents of Amherst.

David Sloviter brought the meeting back to the question of how this proposal would help create affordable housing. “Can you explain about the demographic your proposal is attempting to help, and how it will result in more affordable housing [for them], given that the recent history seems to indicate that new residential units end up as student housing and do not result in providing affordable housing for lower-income residents or for employees of the university or colleges, or for anyone else in the community other than students?”

Hanneke responded that “a housing production plan that was done a decade ago said we probably need, I believe, at least 1,600 dwelling units to accommodate the desire and need and demand in Amherst at that time. I don’t believe we have built those 1,600 units [editor’s note: 1,504 units have been built in the past 10 years]…that’s the housing crisis. The demand is not just from students…the demand is from people who want to live here…and that’s the housing crisis and if we don’t build, we don’t ever supply the demand. We don’t ever cut that demand down. We don’t ever get closer to having enough housing for the number of people who want to live here, and I will be clear that I don’t know what the appropriate number of housing units for a town Amherst’s size are, or what can our water supply supply, right? I don’t know some of those answers. But the housing production plan made it very clear. And our Comprehensive Housing Policy that the Town Council adopted almost a year and a half ago now made it very clear. We have a housing crisis because we are not providing enough housing for the number of people who want to live in Amherst, so our proposal is trying to address that housing crisis.”

Then it was Sloviter’s turn to press on. “That isn’t my question. I’m asking how your proposal — in loosening the ability of the Zoning Board of Appeals to have control over what is done — provide housing or make it easier to provide housing for university employees, the elderly, the other people you listed earlier? The recent history seems to indicate that every time a residence is subdivided or built, it is snapped up by students at 12 to 14 hundred dollars a bed per month, a very lucrative turn for developers. I’m asking you, basically, ‘Who are you trying to help here?’ and ‘How is loosening the protections and oversight going to increase availability of housing for grad students, for associate staff at the university, elderly seniors who are downsizing — how is that going to work? Why is your proposal needed?”

Hanneke: “I think I’ve tried to answer that if we don’t build housing, we’re not providing housing. And it’s demonstrated that we don’t have the housing for them. And…we’re trying to give it more potential to provide that housing by building more housing. We can’t guarantee anything, but right now the zoning we have is not providing that housing.”

Judge asked, “I have a question and a comment about your response to Mr. Sloviter. I don’t think this plan has demonstrated that the reason you don’t have enough housing in town is because of the special permit process. And I think that’s kind of the basis of a lot of this proposal. I’m trying to be fair… And I’d like to provide you with an alternative view of the special permit process. I think there’s a real benefit to [it], especially in more dense areas where a given structure can have a dramatic effect on people very close by, and we can have a special permit process that tries to balance between the desires of the owner and the concerns of the of the community, and that exactly what it tries to do. We bring the public into the discussion, and the town engineer, the safety [departments], the ConCom [Conservation Commission], everyone who has to have an opinion. and we oftentimes see that the results are a well thought-out application.”

He explained that “I’ve seen time and time again, in the six years I’ve been on the board, that the special permit project process educates the community…for example about a fear they had that might not be valid…and helps the applicant create legitimacy for their building, and doesn’t inspire the kinds of real concerns of people, that an equity investor wants to put 12 kids in the house next to you and is just ramming the project down the throats of the community. A great example is Fearing and Sunset, with 59 units, and we worked with the developer and the community, and the developer and the community, I think, felt that the process was fair and they were fairly treated.” He added that the process does not seem to deter people from coming to town. Instead, it provides support for appropriate development in residential neighborhoods. 

Maxfield favored some aspects of the proposed changes but not others. He argued that while the Fearing Street developer, Barry Roberts, could hire architects and other professionals who are familiar with the town and construction processes, it is more difficult for mom-and-pop property owners to navigate the permit process. He also said that it seems as if the only way for people his age to be able to afford home ownership is to buy or build a duplex, triplex, or four-unit home, and rent out the units they don’t live in. “I know what we’ve been doing hasn’t been working…I’ve been with the ZBA for almost three years, and I think we treat people fairly, but at the end of the day it is a bureaucratic process that takes some know-how and can be costly and cumbersome. I feel like people can get bogged down in a process they just don’t understand. And, I don’t know, and I’m obviously speaking for myself here, but I think these changes are on the whole good and will do a lot of good for the town.”

Hanneke asked Brestrup to explain that the Planning Board, too, puts certain conditions on proposed buildings, which she did, explaining that the Planning Board focuses more on the built environment, what the building is going to look like, is it too big for the neighborhood, what is the landscaping, where is the parking. “It’s really kind of an exterior view [whereas], as Mr. Judge has said, the zoning board does focus more on, ‘How is the property going to be used?’ and ‘Is the use going to be appropriate — are there going to be nuisances? Are there going to be loud parties?’” although the Planning Board might ask for revisions in a rental agreement regarding parties, for example. She also went into detail about the relative expenses and amounts of time involved in site plan reviews and special permits, showing that they are not much different.

Public Comment
During public comment, Alex Kent said that the proposal would make it much easier for outside real estate investors to purchase single family houses here and convert them into multiple units, as has been done on his street. 

Dorothy Pam applauded the discussion and said that she’d seen parts of Boston Mayor Michelle Wu’s recent State of the City address, and that Wu had emphasized the need for building community — not just buildings; planning for community stability; planning for sustainability; and recognizing the urgent need for resiliency, affordability, and equity. Pam added that her personal experiences of living in a neighborhood where you’d want to raise a family, where owner-occupied duplexes and students who live there fit in and are “great”.

Janet Keller said that we have a variety of ways to provide affordable housing, two of which are zoning related and provide hundreds of affordable units here. She said she agrees 100% that the kind of the review that the ZBA provides is critical for people to be able to have quiet enjoyment of their homes, and that providing notice of projects to abutters is a right that shouldn’t be abandoned.

Rani Parker said she is having difficulty with the scope of the changes proposed and feels overwhelmed by the complexities. “This in itself is a problem because citizens cannot understand all these changes.” She told the board and Hanneke that it doesn’t seem right to replace community engagement with leaving permits mostly to one person, the Building Commissioner, who will say “yes” or “no” to applications. “I could be wrong, but I think this prevents trust in a community. Buildings are there for generations, and we need processes that encourage and require trust.” She also expressed concern that in this proposal, people are not as important as speed is, and abutters don’t seem to matter.