zoning revisions committee final presentation

8/6/2019 Zoning Revisions Committee Final Presentation

1/39

Rezoning Northampton for a Sustainable Future

Highlights from Final Report of

the Zoning Revisions Committee


2/39

Process

Met two times per month for two years

Analyzed existing zoning and Sustainable NorthamptonPlan

Conducted focus group meetings with neighborhood groups,developers, etc.

Held five public forums

Accepted public comment at every meeting

Zoning Revisions Process


3/39

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS


4/39

Translating Sustainability Goals into Zoning Goals

Task: Boil Future Land Use Map and 45 pages of goals, objectives and strategies from the

Sustainable Northampton Plan into a short set of summary goals that are relevant tozoning.

Concentrate development and allow for a wide range of housing types and workspaces in walkable, mixed-use neighborhood, village and commercial centers

Minimize development in areas that lack infrastructure or have significantenvironmental, open space or agricultural resources

Promote environmental performance, including energy and resource efficiency

Make the zoning code more user-friendly and processes more transparent

Promote design that fits into neighborhoods so that new development makesthe city a better place.


5/39

Key Recommendations

Long-term: Invest in a comprehensive effort to restructure and rewrite the entire

zoning code

Medium-term: Address parking in dense residential neighborhoods (e.g. through on-

street residential parking permits AND changes to parking requirements

in zoning)

Short-term: Revise urban agriculture provisions (backyard chickens)

Revise Home Business Provisions

Revise Accessory ApartmentP

rovisions Revise Planned Development Provisions

Revise Dimensional Standards for URC, URB, and URA

Establish design standards for larger projects

Develop a non-binding design guidebook to encourage compatible designin Northampton

Take steps to make the zoning easier to understand


6/39

HOME BUSINESSPROVISIONS


7/39

Home Businesses

Overview of Current Regulations

A home occupation does not require Special Permit only if:

No clients or customers are seen on site

There is no sign for the business

There are no sales of goods from the premises

You dont meet or work with other people in your house

If home business activity doesnt fit this narrow definition, then a SpecialPermit is required to allow a small sign, sale of goods from the home, or oneother person to work with you


8/39

Home Business Proposal

Goal

Allow many types of home business by right, but minimize impactson neighborhoods

Allow current illegal home businesses to operate legally

Strategies Regulate auto traffic instead of clients and customers seen

Do not distinguish between types of visits (by client, employee,delivery person, contractor, etc.)


9/39

Home Business Proposal

Benefits for Sustainability

Supports

Infill and uses existing structures for multiplepurposes (mixed-use)

Entrepreneurship, and lowers barriers to smallbusiness

Equity - applies to all kinds of work equally(professional services, home made goods, etc.)

Reduces

Traffic and use of nonrenewable resources

Cost of doing business in Northampton

Regulations - fewer special permits required


10/39

Home Business Proposal Definition (Slide # 10)

A Home Business:

Is conducted entirely within the buildings on a property

Does not cause any outward manifestation that is uncharacteristic of or

an additional disturbance to the neighborhood e.g. traffic, parking congestion, noise or air pollution, outdoor materials

storage, public service or utility demand

Does not include any clinical medical/dental practice, veterinary

hospital, restaurant, retail or wholesale supply shop or store, ormortuary. Other uses may be excluded on a case-by case basis.

Definition applies to By Right and Special Permit Home Businesses.


11/39

Home Business Provisions (Proposed) (Slide # 11)

(Apply to By Right and Special Permit Home Businesses)

It is secondary to use of the dwelling for residential purposes

A principal practitioner of the business resides in the home

It does not occupy more than 40% of the floor area

No goods are sold from the premises

Except for those created in the home or sold by internet or telephone

It does not produce noise, obnoxious odors, vibrations, glare, fumes or electricalinterference detectable to normal sensory perception beyond the lot line

The structure conforms to all applicable fire, building, and health codes.

A one square foot sign, attached to building and not lighted, is allowed

If in an accessory structure, structure must conform to setback requirements foraccessory structures in that district, unless a Finding by the ZBA in accordancewith 350 9.3 is made

Must be registered with the city including business hours, vehicle trips, etc.


12/39

Home Business Proposal By Right

Additional Provisions for By Right Home Businesses

There is no outdoor storage of materials, merchandise, or equipment

Up to two open studios to sell home made goods permitted per year

No more than 30 automobile round trips per week

Maximum of 7 trips in any single day

Hours of operation must be between 7 a.m. and 8 p.m.


13/39

Home Business Proposal Special Permits

Special Permit Required To:

Generate more than 30 automobile round trips per week

Generate more than 7 automobile round trips in any one day

Propose operating hours outside of 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Hold more than 2 open studio functions per year

Store materials outdoors, as long as stored materials are not visible from thestreet or adjacent properties

Special Permits must be renewed once, immediately following the first year of

operation, and then may be renewed in perpetuity if no changes are made

Other than providing these additional options by Special Permit, ALLOTHER PROVISIONS FOR HOME BUSINESS BY RIGHT STILL APPLY

(See Slides 10 & 11)


14/39

ZONING IN TRADITIONALNEIGHBORHOODS


15/39

Non-Conformance in Traditional Neighborhoods

What percentage of homes in our urban neighborhoods do not conform* to

current minimum lot size zoningregulations?**URC

- 63% of 1-3 family homes do not conform

- 83% of 4 family homes do not conform

URB




URA


- 100% of 2 family and multiple-family homes do

not conform (they are not allowed)*Non-Conforming refers to a property that is used or structures that are built in a way that is not permitted by the zoning for

the property. The use is grandfathered, or permitted to continue, because the land was being used in such a fashionbefore the zoning law was passed.

**This analysis looked only at conformance with lot size requirements. An analysis of properties that also meet minimumsetback, frontage and other requirements would yield even higher rates of non-conformance

Why Does this Matter?

- Zoning doesnt matchour existing

neighborhoods

- We have great urbanneighborhoods that cannever be built again!


16/39

Non-Conformance in Traditional Neighborhoods

Example:Walnut Street Properties that DoNot Conform to their Zoning(by lot size)

84% could not be built on these lots today!

84%

Example: Elizabeth Street This 2-FamilyHome Could Not be Built Today

Lot Size: 5,183 Square Feet

Today, would need 12,000 SF to buildthis home

Would need 8,000 SF to even build asingle family home


17/39

Innovative Infill Housing NOT Allowed

COTTAGE & POCKET HOUSING


18/39

Adaptive Reuse Infill Housing NOT Allowed

ADAPTIVE REUSE OF OBSOLETE BUILDINGS

Allowed Downtown, but.

Not allowed in Leeds


19/39

Infill

Infill is rose to the Surface as a Critical Issue for Sustainability

Infill is new construction or redevelopment that 'fills in' empty lots or adds unitsor uses in areas that are already developed

Infill is an important tool for concentrating development in walkableneighborhoods, rather than sprawling into undeveloped areas

Infill is the historic pattern of development in Northampton

ParkingLots


20/39

RESIDENTIAL INFILLPROPOSALS


21/39

Infill in Urban Residential Zones

Summary:Problems with The Current Zoning

The current dimensional regulations are designed to DECREASE the density ofexisting neighborhoods, while the sustainability plan says to INCREASE density -there was continued support for this idea at our public meetings

Innovative housing types, especially where people have smaller homes withshared yards (e.g. cottage housing), are not allowed

Adaptive reuse of obsolete structures like old churches and schools for housing isnot possible in our neighborhoods


22/39


Sustainability Benefits of Changes to Allow Residential Infill

Environment: More people live in walking distance to goods and services = less driving

Allows flexible reuse of existing buildings and properties in face of changing householdsizes and needs. Reuse is more resource-efficient than new construction

Economy: More residents to support nearby businesses, both existing and new (and more businesses

nearby will make neighborhoods even more walkable)

Rental income for property owners

More disposable income due to lower car expenses (more walking = less driving)

Equity: More variety of in-town housing = more people can afford to live here


23/39


Residents of neighborhoods where you can walk to services and jobs drive less,but there are more total drivers

New construction can be beautiful and add to the sense of place of theneighborhood, but sometimes neighbors dont like the way a particular projectlooks (design is discussed later)

Reduces the need for expensive new infrastructure, but also increases use ofexisting infrastructure

Considerations: Allowing More Infill


24/39

Residential Infill Proposal # 1: Accessory Apartments

Revise the citys accessoryapartment regulations to make it easier to have

accessoryapartments on owner-occupied single family properties

For garages, carriage houses and other accessory structures built prior to 1975,allow accessory units in existing structures that are closer to property boundariesthan homes.

For all other detached accessory dwelling units, allow structures to be locatedwithin 10 of the front and rear property line by right. In URC, allow this to bereduced to a minimum of 4 by Special Permit

Allow conversion of a detached accessory structure into an accessory apartmentby-right rather than requiring a Special Permit.

Allow the entrance to an accessory apartment to be located in the front of thebuilding (in addition to the side or rear) in URA, URB and URC.


25/39

Residential Infill Proposal #2: Innovative Housing

Amend the citys Planned Development regulations to allow for innovative

housingand adaptive reuse of obsolete structures by Special Permit

Develop zoning provisions to allow for Cottage or Pocket Housing. For example,some possibilities for Cottage Homes zoning could include:

Allowing more than one principal structure on a lot

Limiting size of cottage home units

Allowing single family or duplex structures

Allowing shared open space and parking

Adaptive Reuse: Allow conversion of a non-residential buildings to residential


26/39

Residential Infill Proposal #3: Small Scale Infill

Amend dimensional standards in the urban residential districts to

preserve and promote traditional urban neighborhoods, and allowsmall-scale infill & flexible conversion of homes.

Approach: Revise standards to allow for infill within existing lots, but preventsplitting of small lots into even smaller lots, which would result in more new

construction and a sense of less

open space

in these neighborhoods.

1-4 family homes in URC, 1-3 family homes in URB, 1-2 family homes in URA

Remove the link between the number of units and lot size, allowing flexibleconversion of homes in allowed ranges

Set minimum lot size and frontage requirements to minimize splitting of lots

Simplify requirements and use a more form-based approach in whichrequirements are set to promote a traditional urban form and do not vary bynumber of units


27/39

Dimensional Averaging


28/39

Residential Infill Proposal #3: Small Scale Infill in URC

Medium term: Consider parking permits and parking requirement reductions, withprovisions for snow emergency parking See memo to Parking Committee

Proposed standards based on traditional neighborhood design and assessment ofexisting conditions, e.g lot size proposal based on existing lots in URC: 70% percent of

properties have lot sizes of 3,750 and above.


29/39


30/39

Residential Infill Proposal #3: Small Scale Infill in URB

Lot size proposal based on existing lots in URB: 50% percent of existing 2-familyproperties have lot sizes of 4,400 and above


31/39


32/39


33/39

Residential Infill Proposal #3: Small Scale Infill in URA

Lot Size based on existing lots in URA: 76% percent of existing 1-family properties havelot sizes of 10,000 sq. ft. and above.


34/39


35/39

Residential Infill Proposal #4: Design Standards

Establishgeneral design standards thatapply onlyto larger projects

Urban residential districts: Design standards with Administrative Site PlanReview to apply to all new construction or additions that expand the footprint ofa structure by over 700 square feet

Design standards should be general (no detailed architectural standards),addressing building massing and relationship to the street / neighbors


36/39

Residential Infill Proposal #4: Design Standards

Establishgeneral design standards thatapply onlyto larger projects

Design and other standards to address:

New structures should not interfere with solar access of neighboring structures

Where Special Permit required, buildings should 1) be oriented towards the street

(with some exceptions) and 2) demonstrate

fit

with existing neighborhood Tree preservation and replacement, and front yard shade tree standards

Relief from dimensional standards by Planning Board Site Plan Review

More detailed design standards for townhomes and larger developments


37/39

Residential Infill Proposal #5: Design Guidebook

Develop a Design Guidebook with more detailed (non-binding) design

guidelines (See details in the final report)

Residential Infill Proposal #6:

Make Zoning Easier to Understand__________________________________________________

Provide Guidance and Make Improvements that Make ZoningEasier toUnderstand (See details in the final report)


38/39

KEY LONG-TERMRECOMMENDATION

Invest in a comprehensive effort to restructure and rewrite theentire zoning code.


39/39

Questions?

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to serve our community!

Sincerely,

The Zoning Revisions Committee:

Dennis BidwellStephen Gilson

Danielle McKahn

Peter McLean

Jim Nash

Bob ReckmanDillon Sussman

Tom Weiner

zoning revisions committee final presentation

Documents