KING STREET OPD Assessment 6_28_2010
Assessment of June 2010 Chamber of Commerce Recommendations on King Street Zoning June 28, 2010 Wayne Feiden, FAICP and Carolyn Misch, AICP Office of Planning and Development King Street’s
health is critical to the Northampton’s economic and social health. King Street provides key retail, service and other functions that the City needs. It generates an enormous volume
of commerce, bringing in dollars and visitors to Northampton. King Street should help make Northampton more sustainable. We judge our public policies by whether they help make our city
healthy for our children and our children’s children. Sustainable public policy, as most commonly defined, requires a long-term focus on the environment, social equity, and the economy.
The private sector equivalent, the triple bottom line, uses the similar concepts of the planet, people, and profit. We seek the maximum overlap between all three goals. In 2002, City
Council adopted a major revision to King Street’s zoning. Initiated by three City Councilors, with staff support from the Office of Planning and Development, input from the Mayor’s Office
and the Planning Board, these changes included the participation of hundreds of residents. The final changes reflected a compromise, but not consensus, approach. Some of the aspects
of the zoning have been very successful, embracing economic development with more pedestrian friendly streetscapes. The redeveloped Big Y, Toyota and the Potpourri Plaza and adjacent
buffet restaurant and the new CVS, Honda, and Walgreens all improved substandard sites that existed in 2002. One simply needs to look at photos from 2002 to see that King Street is much
improved from what it was when the zoning was first passed. At the same time, failed redevelopment proposals at the Hill and Dale Mall and the former Honda dealership fueled the perception
that King Street is stagnating. It is not living up to its potential. Some have overestimated the role of zoning for these two major failed redevelopment projects. Unrealistic sales
prices, litigation from an abutter opposed to a project, rents from long gone tenants (reducing the incentive to redevelop), hazardous waste, and most importantly the great recession,
all helped kill projects. At the same time, others have underestimated the extent to which the current zoning could be retarding major King Street redevelopment projects. The time is
right for zoning and other public policy changes. The Planning Board, Zoning Revisions Committee, and Northampton Design Forum (through their Envision Northampton process) have all had
discussions about what changes are necessary now. The Office of Planning and Development, working with the ZRC and the Planning Board, has already been working for several months on
revisions to the structure of zoning tables to make them much easier to read and use. The Chamber of Commerce, however, deserves credit for making concrete proposals for how to improve
King Street.
Guiding Principles for any King Street Zoning Although zoning needs to be revised, the guiding principles identified in 2002 remain relevant: 1. King Street is and should remain a major
economic engine and not just another neighborhood. 2. King Street provides a variety of economic, retail, service and other functions, but its mix of uses should provide for land extensive
businesses that are unlikely to locate in downtown or Florence (e.g., grocery, large footprint retailers/department stores, and automobile dealerships). 3. The blight from empty King
Street sites, although less today than in the past, is unacceptable. 4. The majority of traffic will remain automobile traffic for the foreseeable future, even as increasing fuel prices
reduce average trip length and vehicle fuel sources and efficiency change. 5. King Street should be pedestrian-friendly, bicycle-friendly, and designed on a human (i.e., texture and
richness for those going three miles an hour, not just those going 40 miles an hour). 6. King Street should not be just another strip-USA that could be anywhere. 7. King Street should
remain the neighborhood commercial area for abutting neighborhoods. 8. Sustainability, economic, environmental, and equity, should be part of any solution. 9. The City should embrace
housing above the first floor, while accepting the market reality that this is unlikely to happen to any large extent north of Finn Street. 10. Development on King Street should be dense
enough to serve the niche that King Street serves and avoid the creation of new areas of sprawl in Northampton or elsewhere. 11. Create zoning that is clear and understandable. 12. Buildings,
especially multi-story buildings, built near the sidewalk line frame the street and make an area much more human scale. Three significant changes since 2002 may change the emphasis of
any action: 1. Retailers have always resisted building their buildings up to sidewalks in auto-oriented areas. As a result of the Great Recession, retailers are even less willing to
deviate deviate from their model except for markets far more valuable than Northampton. 2. The development of the Norwottuck Rail Trail crossing King Street has dramatically increased
bicycle traffic and created much more interest in a bicycle friendly King Street. In some areas, this need may be better served by bicycle lanes and multi-use paths along the road instead
of buildings. 3. The most critical area for buildings up to the sidewalk is greatest in the area south of the Norwottuck Rail Trail crossing, especially with the likely densification
of this area as Amtrak and someday commuter rail become a reality. This area provides enough real estate to meet this potential demand for many years. Consistency of Chamber of Commerce
Recommendations with Sustainable Northampton Economic Development: 1. Restructuring and streamlining zoning tables to make the zoning easier to understand. This will help lower the cost
of opening a business or a home improvement. 2. Allowing greater flexibility in the kinds of uses and reducing special permit requirements will provide more flexibility at lower cost
to applicants. It will also reduce city litigation by reducing groundless appeals. 3. Allowing greater lot coverage and higher building heights will increase utilization of existing
parcels and provide more space for business development.
Equity 1. Restructuring the table will level the playing field for all property owners, from small homeowners and small businesses to large developers. 2. Allowing greater flexibility
in uses and elimination of special permits will also level the playing field and reduce the cost of starting up a business or project 3. Allowing more lot coverage and building height
will allow more opportunities and potentially eventually allow upper story housing uses and mixed uses. 4. Housing, job options, access to services from surrounding neighborhoods, bike/pedestrian
options for section north of the rail trail will be more available to a broader segment of the community. 5. The area north of the rail trail has prohibitive land costs and development
costs particularly associated with retail development and not other uses (second story only applies to retail). The proposal would apply to all uses and reduce payment-in-lieu of second
floor requirement while still allowing multi-stories. This could provide more affordable options for smaller businesses. 6. Reduction in buffer in CB to 15’ with quality landscaping
instead of single row could improve current buffer for surrounding residents while providing more land for quality development. Environment 1. Maximizing existing lots by shrinking setbacks
and increasing heights in commercial areas will allow infill in existing commercial areas rather than pushing development into neighborhoods and to outlying green sites. 2. Reduction
of open space coupled with more detailed landscape buffer requirements would provide a greater carbon benefit and aesthetic benefits than larger expanses of grassed islands hidden behind
buildings. 3. Increased buffer for area north of the rail trail path could create opportunities for off-street bike/pedestrian connection between the rail trail and Damon Road. This
could increase the viability of walking and biking to services from surrounding areas. Better buffers could encourage non-motorized access. 4. Changing HB to GB south of the rail trail
provides better opportunity for access to services via the rail trail for this portion of King Street. Buildings built to the street with no parking in front will encourage more pedestrian
activity. This significant change makes a clear statement about vision for this area with the intention of it becoming a more walkable transition to downtown. 5. Increased heights add
opportunities for future mix of uses. 6. Setbacks north of rail trail don’t preclude buildings from being built close to the street. Overall, the Chamber proposal has the potential to
help in three important areas: 1. Remove any city barriers to economic development and infill on King Street. 2. Change the way new development becomes pedestrian friendly. 3. Make development
more bicycle friendly. 4. Allow infill development close to the sidewalks in the most critical area south of the rail trail.
The Proverbial Devil is in the Details While overall endorsing the Chamber of Commerce recommendations, the Office of Planning and Development recommends the following. In most cases
this is a level of detail that the Chamber did not attempt to provide. In other areas this would represent a subtle change from the Chambers recommendations. 1. The proposed buffer for
businesses in Highway Business should be a minimum of 30’ (not the proposed 25’) instead of current provisions forcing buildings up to or nearer the sidewalk line than the market wants.
2. Any development proposal should examine the area between the curb line and the private property side of the buffer and layout and build a tree belt, a mixed sidewalk/multi-use trail,
and landscaping in the most logical layout. Typically, unless some other layout clearly creates improved pedestrian and bicycle access and buffering (e.g., a rail trail on the rear of
the property) the expected standard would be: Street curb to 10’ from street curb: Tree belt with one tree per 30’. Starting at the edge of the tree belt: 12’ wide concrete sidewalk/bicycle-frien
dly multi-use trail permanently dedicated to public use. Starting at the private property side of the sidewalk/trail: a landscaped area extending from the sidewalk to the parking lot
with two rows of trees 30’ on center in each row and the two rows offset in a triangular fashion. Appropriate benches along the sidewalk. Developers who did not want to dedicate any
of their land would always have an option of making the improvements in the public way and setting aside a 60’ landscaped strip. 3. Central Business should ideally extend to North Street.
A transition zone, however, is an acceptable compromise for the interim. The ultimate reason for transitioning to CB would be for design, which may be the most important issue in this
area. See Table below for differences between CB and GB. 4. No grandfathering (pre-existing non-conforming) exemption the buffer or parking lot landscaping for redeveloped sites. Mixed
Use Trail, Univ. Dr. Amherst
5. There is no reason for parking requirements in Highway Business and the responsibility to figure out how many spaces can be privatized. 6. Revise current zoning titles and visions,
as shown below. This is consistent with the Chamber recommendations and would provide a unique identity for the King Street. Current Zoning District Label New Zoning Label Vision CB
(Central Business) CB Walkable, intense mixed use, multi-story, buildings to sidewalk, parking in rear, public parking provided GB & NB (General & Neighborhood Business) Florence
Ctr. Pleasant St, Leeds Ctr, Pine/Nonotuck West Farms + others VB (Village Business) Walkable, mixed use single or multi story, buildings to sidewalk, parking in rear, on-street
parking. Possible to transition to CB (e.g. Pleasant/Conz) {This would essentially be the current GB zoning} GB King St Damon Rd TB (Transitional Business) Walkable, mixed use, single
or multi story, buildings with vegetation between sidewalk and building, parking in rear, on street parking. Possibly transition to other zone(CB or VB) at some point. {This would be
the current GB zoning with the 8’ buffer in the Chamber recommendations.} HB (Highway Business) King Street HB Auto-oriented mixed business but with Bike/Ped accommodation/accessibility
SI (Special Industrial) OI (Office Industrial) Office and industrial uses. Back office, r&d and very limited medical. No heavy manufacturing. Mixed residential only above first floor.
GI (General Industrial) GI Mixed industrial, some back office uses. More intense industrial/warehousing—highway dependant. URC DNR (Downtown Neighborhood Residential) Mix of residential
types and densities walkable to downtown. Most intense residential district, some non-residential uses allowed. URB/URA Jackson, Round Hill, Ward NR (Neighborhood Residential) Mix
of residential types and densities, not as dense as 1. Walkable to village centers, bikeable to village or downtown, some modest nonresidential uses. URA TBD Leeds? TBD FLO-N. of
Bridge rd etc SR Reflective of existing conditions unlikely to change, encourage new development in open space cluster design. URA/SR/RR with WSP overlay I /II WSP Larger lot for water
supply protection. Eliminates confusing overlay system. SR/RR with or without RI overlay SR Reflective of existing conditions-unlikely to change, encourage new development in open space
cluster design. RR with or without RI overlay FFR(Farms Forest Rivers) Larger lots, really rural, encourage development in cluster format to preserve open space URA/B/C/SR/RR with WP
overlay SC Clearer standards for actual allowances in floodplains GB/HB/GI/SI/NB with WP overlay FP Clarifies standards for business in floodplains. RI (residential incentive) Eliminate
based on location and potential for rezoning. Evaluate map changes where current zoning does not meet vision or create provisions for new neighborhood-serving commercial: E.g., HB at
Look Diner in Leeds; E.g., spot of URC surrounded by URA/B on Barrett St & URA walking distance to paths/downto
wn Comparison of General Business and Central Business District USES DIMENSIONS PARKING BUFFER/LNDSCP Central Business Planned Unit Devel (PUD) not allowed Lot Area= 0 Generally
fewer prkg spaces per square foot for ALL uses. No new parking for reuse of existing bldg. No new parking for the addition of 2nd floor above 1st floor. New parking only for new,
footprint expansion & 3rd floor+ additions to exstg. bldg No special permit for reduction in parking. Payment in‐lieu of parking ‐$2,000/space. Bike storage for new use not required
No street tree Private School by Right Frontage = 0 requirement Vet Hospital not allowed Depth = 0 Over 15K of multiple retail Estab. by Site Plan Front Setback = 5’ MAX (unless special
permit) Car Sales not allowed Side Setback= 0 Car Repair (not gas) not allowed Rear Setback= 15’ or 0’ on public way Convenience Store/Auto Srv not allowed Height= 55’ Max; 30’ MIN.
(unless special Permit) Bus. Srvc/Supply Allowed Open Space= up to 5% Movie Theater Allowed Repair Repair Service Estab. Allowed by right Accessory uses supporting mnfctrg Not allowed
Wholesale trade/distribution not allowed General Business PUD by special permit Lot Area= 0 More spaces per square foot than CB. (GB calculation same as all other districts) No new
parking for reuse of existing bldg. New parking only for new, footprint, or sq. foot expansion. Special permit or site plan allowed for reduction in required parking or shared prkg.
Bike storage for new use required No street tree requirement if 0’ front setback, otherwise 1/30’ of frontage length Private School by special permit Frontage = 0 Vet Hospital Allowed
Depth = 0 Over 15K of multiple retail Estab. by Special Permit Front Setback = 0’ landscaping/plazas b/w bldg and street no prkg allowed Car Sales Allowed by special permit Side Setback=
0 Car Repair (not gas) by site plan Rear Setback= 6’ Convenience Store/Auto by special permit Height= 50’ max Business Srvc/supply by special permit Open Space= 5% Movie Theaters allowed
by special permit Repair Srvc Estab. allowed by special permit Accessory uses supporting mnfctrg. allowed Wholesale Trade allowed Those shown are the only ones that differ. All other
uses in table are same between CB & GB. Recommendations from Planning Board and Chamber are to substantially modify what requires special permit so that many of the uses shown to be
different would ultimately be allowed by right in both districts. Discussion has been to eliminate parking requirement in CB altogether and possibly GB to let the market drive it. GB
is more problematic because no public parking is provided, except on‐street.
30’ 10’ Tree Belt 1 tree/30’ 12’ Wide Multi‐Use Trail King Street Building Option 1 Building/Site Development Option 2 Building/Site Development Option 3 20’+‐ Buffer 50’+‐ buffer HIGHWAY
BUSINESS Current Zoning Chamber Recommendation OPD Recommendation Zoning Boundary HB runs from Summer/North to River Valley Market Highway Business should run from Bike Path to River
Valley Market HB from Bike path to River Valley Market Vegetative buffer zone None required 10’ required 25’ buffer zone should be required, with plantings to create a continuous street
element throughout HB 30’ with detailed planting requirements OR 0’ with bldg at prop line. Setback from the street Retail buildings cannot be built more than 55’ from the street(allowing
at most one row of parked cars in front of buildings). Incentives are provided for building at the street. Eliminate the 55’maximum setback. Property owners should have flexibility,
beyond the 25’ buffer, in placing buildings and parking, based on lot characteristics and market demand. Incorporate options for build out as follows * Option 1= 0’ (with 12’ wide concrete
multi‐use trail & granite curb in ROW). Applicant pays for sidewalk improvement. Option 2=30’ (8‐10’ tree belt plantings in ROW, 12’ wide concrete multi‐use trail‐part of 30’ buffer
remaining 20’+‐ is landscaped planted buffer). Sidewalk counts toward traffic mitigation (being on private property) Option 3= 60’ ‐‐Assumes applicant not interested in dedicating portion
of property to public use as in option 2. 50’+‐planted buffer abuts 12’ wide concrete multi‐use trail—applicant pays for landscaping and sidewalk. *Assumes ROW ~10’ beyond curb to PL
Setbacks Side‐10’ Rear‐20’ Lot Size/Frontage 20,000/60 Side‐No Recommendation Rear‐6’/15’ No Recommendation on lot size Side‐0’ Rear‐0’/15’ buffer as noted in CB/GB Lot Size and Frontage‐0’
Minimum height/second story 20’ minimum, with requirement to build out a full second storyStrong incentive for 2 story FOR 30,000 SF RETAIL ONLY 20’ minimum at some point along King
Street façade, but with no requirement to build a second story 20’ minimum as defined in zoning (average to finished grade) (no mandated 2nd floor) Max. height 35’ or 40’ maximum allowed
65’ maximum should be allowed 65’ Open space requirement 5% to 30%, depending on various factors There should be no %open space requirement. Rather, landscaping and screening requirements
should be made quite specific. 0% change §9.3 to exclude site and parking standard layouts from grandfathering Parking As per table based on Sq. feet No Recommendation 0‐ Privatized
Design Applies to retail 10,000+ sq. ft No Recommendation Apply to all uses above 10,000 sq. ft. Uses Varied with Special Permits Eliminate many special permits Eliminate most special
permits, specify grandfathering for uses only Signs Wall= 10% of facades or 100 sf Allow more signage for bigger bldgs Increase 100 sq. foot threshold
GENERAL BUSINESS Current Zoning Chamber Recommendation OPD Recommendation Zoning Boundary General Business runs from Trumbull to Summer/North(except URC on East side of King) General
Business should run from Trumbull to Bike Path (except URC on East side of King) Transitional Business (New district TB) viable Include URC parcels (1 deep on east side of King) Buffer
zone/minimum front setback None required An 8’ buffer zone should be required, with plantings, benches, bike racks, etc. Same as Chamber Rear Setback 6’/30’ 0’/15’ 0’/15’ Maximum Height
50’ 50’ 65’ Minimum height None 20’ minimum at some point along King Street façade, but with no requirement to build a second story 20’ as measured according to current regs. (to avg
finished grade) NH Coop and Goggins in Flo meet this with peaks at 25’ and 27’ Open space requirement 5% There should be no open space requirement. Rather, landscaping and screening
requirements should be made quite specific. 0% Parking As per sq foot for new construction Evaluate opportunities to increase parking supply 0‐ privatized, with simultaneous parking
management system for abutting neighborhoods Uses Various Regulations Eliminate special permits for many Eliminate special permits for many Signs Special Permit for all ground signs
No specific recommendation Replace SP with by‐right standard CENTRAL BUSINESS Current Zoning Chamber Recommendation OPD Recommendation Zoning Boundary Central Business goes north to
Trumbull Road No change recommended No change for King Street for the time being Max height (no change for Min Height) 55’ 65’ 65’ Min rear setback 6’ to 30’ There should be no required
rear setback, except for a 15’ buffer strip bordering residential zones. Same‐need detailed analysis of buffer. Open space requirement 5% There should be no %open space requirement.
Rather, landscaping and screening requirements should be made quite specific. 0% Parking 1/500 sf‐‐‐payment‐in‐lieu Eliminate regulations 0 – privatized Uses Various Regulations Ease
Regulations Eliminate most special permits Signs Special Permit for some wall signs Allow larger signs for bigger bldgs Replace some special permits with by‐right standards