Loading...
1993 Northampton State Hospital Plan NORTHAMPTON STATE HOSPITAL PLAN AN ELEMENT OF THE NORTHAMPTON GENERAL PLAN ADOPTED BY THE NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD MARCH 26, 1992 REVISED APRIL 8, 1993 City of Northampton Office of Planning and Development 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Executive Summary 1 History 2 Previous Studies and Input 3 Parcel Descriptions--Transferred Parcels 6 Parcel Descriptions--Surplus/ DMH Parcels 6 Access and Traffic Descriptions 9 Goals and Objectives 11 Proposed Action Plan 13 Zoning Text Changes 13 Zoning Map Changes 14 Municipal Infrastructure and Services 15 Open Space Acquisition 16 Acquisition for Municipal Needs 16 Northampton Planning Board: Andrew Crystal, Chair Joseph Beauregard Nancy Duseau Judith Hale Kenneth Jodrie Marion Mendelson Bob Riddle Diane Welter Daniel Yacuzzo Staff: Wayne Feiden, AICP, Principal Planner INTRODUCTION The planned closure and potential disposition and redevelopment of much of the Northampton State Hospital complex presents unique problems, challenges and opportunities. While disposition of half of the acreage of the original complex has already been disposed of, the use of the remainder of the land and most of the buildings has not yet been resolved. Numerous studies over the past decade recommended ways to maximize the public benefits of the land and buildings. Pending legislation, introduced by Representative Nagle, would direct the state to perform a Master Plan for the disposition of the surplus land and buildings. In the past, however, the Governor has requested authority to sell surplus assets to the highest bidder. The Northampton Planning Board initiated this study of the Northampton State Hospital Complex and environs to insure that the reuse contributes to the community goals identified in this and other planning studies, regardless of who acquires the property. Because local zoning does not apply to most "essential" state government activities, there has been little attention paid to the zoning of the State Hospital Complex. If the land is privately developed, however, it is critical to have adequate zoning in place to direct development and protect critical natural and human built resources. If the Commonwealth does eventually dispose of a majority of the complex, the potential redevelopment of two hundred acres of land with well over half a million square feet of existing buildings could have extremely significant impacts in Northampton. The redevelopment of this area could potentially create a new Industrial Park larger than the existing park, an Office Park, or a large sprawling residential subdivision, all of which would have significant traffic and environmental impacts. Alternatively, the area could become a new mixed use village center surrounded by a cohesive residential neighborhood and designed to broaden Northampton's tax base and meets a wide variety of community goals. Under current zoning, the only permitted use of the property is residential or educational. Upwards of four hundred dwelling units could be developed under the current zoning. In a worse case scenario, existing regulatory controls would be unable to prevent suburban sprawl, traffic congestion, stress on municipal services and finances, and environmental damage. This study is part of the Northampton General Plan. The complete General Plan will be adopted by the Planning Board in accordance with Mass. General Laws, Chapter 41, §81D and will be submitted to the City Council for their consideration. It is the Planning Board's belief that this process will assist the City's efforts to meet our community's goals and objectives. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The State Hospital Complex has unique resources and amenities that make it extremely attractive for many businesses. It can not compete, however, for industries which require large flat sites and easy interstate access. Any redevelopment should insure that the unique resources are protected. 2. The main hospital complex, including the Historic Main Complex, Haskell Building, and Memorial Complex should be rezoned to create a mixed-use village-center. Such an area would include economic development activities, job creation, and other uses to create a center and encourage pedestrian scale activities while allowing a wide range of options for a developer. 3. Areas well suited for housing in existing residential areas should be maintained at a density in keeping with surrounding residential areas. 4. The School Department should determine if future school needs can and should be met on Parcel A or other parcels. 5. The vast majority of the existing open space should be protected for farmland, recreation and conservation. 6. The Conservation Commission and the Department of Food and Agriculture should attempt to acquire open space and agricultural lands, mostly on the west side of the complex. 7. Traffic, including pedestrian traffic, and infrastructure issues must be addressed prior to any significant development in Northampton, including the redevelopment of the main complex. 8. Every effort should be made to preserve and reuse existing structures of architectural or historical significance, but unrealistic historic preservation requirements that will impede or prevent development should not be adopted. HISTORY The Northampton State Hospital (originally the Northampton Lunatic Hospital and then the Northampton Insane Hospital) was established in 1855 and built in 1856. Originally designed for 250 patients the hospital had many expansions, with the peak census in the 1950's. The original 1856 building remains largely intact, and currently completely empty. Several wings were added to the original complex (c. 1890's and c. 1930's) and many other buildings (including Memorial Complex started c. 1926 with a major expansion in c. 1969, Haskell building c. 1956, three large building for employees c. 1918, c. 1927, and c. 1931)) were constructed in the complex over the years. From 1855 until the early part of this century, the state steadily purchased additional land for the State Hospital. The State Hospital acreage peaked at 538 acres until 1977. In 1977, 30 acres were transferred to Hampshire County (and have since been transferred back to the Commonwealth) to house the Hampshire County Correction Facility. In December, 1983, as a result of requests to protect farmland, state legislation authorized the Massachusetts Department of Capital Planning and Operations (DCPO) to transfer 282 acres to the Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA). Throughout the past two decades there has been a nationwide trend toward de-institutionalization of mental health clients. A court decree accelerated this process at the Northampton State Hospital In August, 1984 the Department of Mental Health (DMH), as a result of the downsizing and consolidation of the State Hospital, declared 450 acres of the State Hospital Complex surplus to its need. DMH retained control of the Memorial Complex and several buildings at the main complex, and several other buildings and parcels. Surplus land included the farmland authorized for transfer to DFA and the main complex. In May, 1985 the Executive Office of Human Services declared that this land was surplus to their needs. In August, 1986 DCPO transferred 282 acres to the Department of Food and Agriculture, which was then leased to Smith Vocational-Agricultural High School on a long term lease (up to 100 years). In May, 1990 DFA signed a permanent Agricultural Preservation Restriction and Conservation Restriction with the City of Northampton, insuring that the property would always remain farmland. In July, 1987 legislation was authorized to allow the Northampton Housing Authority to run a shelter (Jessie's House) on State Hospital property for forty years. Representative Nagle has introduced a bill to authorize a master plan for the disposition of the surplus property in a manner which would meet local and mental health needs. This bill has been stalled in the legislature. Representative Nagle has also introduced three other related bills. These bills would authorize forty year leases for six community residences for psychiatrically disabled populations, place a conservation restriction and public right-of-way on one-half mile of Mill River frontage behind the main complex, and protect 36 acres of farmland. Two years ago, the Governor requested authority to sell surplus land at the state hospital, with no conditions as to how the land was sold. An early state budged anticipated selling the hospital for a profit. This bill was not approved. More recently, the Department of Capital Planning and Operations (DCPO), has acknowledged that given market conditions, the development limitations of the undeveloped land, and the age and condition of the buildings, the property may be a net liability. The state will probably need to invest in the site before the area can be reused. The Weld administration plans to close the last remaining units of the Northampton State Hospital later this year. Patients will be transferred to community residences, psychiatric units at hospitals, and possibly to state hospitals in eastern Massachusetts. The hospital closing obviously effects patients and their families and poses new risks to the area's economy. With the closing of the hospital, most of the land and buildings currently held by the Department of Mental Health (DMH) will be declared surplus and become available for disposition. DMH has announced that they would retain control over the Haskell Building, as an emergency backup facility, for up to a year after all the patients are transferred out. With the possible exception of some community care residences, however, it is DMH's intention to end all DMH presence at the hospital within two years. PREVIOUS STUDIES AND INPUT The potential re-use of the Northampton State Hospital has been extensively studied as significant to the future re-use of the complex. Lozano, White and Associates released their "Northampton State Hospital Re-Use Plan" in March, 1982. Working with members of the Mayor's Advisory Committee on State Hospital Building Re-use and funded with City funds and a grant from the Executive Office of Communities and Development, the report made recommendations for the re-use of buildings and land. The Center for Economic Development at the University of Massachusetts, under contract to the City, issued their "Northampton State Hospital Redevelopment Strategy" in March, 1984 This report provided a strategy for the re-use and development of the building and grounds, based largely on the recommendations of Lozano, White and Associates. The Northampton State Hospital Citizens Advisory Committee, with the assistance of the Massachusetts Department of Capital Planning and Operations, released its recommendations in April, 1987, "Northampton State Hospital Draft Development Guidelines" on the disposition of surplus property at the State Hospital. This process involved extensive public involvement and public input. Fay, Spofford & Thorndike issued their "Comprehensive Roadway Study for the City of Northampton" in March, 1987 as part of Northampton's Strategic Planning Effort. Their report focused on needed roadway improvements, regardless of the future development of the State Hospital. Other Public Input has been received at numerous public meetings. The Conservation Commission has had extensive public discussions on several of the undeveloped parcels, the League of Women Voters sponsored a public meeting on the disposition of the state hospital in 1989, in 1989 the Valley Community Development Corporation and The Creative Housing Group issued a position paper on how the complex could be used to maximize housing opportunities, and generally public input has been received at a variety of comprehensive and strategic planning workshops and public hearings. The Planning Board has held, will continue to hold, a series of public input sessions in the preparation of this plan and the accompanying zoning proposal.  PARCEL DESCRIPTIONS--TRANSFERRED PARCELS Food and Agriculture/Sunset Hill/ Jogging Track--Parcels J & I (282 Acres) Parcels J and I, which contain prime farmland and spectacular views, have already been transferred to the Department of Food and Agriculture and leased to Smith Vocational-Agricultural School for 100 years (25 years with an option to renew three times). The City holds a Agricultural Preservation Restriction on both parcels and a Conservation Restriction and public right-of-way on the river frontage and the "drumlin", which insures permanent protection of the parcel. Hampshire Correction Facility (30 Acres) This parcel, which was transferred to Hampshire County and then transferred back to the Commonwealth, holds the Hampshire County Correction Facility. In addition, part of Parcel J is posted to provide a buffer for the jail and a barn is used by the jail. PARCEL DESCRIPTIONS: SURPLUS AND DMH PARCELS Parcel A - Historic Main Complex (55 Acres) This parcel includes the historical main state hospital complex. Among the numerous buildings in this area are the original hospital buildings. These spectacular and historically (eligible for federal listing) significant brick buildings contain over 400,000 square feet of space. In addition, there are several other brick and wood frame buildings in the main complex. Many of the other buildings are eligible for listing on the federal register. The Massachusetts Historical Commission is preparing a nomination of the main campus, including parcels A and B, for listing on historical register. This process would qualify the private owners for tax credits, place a regulatory emphasis on historical preservation, and make development much more difficult, especially any development which required the razing of historical buildings. Unfortunately, after years neglect and sitting vacant most of the buildings are in very poor shape. Rehabilitation of many of the buildings will be extremely expensive and in some cases more expensive than demolishing and rebuilding. While historical and aesthetic values of these buildings, however, are irreplaceable, many of these buildings have been damaged irretrievably. The buildings are located on a hill and hold a commanding view of Northampton. The hill slopes down to the Mill River and contains 1/2 mile of river frontage. The wooded area from the top of the hill to the Mill River is of important ecological significance. Historically, the Main Complex served as a significant center in the development of Northampton. The combination of the setting, the buildings, the location, and the available infrastructure make it an ideal site to redevelop as a village center. This area was declared surplus to DMH needs (although the boundary of the surplus area has changed since 1984). The main complex is vacant. Lozano, White recommendations: In conjunction with the small buildings and outbuildings on Parcel H, Lozano, White found that a wide variety of uses or mixed uses are possible. These include light industry, research facilities, office, residential and conference center. The majority of historical buildings should be preserved, although some demolition will be required. Development controls are critical. Mill River frontage should be protected as open space. Center for Economic Development recommendations: Main complex is one of the most appropriate for development. Building on Lozano, White, the Center found these buildings well suited for mixed industrial and office uses. Industrial space, especially incubator space, strongly needed in the area. Citizen's Advisory Committee recommendation: Main complex for commercial, light industrial, housing, artist space, or mixed uses with environmental and design standards. River bank and entire area from top of hill to river should be protected in its natural state. Other Public and Board Input: Generally citizen input has been supportive of mixed uses, with some groups emphasizing the need for a large amount of housing (200 or 300 units) and others focusing on economic development activities. There has been some discussion of the possibility of future high school on this site, but this would be impossible without a huge investment in public funds and without a clear commitment from the School Board. Parcel B - Memorial Complex (31 Acres) Until a year ago, the majority of the hospital's activity was in this area. All activities have since been moved to the Haskell Building and this site is vacant. The parcel contains a mixture of very interesting historical structures and nondescript institutional buildings. Because of the assumption until recently that this land would remain part of the State Hospital, there has been relatively little public discussion of the future of this site. Much of the Memorial Complex, including the historical structures, are in very poor condition. Lozano, White recommendations: Less useful for private development, recommended consolidation of mental health facilities on this parcel with some rehabilitation of existing facilities and much demolition and reconstruction. (DMH never accepted consolidation of facilities on this parcel.) Other Public and Board Input: Citizen comments have focused on the need for more housing opportunities in Northampton and especially on this site. If the reuse of Main Complex does not address any housing needs, then it is critical that at least part of Parcel B be used for housing. Parcel C--Hayfields (12 Acres) Parcel C is currently agricultural land, but has not been declared surplus. Soils are of state and local agricultural significance but are moderately yielding soils (Hinckley loamy sand). The University of Massachusetts is currently using the site for hay production. The site could be used for productive farmland, including vegetable gardening. Sanitary sewers run by the property. Property abuts a small relatively dense residential neighborhood. Lozano, White recommendation: Recommended parcel be transferred to City for municipal needs, such as school or other public facility. Other Public and Board Input: Most previous discussion has assumed that this property will be transferred to City for municipal uses. There has been some interest expressed in preserving the property as farmland. Parcel D--Gateway Vistas and Hayfields (36 Acres) Parcel D is currently used to grow hay for University of Massachusetts. It contains federally prime agricultural soils and high yield soils of state significance (Belgrade silt loam) and one of the most spectacular views in Northampton. Located as an visual entrance-way to the city, the spectacular mountain vistas and pastoral view helps define Northampton. The views from the road over Parcel D are the most spectacular views along Route 66 The parcel is sloping land with two streams, one of which has extremely important ecological values including a significant wildlife corridor. The entire property has important ecological significance. One gas pipeline running east-west bisects the parcel and a second gas pipeline runs along the western boundary. Except for a small area on the north-east corner of the property, it would be expensive and difficult to extend sanitary sewers to develop the property. Large scale development of Parcel D could also create serious traffic congestion. Unlike the neighboring land to the west which is zoned Business Park, there is no access to Route 10 from Parcel D and it would be expensive and environmentally damaging to make a connection to either Route 10 or to the proposed Business Park. These conditions create severe environmental and development constraints. Parcel D has been declared surplus. Lozano, White recommendation: Industrial or office use. Citizens Advisory Committee recommendation: Agricultural business enterprises preferred. If not economically viable, then business and light industrial. Department of Food and Agriculture recommendation: Strongly indicated that this parcel should be part of the permanently protected farmland. Other Public and Board Input: Planning Board, Conservation Commission, Smith Vocational School, and extensive citizen input has all stressed on the importance of protecting this property as farmland and open space and as a scenic gateway into the City that helps define the City. Parcel E--Ice Pond (39 Acres) Parcel E is a wooded parcel adjacent to the county jail. It contains an old ice pond site and a high percentage of ecologically significant wetlands (including a significant wildlife corridor). The parcel is bisected by two high power transmission lines. Approximately half of the property is upland. Municipal water but not sanitary sewer is available. Parcel E has been declared surplus. Lozano, White recommendation: Protect as conservation area or conservation restriction held by Northampton Conservation Commission. Citizens Advisory Committee recommendation: Majority of parcel should be retained as open space, with subsidized housing on the western (upland) portion. Other Public and Board Input: While there is strong feeling that the wetlands, wildlife corridor, and buffer from the jail should be protected, many citizens and housing advocates have suggested housing on the western third of the property. Parcel F--Community Residence (2 Acres) This parcel contains a wood frame house that is currently used by DMH for a community residence and has not been declared surplus to their needs. There has been discussion that it should be used to serve as a special needs community residence. Parcel G--Community Gardens (5 Acres) This parcel contains the Community Gardens (which is coordinated by the Northampton Recreation Department). Soils are of state and local agricultural significance but are moderately yielding soils (Hinckley loamy sand). Lozano, White recommendation: Transfer to City to continue as community garden. Citizens Advisory Committee recommendation: Top priority to provide improved access to Main Complex. Preserve as much of community garden as possible. Other Public and Board Input: The community gardens are very heavily used and appreciated. Parcel H--Haskell Complex (26 Acres) The Haskell Building currently holds all administrative and client facilities for the hospital. Several other usable buildings, most of which are currently vacant, and maintenance and storage facilities, which are being used are part of this parcel. DMH intends on retaining the Haskell Building for up to a year after patients are moved out, as an contingency, but plans to move all offices out of the building and close it within two years. Presumably, it can be declared surplus at that time. Most of the buildings could readily be rehabilitated. There has been little public discussion of the future of this site because of the assumption it would remain part of the State Hospital. Lozano, White recommendation: Haskell Building should be rehabilitated and used for private industrial and office development. The remainder of Parcel H should have the same mixed uses discussed in Lozano White's Parcel A recommendations. Center for Economic Development recommendation: Use for industrial and office development. Industrial space, especially incubator space, is needed. Parcel K - Hospital Hill (20 Acres) This parcel includes "Hospital Hill", which gets a tremendous amount of use for passive and active recreation, six acres leased to Smith College, and three homes. One of the homes has been leased to the Northampton Housing Authority as a shelter (Jessie's House). Lozano, White recommendation: Protect as open space and transferred to the City, with management by Smith College. Citizens Advisory Committee recommendation: Should be transferred to City for conservation and recreation. Jessie's House and other two homes should be available for affordable housing. Public access along river and the two accesses to Smith College should be maintained. Other Public and Board Input: There is very strong support for maintaining public access to hospital hill. ACCESS and TRAFFIC If the State Hospital receives any significant amount of development, access issues must be addressed. Route 66 (Chapel Street/Prince Street/West Street) provides the primary access from the complex to downtown, but it is inadequate to handle a major increase in traffic. Earle Street to Route 10 (Easthampton Road/South Street) also carries traffic downtown, and is also inadequate for any significant increases in traffic flow. West Street/Elm Street, South Street/Main Street and South Street/Old South Street intersection and West Street, and Old South Street all have serious traffic congestion An engineering study of Route 66 will soon be conducted, with federally funded traffic improvements to follow. The City has suggested that the engineering study consider improvements to the Earle/Grove Street intersection to relieve congestion at the West Street/Main Street intersection. The proposed Route 10 Business Park, if it is ever built, would probably include a road from Route 66 (Rocky Hill Road) to Route 10 (Easthampton Road). This would relieve some traffic congestion and provide alternate access. These and other traffic improvements have been recommended in the past. Lozano, White recommendations: Removal of railroad embankment at Earle Street/Grove Street to improve traffic connection to Route 10. Improvements at South Street/Old South Street and Old South Street/Conz. [The Old South/Conz improvements have been completed.] Fay, Spofford and Thorndike recommendations: Improvements to the Grove Street/Earle Street Route 66 to Route 10 link. A possible new link between Route 66 and Route 10. A possible new West Street/Old South Street collector (possibly a one way collector) on the old railroad bed from the felt plant to the Round House Plaza. Improvements to Old South Street. Other Public and Board Input: Over the years citizens and boards have expressed concern about existing traffic congestion and the potential for more congestion with more development. Many citizens have indicated that no significant development should be permitted until traffic issues can be addressed. The West Street/South Street/Main Street and South Street/Old South Street intersections have consistently been identified as the most critical intersections. In 1993, the Partnership for Economic Development stressed the need for South Street/Old South Street improvements for any economic development, and the need to look at Earle Street/Grove Street and an Old South/West Street by-pass.  GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Planning Board identified the following goals and objectives as the goals and objectives for actions pertaining to the state hospital. These goals and objectives are from Northampton's strategic planning and comprehensive planning processes and are the result of extensive citizen participation. Goals Relevant goals to this action plan include: o Encourage economic diversity and vitality. o Encourage development into areas which can best accommodate it (Use existing infrastructure, encourage cluster). o Protect important ecological values and discourage development in environmentally sensitive areas. o Maintain distinction between rural/suburban/urban areas. o Preserve character of rural areas, including maintaining large undeveloped tracts, vistas, and farmland.  Objectives The objectives of this action plan include: o Encourage development patterns similar to traditional Northampton neighborhoods, including pedestrian scale. o Encourage economic expansion, job creation and stability. o Diversify Northampton's economy. o Minimize the adverse municipal fiscal impacts of developments and encourage development that either "pay its own way" or meets other community goals, such as job creation. o Insure that municipal services and facilities are adequate to meet public needs, without subsidizing development. o Minimize infrastructure costs. o Encourage development in relatively dense nodes with open space nearby. o Minimize traffic congestion from new development. o Protect open space and preserve undeveloped areas, especially those visible to the public. o Protect farmland. o Provide a buffer and a greenbelt between the urban/downtown area and the suburban development on Route 66 and Burts Pit Road. o Provide vistas, and especially scenic "gateways" into downtown. o Protect valuable wildlife corridor and habitat area. o Provide housing opportunities. o Preserve and reuse structures of historical and/or architectural significance. PROPOSED ACTION PLAN The Planning Board identified the following action plan as being the most effective plan to implement the goals and objectives identified above. This action plan is consistent with all identified goals and objectives and with citizen input received at public meetings and hearings. Zoning Text Changes 1. Create a new Farms, Forests & Rivers (FFR) overlay zoning district to protect sensitive open space and ecological features by: a. Mandating cluster development within the overlay district b. Allowing development rights permitted by underlaying zoning and site constraints to be transferred to sites outside of the FFR overlay. FFR would be a "sending zone" of a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) scheme. The FFR overlay zone protects important open space, agricultural, and ecological resources. The amount of transferable development rights would be based on zoning restrictions and on what could actually be developed, considering all the legal and physical site constraints. Receiving zones would be limited as to the amount of extra density they can receive and under what conditions. TDR is complex and will be of only limited use outside of unique areas such as the state hospital land. 2. Encourage new developments to be cluster or PUD developments. The recently approved changes to the open space/cluster and planned unit development sections of the zoning ordinance provides a much greater incentive for protecting open space, preserving the character of Northampton, reducing traffic impacts of an area by clustering housing and allowing small nodes of development. 3. Create a new Planned Village (PV) overlay zoning district. This district encourages mixed uses, with an emphasis on economic development. It allows developers to take advantage of the unique attributes the main hospital complex has to offer. a. The PV overlay will be over RR zoning north of Prince Street (Route 66) and URB zoning in the Memorial Complex. (See Zoning Map Changes) Allowing some uses as of right protects the zoning from legal challenges and provides greater flexibility to developers. b. PV will serve as a "receiving" zone for the transfer of development rights from the Farms, Forests & Rivers (FFR) overlay district. c. PV will allow mixed uses by Special Permit and: 1. Allows office, light industrial, limited retail, housing, and other similar uses. 2. Allows a mix of uses to create a village center to serve neighborhood needs but not compete with downtown or Florence. 3. Encourages economic activities that stimulate job creation and economic expansion (especially "export" related activities, not commercial activities serving primarily local needs). d. PV will encourage reuse of historical and architecturally significant buildings. e. PV will incorporate site development standards, including protection of critical vistas. f. PV zoning will require that adequate municipal infrastructure, especially the transportation system, be developed concurrent with or prior to a major new PV development. g. PV will incorporate some elements of "performance" zoning to give a developer the maximum flexibility while insuring that community goals are met. 4. Make procedural changes to the Zoning Ordinance to ease administrative burdens and clarify the intent of the ordinance. Zoning Map Changes 1. Rezone the following parcels to Rural Residential (RR) and to the Farms, Forests & Rivers (FFR) overlay: a. Parcel D (hayfields) b. "Ice Pond Site" -wetland and buffer areas on Parcel E c. Parcel J (agricultural land) d. The Jail e. The level farmland along Burts Pit Road on parcel C f. The City conservation land and private landlocked land between parcel J and the Mill River g. River frontage below 195' Mean Sea Level on Parcel A h. Parcel G (Community Gardens) i. Parcel K (Hospital Hill) j. Smith College athletic fields along the Mill River. Rezoning to Rural Residential decreases the density of allowed development. Parcel D is currently zoned URB. The other parcels are currently zoned SR. Smith College would not be affected so long as their land remains in recreational use. Educational uses are exempted from use requirements of zoning, but not dimensional requirements. These areas have a strong rural character, include prime agricultural lands, provide a visual "gateway" to Northampton, and have extremely sensitive and valuable ecological resources. The majority of the acreage is already covered by an Agricultural Preservation Restriction, which limits its use to agricultural. If there must be any development on Parcel D, a small area on the northeast corner of the parcel could be developed for housing with minimal impacts on open space and agriculture. 2. Retain Parcels E (upland areas only) and F as SR. These areas are well suited to development as allowed by SR, especially a cluster on parcel E. 3. Rezone the hilly sections of Parcel C on Route 66 (excluding the most valuable farmland along Burts Pit Road) to URB. This will allow increased density of a type to match what is allowed in the surrounding neighborhood. Educational and municipal uses will still be allowed. This parcel is currently zoned SR. 4. Rezone Parcels A (Historical Main Complex, except river frontage), B (Memorial Complex), and H (Haskell Building) to the new Planned Village (PV) Zoning Overlay District. These areas are well suited to the type of planned development described above. Most other zoning schemes would either severely limit a developers flexibility, and therefore the likelihood of redevelopment, or create undesirable consequences, such as the demolition of historical buildings or development that severely stresses municipal services and infrastructure. 5. Rezone Parcels A (Historical Main Complex, except river frontage) and H (Haskell Building), to RR. This allows some uses as-of-right, which protects the zoning from legal challenges, but will strongly encourage a PV development. 6. Retain Parcel B as URB. This allows PV development or housing development in keeping with the neighborhood, including cluster or PUD developments. The preferred development is a clustering of residential or PV the Memorial Building and open space elsewhere on the property. This zoning allows a developer flexibility to meet market conditions (housing or PV) while still addressing community concerns. Bonus densities are available clusters with provision of affordable housing. Area streets can accommodate the development of Parcel B as URB, especially with the closing of the state hospital. MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES 1. Traffic and municipal infrastructure issues need to be addressed by the developer and the City prior to redevelopment of main complex. A. Reuse of existing buildings and non-PV developments, while creating traffic and infrastructure demands, will not create significantly greater off-site traffic impacts than existing hospital demands. Current site plan review and special permit standards provide protection against negative impacts. B. Redevelopment main complex area with new buildings for a PV could create major traffic problems if not properly addressed and mitigated. A major traffic study is needed. (In addition, see Fay, Spofford & Thorndike "Comprehensive Roadway Study.") C. The City should consider preparing engineering studies and seek federal and state funds for improvements to the South Street/Old South Street intersection, the Route 10/Earle Street/Grove Street link, and a possible new Old South Street/West Street Bypass. Traffic flow to downtown, Burts Pit Road, Route 66, Route 10, and local streets will all be impacted by the redevelopment of the main complex. D. Development of the Planned Business Park on Route 10, with an eventual Route 10 to Route 66 road, would alleviate some Route 66 traffic. With or without a Business Park, some improvement in the Route 10/Route 66 connection is important. E. Public transit improvements will be needed when the main complex is redeveloped. F. Pedestrian and bicycle circulation improvements on the site and paths to downtown and to residential neighborhoods are needed. The former railroad right-of-way from National Felt on West Street to the Round House Parking Lot should be examined as a possible pedestrian/ bicycle path, either by itself or in conjunction with a new road connection. G. The current federally funded redesign of Route 66 especially the Prince Street/West Street and West Street/Elm Street intersection, should address the impacts of redevelopment of State Hospital, in addition to existing needs. This redesign should also consider alternative connections to Route 10 or Old South Street listed above. 2. If legislation is passed authorizing impact fees, the City should do the necessary planning and adopt an impact fee ordinance to require developers to pay for all infrastructure and City service costs that result from their project. Such an ordinance could exempt certain types of development from impact fees to encourage those developments (for example, some types of mixed use developments). OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION 1. Commission or the Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) should acquire parcel D and place an Agricultural Preservation Restriction on the parcel to insure permanent protection for agriculture and open space. 2. The Northampton Conservation Commission or other state or private conservation agencies should acquire the Parcel E "Ice Pond Site," a strip of land along the Mill River in Parcels A and K (up to a height of 195 M.S.L.), and the Parcel K "panhandle" and place a conservation restriction and public right-of-way on the parcel to insure permanent protection for public access and conservation. 3. The City, possibly in partnership with Smith College, should acquire Parcel K for open space and recreation. If a new school was ever built on Parcel A, Parcel K could meet some recreational needs. Parcel K might also meet some of Smith College's buffer needs. If Smith acquires the property, the City should secure access to the river and hospital hill for the public and conservation restriction on the entire parcel. 4. The Northampton Recreation Commission or the Department of Food and Agriculture should attempt to acquire and place an Agricultural Preservation Restriction on the Community Gardens (Parcel G), except for the eastern one and a half acres which should be saved for possible road access to a future Planned Village development. The Community Gardens are heavily used and should be protected for permanent garden use. The eastern 1.5 acres are needed to preserve access to the PV district. If this 1.5 acres is removed from the Community Garden, a second Community Garden site should be developed elsewhere on the state hospital agricultural lands. ACQUISITION FOR MUNICIPAL NEEDS 1. The City, working with the Housing Authority and local housing land trusts should acquire parcels to meet identified housing needs if parcels can be acquired at no cost or for below market rates. Specifically: Jessie's House (part of parcel K), the Grove Street Homeless Shelter (part of parcel B), and the house on the south side of Grove Street opposite the Grove Street Homeless Shelter. 2. Parcel C should be acquired by the School Department as a future elementary school site if it can be acquired at no cost or for below market rates. (gis\wp\nsh\hospital.pla May 27, 2004)