Section 3 Rev. 09-21-2022 v2
Section 3. Investigation and Analysis
Page
3.1. An Overview of Historic Preservation Issues and Challenges in Northampton
3.2. Historic Properties Inventory – Analysis of Existing Documentation 2
3.3. Designated Historic Properties in Northampton 10
3.4. Local Public Awareness and Engagement Analysis
3.5. Analysis of Existing Municipal Ordinances, Regulations, Tools, Municipal
Policy, Management and Capital Improvements Analysis
22
2
Section 3.2.
HISTORIC PROPERTIES INVENTORY
Communities conduct comprehensive surveys to record the location, form, appearance,
condition, and history of their historic resources. The product of the survey is known as the
inventory. Resources selected for documentation are generally at least fifty years old at the
time of survey. The inventory provides the baseline documentation needed to evaluate the
significance of the resources and establish priorities for preservation. Funding constraints
often limit the number of resources documented in a survey project, and each year more
resources reach the fifty-year mark. For these reasons, a survey may be considered
communitywide and comprehensive but is rarely complete.
The Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth, maintained by
the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC), currently records about 1,734 historic
buildings, areas, structures, objects, and burial grounds in Northampton. Inventory forms
and related preservation planning documents, including National Register of Historic
Places nominations, are available through the MHC’s Massachusetts Cultural Resource
Information System (MACRIS) database at https://mhc-macris.net, with online mapping at
https://maps.mhc-macris.net. Per MHC historic properties survey methodology, the City of
Northampton has duplicate sets of inventory forms filed in various locations, including
Historic Northampton, Forbes Library, and City Hall.
The inventory records both unique and representative examples of Northampton’s historic
development and demonstrates how historic resources are concentrated. The most intact
or best preserved resources are the highest priority for documentation. To meet MHC
standards that the inventory be both communitywide and comprehensive, the process of
identifying resources for survey is guided by the goals of recording resources:
• in each geographic area of Northampton;
• reflecting the range of historic resource types (areas, neighborhoods, buildings,
structures, objects, landscapes, burial grounds, etc.) present in the city;
• reflecting the range of historic uses (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial, private
institutional, educational, municipal, etc.) present in the city; and
• illustrating the range of time periods and associations with important themes, events,
or persons in the city’s history and development.
Communities compile their inventories using MHC inventory forms, completed to MHC
survey standards. Only forms submitted to MHC are included in the statewide inventory.
Inventory forms may include recommendations, if appropriate, for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places, per National Register criteria.
3
Survey Activity in Northampton to Date (Existing Inventory)
Northampton began recording its historic resources in 1970. The Historical Society (now
Historic Northampton) initially documented 139 resources citywide, submitting the
inventory forms to MHC in 1972. Northampton Historical Commission assumed
responsibility for survey work upon its establishment in 1973. Under the chairmanships of
Dr. C. Keith Wilbur and Helen Searing, professor of architectural history at Smith College,
the Historical Commission greatly expanded the inventory to more than 1,100 resources
by the early 1980s, with many forms prepared by trained volunteers working with
consultants C. Dubie and Edmond Lonergan. Northampton was commended for the
quality and comprehensiveness of this early inventory, described in 1982 as:
…exceedingly well documented. Almost every building of outstanding character,
either historical or architectural, is included along with representative examples of
all major building types and styles present in the city. Historical significance is
particularly sensitively treated.
Also known in Northampton as the legacy survey, the early inventory yielded numerous
recommendations for historic districts and individual National Register listings at the city
center, Florence, Bay State, Leeds, Laurel Park, West Farms, and Oxbow. In addition to
providing the framework for subsequent update projects, the legacy inventory preserves
photograph views of Northampton’s historic resources as they appeared ca. 1970 through
the early 1980s. This documentation is invaluable for illustrating how recorded resources
have been modified in recent decades.
Northampton Historical Commission produced inventory forms in the late 1970s for the
Smith College campus, a sizable concentration of high-style, architect-designed buildings.
C. Dubie and Ann Gilkerson prepared the forms on the commission’s behalf. Preservation
consulting firm Boston Affiliates, Inc. conducted a campuswide survey update in 2002,
adding updated photographs, street address corrections, and minor notations on building
alterations that had occurred since the 1970s.
The Northampton commission also completed the first cultural resource survey of the State
Hospital campus in 1980-1981. Consultant Edmond Lonergan recorded buildings from the
1840s through the late 1960s, providing an important and early record of the campus with
buildings that have since been demolished. This local survey was followed by a 1984
statewide survey of state hospitals and state schools, and a statewide multiple property
National Register of Historic Places nomination on the same theme. Inventory forms from
both the city and state surveys are available through MACRIS.
From the 1980s through the late 1990s, project planners, consultants, and volunteers
produced a number of inventory forms for Northampton resources; some were updates of
earlier forms. Stephen J. Roper, Historic Bridge Specialist for Massachusetts Department of
Public Works/ Highway Department (now the Highway Division of the Massachusetts
4
Department of Transportation) recorded several bridges in Northampton. Volunteer survey
efforts included documentation of the Soldiers and Sailors Monument by Save Outdoor
Sculpture (SOS). The Public Archaeology Laboratory (PAL) completed an updated
inventory form for Park Street Cemetery in Florence, prepared for the Museum of African
American History.
The city substantially updated the legacy survey in 2010-2011, in a project completed by
planners Bonnie Parsons, Jayne Bernhard-Armington, and staff at Pioneer Valley Planning
Commission. Since the original communitywide survey was completed, Northampton had
established design review districts and a demolition ordinance, and more detailed
information on the appearance and condition of historic resources was needed to support
preservation planning decisions. Inventory forms for many individually recorded resources
were amended with new photographs, location sketch maps utilizing online mapping, and
narrative architectural descriptions. The latter were a significant addition to the city’s
inventory because inventory forms from the 1970s and early 1980s did not require
descriptions in a data field separate from the historical narrative. In most cases, form
updates restated the historical narratives from the original forms, with minor corrections.
Several resources from the legacy survey were confirmed to be demolished, and their
inventory forms marked accordingly in the statewide inventory and MACRIS database.
Restorations and renovations also were noted.
New forms were prepared in 2010-2011 for properties not documented in the legacy
survey. Examples include post-World War II residences and new construction in the Elm
Street Historic District, additional buildings on adjacent Round Hill that would later be
added to the district, and buildings in a potential expansion of the Fort Hill National
Register historic district. In these cases, where historic resources were being added to the
inventory for the first time, forms included architectural descriptions and detailed historical
narratives.
Property-specific preservation and development projects have added a limited number of
new forms to the Northampton inventory in recent years. Most were associated with review
and compliance, establishment of preservation restrictions, or efforts to list additional
properties in the National Register of Historic Places.
As survey projects are completed, inventoried resources are evaluated against National
Register of Historic Places criteria to identify areas and individual resources potentially
eligible for listing in the National Register. See Designated Historic Properties in
Northampton for further information on the National Register program. MHC staff evaluates
recommendations upon request, decides whether a resource is eligible or not eligible, and
often asks for more information before issuing an opinion. A positive National Register
eligibility opinion from MHC does not confer any official historic designation on an area or
property, though the Northampton Historical Commission does consider such properties
5
significant for the purposes of demolition review (see Municipal Ordinances and
Regulations).
Geographic Distribution of Inventoried Resources
The statewide historic properties inventory identifies seven places in Northampton where
historic resources are concentrated: Northampton (72.5% of the total), Florence (15.5%),
Leeds (7.8%), Bay State (3%), West Farms (0.9%), Laurel Park (0.2%), and Pine Grove (0.1%).
Other places of historic interest in Northampton include North Farms, Oxbow (Island Road),
and Loudville. The inventory does not fully reflect the density of historic development
citywide, principally because villages and subdivisions beyond two miles of downtown
have not been inventoried as intensively.
A heavy concentration of architecturally significant buildings downtown is one factor in the
uneven distribution of inventoried resources citywide. Another is the early 1980s
completion date of Northampton’s legacy survey, a time when inventories focused on
recording resources individually. By the late 1980s, MHC survey methodology had shifted
to a cultural landscape approach that used area forms as the principal vehicle for recording
concentrations of historic resources. Rather than prepare individual forms for unique and
representative resources in the geographic area, the new approach recorded the
architecture, setting, and history of the area, and the resources within, as a whole. The
legacy survey delineates boundaries for areas such as Water Street at Leeds (NTH.W),
Laurel Park (NTH.N), and Loudville (NTH.D), though information on the number, character,
and condition of historic resources in those areas is limited. In mill villages and other
settlement clusters at Bay State, Florence, Leeds, and Oxbow, detailed area forms are now
desirable to provide a more complete accounting of the resources present.
An area form for Florence Village has been drafted and is currently (July 2022) in the
preliminary stages of review by MHC for a potential National Register of Historic Places
multiple property nomination project using Community Preservation funds.
Resource Uses and Types Represented in Inventory
Northampton’s inventory is notable in Massachusetts for the wide range of historic uses
represented. Single-family dwellings, multiple-family dwellings, apartment houses, and
workers housing comprise just over 55 percent of the building uses identified, a
comparatively low percentage for cities. A substantial number of identified buildings,
therefore, were not residential historically, indicating diversity among the types of historic
resources recorded. Roughly eighty outbuildings also have been identified to date.
6
Table X. Current Distribution of Resource Types in the Northampton Inventory
Resource Examples Total Count and
Percent of Inventory
Buildings Residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
municipal, institutional (e.g., educational,
religious)
1,565 total
(90.3% of inventory)
Structures Bridges, dams and other water power features,
railroad features, parks and landscapes (including
fairgrounds)
102 total
(5.9% of inventory)
Areas National Register of Historic Places districts
Elm Street Historic District (under M.G.L. c. 40C)
Residential neighborhoods/subdivisions
Industrial complexes
Institutional campuses (e.g., schools, hospitals,
religious properties)
37 total
(2.1% of inventory)
Objects Statues, markers, monuments, fountains 21 total
(1.2% of inventory)
Burial grounds Includes cemeteries 9 total
(0.5% of inventory)
Source: MHC Town Profile, Northampton (May 2022)
Landscapes – including agricultural landscapes and designed landscapes such as parks
and campuses – appear to be especially underrepresented as a resource type in
Northampton’s inventory. Legacy survey forms for Pulaski Park (NTH.911) and Look
Memorial Park (NTH.904) no longer meet preservation planning standards for parks and
landscape documentation. A more recent area form for Three County Fairgrounds
(NTH.AF) requires more detailed mapping, photographs, and descriptions of the historic
resources present. Many opportunities exist for adding a variety of landscapes to the
inventory.
Most of the nine cemeteries in the Northampton inventory have legacy survey forms that
provide historical details but lack the descriptive information necessary to support current
preservation planning decisions. General descriptions of cemetery and marker design,
along with assessments of current condition and representative photographs, are needed,
though 1970s-era stone-by-stone recording of birth and death dates is no longer expected.
Bridge Street Cemetery is well documented due to recent preservation activity.
For preservation planning and public information purposes, all pre-1975 historic buildings,
parks, cemeteries, bridges, and related resources owned and maintained by the City of
Northampton should be included in the inventory. The Seth Thomas Street Clock on Main
7
Street, relocated and restored with Community Preservation funds, merits inclusion in the
inventory as well.
Historic Periods and Themes Represented in the Inventory
MHC’s Town Profile for Northampton shows inventoried resources with approximate
construction dates from 1660 to 2010. Later dates tend to reflect either non-contributing
resources in historic districts, or contemporary resources (such as a fence) present on an
inventoried property. MHC currently encourages documentation of historic resources in
place by ca. 1975, though the statewide inventory and MACRIS database can
accommodate above-ground resources of any age.
Roughly 75 percent of Northampton resources date to the period from 1850 to 1920, with
about half of these associated with growth during the Late Industrial period (1870-1915). A
comparatively limited number of pre-1850 resources indicates well preserved examples
are likely to be of communitywide significance. About 6 percent of the inventoried
resources date to 1950 and later.
Aside from architecture, the top historic themes represented in Northampton’s inventory
to date are education, commerce, health and medicine, industry, agriculture, religion,
recreation, and transportation. A resource may illustrate more than one historic theme or
area of significance. Further survey work can be expected to document additional
resources associated with these themes. A high priority for survey is resources associated
with underrepresented themes in Northampton, among them ethnic history, the
Underground Railroad, and several themes under the broad category of social history:
disability history, labor history, LGBTQIA history, traditional cultural history, women’s
history, and civil rights.
Quality of Inventory Documentation
Prepared from the 1970s through 1981, Northampton’s legacy survey is uncommon among
early communitywide surveys for its comprehensiveness. The inventory captures unique
and representative examples of historic development throughout the city, includes a wide
range of resource types from different historic periods, and is strong in historical research.
The inventory forms exceeded MHC survey standards in effect at the time of submittal.
MHC survey methodology and standards continued to evolve to meet preservation
planning needs, and inventory form documentation became more detailed and complex.
The 2010-2011 survey update project addressed new survey standards introduced since
the completion of the legacy survey, by amending the forms with narrative descriptions of
each resource, updated photographs, and location sketch maps from digital mapping
sources. New inventory forms were added for certain post-World War II buildings in design
review districts, and select apartment buildings owned by Smith College. Beyond new area
forms for the Nonotuck Mills, 296 Nonotuck Street, Florence (NTH.AB) and Norwood
8
Engineering Company, 28-32 North Maple Street (NTH.AD), the structure of the legacy
inventory was largely maintained, with an emphasis on recording individual properties.
Opportunities exist for updating and expanding the inventory to tell a more complete story
of Northampton’s growth and development and better support preservation planning
activity.
• Prepare detailed area forms for concentrations of historic resources outside
downtown. The early success of Northampton’s legacy inventory delayed the city’s shift
to the cultural landscape approach for survey, which documents important clusters or
concentrations of historic resources, including non-building resources such as
landscapes. While a building-by-building inventory does help facilitate design and
demolition review, for broader preservation planning purposes the inventory should
convey a better sense of the mill villages, agricultural settlements, and historic
residential neighborhoods present in the community. These resources in Northampton
are under-documented by today’s survey standards. Future updates could confirm
boundaries, enumerate the full range of historic resources in each area, and place them
in the context of the area’s physical and historical development. Ancillary buildings such
as barns and garages are typically recorded in area form documentation.
• Update and expand the inventory with historic resources from ca. 1930 to ca. 1975.
When the legacy inventory was completed, the typical cut-off age for historic resources
to be considered was ca. 1930; the current date is ca. 1975. Most of Northampton’s
inventoried resources from this period are buildings on school and hospital campuses;
diners, churches, and bridges; or noncontributing buildings in designated historic
districts. Post-World War II residential development is underrepresented. Many side
streets and residential subdivisions off Bridge, Burts Pit, Florence, Ryan, and
Westhampton roads and Hatfield and North Main streets were developed since ca.
1950 and merit consideration for survey.
• Add a range of landscape types from different historical periods to the inventory.
Updated forms are needed for Pulaski Park, Look Memorial Park, and Three County
Fairgrounds. Additional landscapes to consider (some in coordination with the city’s
Open Space planning priorities) include, but are not limited to, Childs Park,
Northampton Country Club, the Connecticut River Greenway and Meadows,
Northampton (LaFleur) Airport, Turkey Hill Quarry, and Mineral Hills (Galena Mines).
Unless the city’s conservation activities warrant documentation of historic landscapes
individually, many could be recorded with related resources in area forms. Industrial
landscapes in the Mill River corridor are best recorded with their associated mill villages
and bridges. Campus landscapes are best recorded in area forms that integrate the
buildings and grounds in consolidated description and history narratives. Agricultural
landscapes are ideally recorded with their historically associated farmhouses and any
extant outbuildings.
9
• Expand historical narratives to incorporate new research. With the emergence and
growth of online historical research in recent decades, accessibility to research records
has improved dramatically since the legacy survey was completed in 1981. Census
records, immigration and naturalization records, and city directories yield information
on the personal relationships, ethnic origins, and occupations represented in
Northampton households through at least 1950. Since many inventory forms from the
2010-2011 update project restated historical narratives from the legacy forms, some
research in Northampton’s inventory has not been appreciably updated or expanded
in forty years.
Further survey efforts would identify, and promote locally, new areas of preservation
planning interest in Northampton. New and updated inventory forms would also celebrate
new research findings for areas, neighborhoods, and non-building resources that have yet
to be fully understood.
Using the Northampton Inventory
For the most up-to-date accounting of the full Northampton inventory, users are urged to
consult MHC’s MACRIS database and companion mapping site, which include the MACRIS
identification numbers currently assigned to inventoried properties. As the central
repository for the statewide inventory, MHC receives forms for Northampton resources that
are not produced locally and therefore may not be included in local collections on paper
and online. In addition, MHC has unique inventory numbering requirements that caused
some legacy forms, especially those originally numbered in the 800s and 900s range, to be
renumbered during the MACRIS data entry process. Use of the MACRIS database going
forward will streamline communication on historic properties, allow users to see all
inventory forms submitted to MHC for a single property over time, and eliminate the need
for local repositories to update the numbering of inventory forms in their possession.
10
Section 3.3.
DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN NORTHAMPTON
Properties that have received one or more local, state, or federal designations based on
their historical or archaeological significance are listed in the State Register of Historic
Places, published annually by the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC). The State
Register includes all Massachusetts resources listed in the National Register of Historic
Places; located in local historic districts (under G.L. c. 40C); designated as local, state, or
national landmarks; or for which a preservation restriction (i.e., preservation easement) has
been recorded at the Registry of Deeds. The State Register is distinct from the Inventory of
Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth analyzed in Section 3.2, which is
a much larger database that identifies historic resources present in the community, some
of which may merit designation in the future.
Designated historic properties in Northampton are protected in various ways. The MHC
reviews any new construction projects or renovations to existing buildings that require
funding, licenses, or permits from any federal or state agency, to determine the potential
impact on historic properties and archaeological sites and avoid, minimize, or mitigate any
adverse effects.1 The MHC conducts its review in consultation with the Northampton
Historical Commission and other interested parties. While not design review programs,
these mechanisms provide limited protection from federal and state actions. State Register
listing makes a property eligible for certain matching state restoration grants, when
available, and certain tax benefits for certified historic rehabilitation projects. Ultimately,
the strongest protections are implemented at the local level, typically in the form of c.40C
local historic districts and preservation restrictions.
This chapter examines National Register listings, the Elm Street Historic District, and
preservation restrictions in Northampton. The city’s Central Business-Core District and
West Street Architecture District are not listed in the State Register because they are not
local historic districts designated under c. 40C. For further information on these districts,
see Section 3.6 and Table 4.
National Register of Historic Places
The National Register of Historic Places is the nation’s official list of buildings, sites,
structures, objects, and districts worthy of preservation and significant on the local, state,
and/or national level. An essential tool for preservation planning, the National Register
recognizes unique and irreplaceable historic resources that convey a sense of time and
place, and contribute to community character. The National Register also is an important
1 In compliance with the following federal and state statutes and regulations: Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and 36 CFR 800, M.G.L. c. 9, § 26-27C as amended by Chapter 254 of the Acts of 1988 and 950
CMR 71.00; and the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA).
11
public information tool that increases awareness of our irreplaceable resources and
promotes preservation and revitalization of historic properties. National Register listing,
also known as registration, provides limited protection from federal and state actions, but
does not involve design review and does not guarantee that historic and cultural resources
will be preserved.
Authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and administered by
the National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior, the National Register is part of a
federal program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate,
and protect the nation’s historic and archaeological resources. Section 106 of the NHPA
requires federal agencies to consider the effects on National Register-listed properties of
projects they undertake, assist, fund, permit, license, or approve. Properties determined
eligible by the Secretary of the Interior for listing in the National Register are also afforded
this review.
As the State Historic Preservation Office, the MHC conducts the National Register program
in coordination with the National Park Service, and both agencies have a role in approving
nominations. MHC staff also evaluates individual properties and districts to see whether
they meet the National Register criteria before nominations are prepared. Massachusetts
properties listed in the National Register are automatically listed in the State Register of
Historic Places (see above).
Financial incentives are available to encourage private-sector rehabilitation and reuse of
certain income-producing properties (such as commercial, industrial, and rental residential
buildings) listed in the National Register. Both the Federal Historic Preservation Tax
Incentives program and the Massachusetts Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit program allow
tax credits for substantial rehabilitation projects that meet the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation, as certified by the National Park Service (for federal credits)
and the MHC (for state credits). These tax credits are intended to help pay the unique costs
associated with rehabilitation of historic properties.
Listing of their property in the National Register places no constraints on what owners may
do with private property using private funds and local permits, unless some state, regional
and/or local ordinance or policy is in effect. If owners use state or federal funds to alter their
property or need state or federal permits, the proposed alteration will be reviewed by MHC
staff. The review is triggered by the funding or permitting source, not by the historic
designation. Local funding and permitting do not trigger MHC review.
Under the city’s Demolition Ordinance (Code of Ordinances, c. 161), the Northampton
Historical Commission considers buildings or structures listed in the National Register,
individually or as part of a district, as one of the factors to be considered when determining
whether a building is significant for the purposes of demolition review. It is important to
note, however, that all buildings or structures built in 1900 or earlier, and all principal
12
buildings or structures built between 1901 and 1945, are already regulated under the
provisions of the Demolition Ordinance. Any future National Register designation of pre-
1946 buildings or structures, therefore, would not subject their owners to additional
regulatory requirements beyond those already in place, when private funds and local
permits are used.
National Register Activity in Northampton
Northampton has listed historic resources in the National Register for nearly fifty years (see
Table 1). Growing enthusiasm for local history and historic preservation generated by the
nation’s bicentennial celebration in 1975-1976 led to listing of several individual properties
and the sizable downtown historic district within a decade. Most of the earliest listings were
concentrated in or near the downtown area.
Important firsts in Northampton’s nascent preservation planning activities included the
city’s earliest individual property and historic district listings in the National Register. Both
citizens and alumnae advocated for the preservation of Smith College Alumnae
Gymnasium (NRIND 1976), which had been slated for demolition in 1975. The building was
subsequently relocated to a new foundation at 83 Green Street and converted for use as
the college archives. Listing of the Downtown Historic District (NRDIS 1976) was a major
accomplishment, encompassing the city’s commercial and institutional core with Main
Street as its spine. Extending roughly from Pearl Street to Bedford Terrace and from West
Street to the Boston & Maine Railroad right-of-way, this district was expanded in 1985 to
add buildings on Bridge Street and Market Street east of the railroad right-of-way.
Architecturally significant residential buildings began to be added to the National Register
with nominations for The Manse (Stoddard House), 54 Prospect Street (NRIND 1976),
associated with a prominent Connecticut Valley family, and the Calvin Coolidge House, 19-
21 Massasoit Street (NRIND 1976), the first and longtime Northampton home of the U. S.
President and Massachusetts Governor. The Dimock Estate-Grove Hill Mansion, 1 Florence
Street, Leeds (NRIND 1982), residence of industrialist Lucius Dimock, was Northampton’s
first nomination connected with a certified historic rehabilitation using federal tax credits.
Another early certified historic rehabilitation project was the Dr. Silas Cooley Row Houses,
8 through 12 Graves Avenue (NRIND 1985). The small Fort Hill Historic District (NRDIS
1989) on South Street features six residences of early settlers and builders in Northampton,
from the mid-18th century to ca. 1830.
Five properties in Northampton were listed in the National Register from 1994 to 2012 as
part of statewide thematic nominations. From a single commercial building to multiple-acre
institutional campuses, these resources were recognized for their contributions to historical
and architectural development at the state and even national levels. The thematic
nomination format allows future nomination of additional properties associated with the
theme.
13
Representing the institutional campuses, the nomination for Northampton State Hospital
(NRDIS 1994) stemmed from a 1984 thematic survey of state hospitals and state schools
managed by the Commonwealth’s mental health and public health agencies; survey and
subsequent registration of the most significant properties in the system assisted state
agencies in fulfilling their review responsibilities under state and federal preservation
statutes. A comparable nomination project undertaken at the federal level listed the
Northampton Veterans Administration Hospital (NRDIS 2012) within a thematic study of
United States Second Generation Veterans Hospitals (built 1919-1950). The Secretary of
the Interior had previously determined the Northampton Veterans Hospital eligible for the
National Register in 1980.
Other thematic National Register nominations were intended to raise public awareness and
encourage preservation of significant resources. Through the Diners of Massachusetts
multiple property submission, the Miss Florence Diner, 99 Main Street, Florence (NRIND
1999), joined twenty-one other well preserved diners that, as a group, represented the
range of diner designs, manufacturers, and business operators in Massachusetts through
ca. 1970. Two properties were listed for their associations with the Underground Railroad
of Massachusetts (1783-1865): the Basil Dorsey-Thomas H. Jones House, 191 Nonotuck
Street, Florence (NRIND 2005), and Ross Farm, 123 Meadow Street, Florence (NRIND
2008). The Underground Railroad thematic nomination demonstrates the importance of
the Utopian communal society in Florence as a destination and residence for fugitives from
slavery in the mid-nineteenth century. The thematic overview identifies additional
properties in Florence that will be nominated in the future as part of a Florence abolition
and reform historic district, pending additional research. This work is underway.
National Register listing of the Parsons, Shepherd, and Damon Houses Historic District
(NRDIS 2001) encompassed the three museum houses owned by Historic Northampton
and operated as a local history museum and repository for Northampton and Connecticut
Valley collections. The nomination coincided with major restoration work and helped
facilitate acquisition of Community Preservation funds for further renovations to the historic
buildings. Abutting the museum complex, Pomeroy Terrace Historic District (NRDIS 2018)
is the largest National Register district of privately owned property created in Northampton
since 1976. Pursued principally by property owners and residents as an honorary
designation to encourage preservation of the neighborhood, the nomination traces
development from the late seventeenth century through the 1960s, highlighting a number
of architecturally notable residences and the work of local carpenters and architects, as well
as known stone cutters and artists at Bridge Street Cemetery.
Most recently, Clarke School for the Deaf Historic District (NRDIS 2022) was listed in the
National Register in connection with certified historic rehabilitations of six campus
buildings using state and federal historic rehabilitation tax credits. All buildings in this
National Register district are also within the boundaries of the Elm Street Local Historic
14
District, as expanded in 2013, and a Preservation Restriction area designated in 2016 (see
below).
Properties Recommended or Evaluated for the National Register
Since the 1970s, a number of historic areas and individual properties in Northampton have
been recommended for listing in the National Register of Historic Places through the survey
and inventory process. Some of these areas and properties were evaluated further by MHC
staff and found to possess, at the time of review, sufficient significance and historic integrity
to warrant proceeding with a National Register nomination.
It should be noted that a positive National Register eligibility opinion from MHC does not
confer any official historic designation on an area or property, though the Northampton
Historical Commission takes into account listing or eligibility as one of the criteria by which
a building may be determined significant for the purposes of demolition review (see
Municipal Ordinances and Regulations). Only properties for which National Register
nominations were completed and approved by the National Park Service may be
considered to have a National Register designation. For further information on properties
recommended or evaluated for National Register listing, see Survey Activity in
Northampton.
Elm Street (Local) Historic District
Historic districts created and administered at the local level generally provide the strongest
form of preservation protection on a neighborhood scale in Massachusetts. The local
historic district acknowledges the historic and architectural integrity of a neighborhood,
and establishes project review procedures to protect this character from inappropriate
alteration and demolition. Elm Street Historic District is included in the State Register of
Historic Places by virtue of its establishment, in 1994, as a local historic district under G.L.
c. 40C. The district ordinance, adopted as Chapter 195 in the City of Northampton Code
of Ordinances, regulates exterior architectural features visible from the public way for
nearly 100 properties, many owned by Smith College.
Design standards adopted in 2010 facilitate administration of the Elm Street Historic District
by providing guidance to owners who improve and/or alter their properties. The standards
also help ensure consistency of review decisions involving the appropriateness of those
improvements and alterations. Many local historic districts in Massachusetts lack design
guidelines tailored to the unique features of the district, making Northampton’s design
standards manual – prepared with Community Preservation funds – a model for other
communities.
Elm Street Historic District preserves significant residential and institutional buildings
dating from the early 18th through the mid-20th centuries that form the gateway to
downtown Northampton from the northwest. Initially limited to properties fronting the Elm
15
Street corridor, district boundaries were expanded to their present position in 2013 to add
twenty properties on Round Hill and Bancroft Roads, most associated with the former
campus of Clarke School for the Deaf.
Northampton Historical Commission serves as the city’s Local Historic District Commission,
having merged in 2013 with the Historic District Commission to reduce administrative costs
and centralize communications.
Preservation Restrictions
The strongest form of long-term protection for an individual historic property is a
preservation restriction, a legally binding agreement (typically an easement) between a
property owner and another party that prohibits or conditions specified physical changes
or uses of the property by current or future owners. The other party (grantee) may be a
government entity, or a qualified charitable corporation or trust whose purposes include
preservation of historically significant properties with the power to acquire an interest in
land. Preservation restrictions may be conveyed in perpetuity or for a term of years and
must be recorded at the Registry of Deeds to be generally binding on future owners.
Preservation restrictions may regulate repair and maintenance, alteration, demolition, and
moving of the historic resource.
The legal procedures for conveying a preservation restriction are outlined in G.L. c. 184 §
31-33. MHC must approve all preservation restrictions conveyed under c. 184, which are
ultimately added to the State Register of Historic Places. For preservation restrictions held
by a charitable corporation or trust, the city also must approve the preservation restriction.
To confirm a property qualifies for a preservation restriction, MHC uses the National
Register of Historic Places eligibility standard by reviewing a recently completed inventory
form with photographs and applying the National Register criteria. Preservation restriction
documents must reference the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and
Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Additional information on establishing a preservation
restriction is available from the MHC.
Active Preservation Restrictions in Northampton
The State Register of Historic Places currently records nine (9) active preservation
restrictions in Northampton meeting the statutory requirements of M.G.L. c. 184 § 31-33.
These restrictions govern six individual buildings, the Bridge Street Cemetery, the three-
building museum property on Bridge Street owned and operated by Historic
Northampton, and the Round Hill Road campus formerly associated with the Clarke School
for the Deaf. The City of Northampton holds five of the preservation restrictions, and the
MHC holds four. See Table 2.
16
State and federal preservation programs usually require a preservation restriction be
conveyed by the property owner to protect the public interest in a historic property
restored or rehabilitated with taxpayer dollars. Sources of this grant funding in
Northampton have primarily been the MHC’s Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund
(MPPF). If Community Preservation Act (CPA) funds are used to acquire a historic property,
a preservation restriction is required by statute. If significant CPA funds are utilized for
restoration or rehabilitation of a property, a preservation restriction is typically required as
a condition of funding. In most cases, Northampton properties with preservation
restrictions are listed in National Register historic districts: the Academy of Music, 274 Main
Street (PR 1986); First Church of Christ Congregational, 129 Main Street (PR 2008);
Parsons, Shepherd, and Damon Houses, 46, 58, and 66 Bridge Street (PR 2015); Smith
Charities Building, 51 Main Street (PR 2018, PR 2021); Hampshire County Courthouse, 99
Main Street (PR 2019); and Bridge Street Cemetery, 156 Bridge Street (PR 2019).
Municipalities may require a restriction to protect a significant historic property as a
condition of granting a permit or variance, or in connection with declaring a municipal
building surplus before its sale to a private party. The restriction for West Farms Chapel,
185 West Farms Road (PR 1987), was negotiated with Zoning Board of Appeals approval
to convert the chapel to residential use. Slough Hill School a/k/a Hatfield Street School, 52
Hatfield Street (PR 2002), was sold to a private party for residential use. Owners of the
former campus for the Clarke School for the Deaf, 40 to 54 Round Hill Road (PR 2016)
conveyed a preservation restriction to the City of Northampton as a condition of the zoning
used and site plan approval for rehabilitating the campus buildings into residential
apartments.
A growing number of preservation restrictions granted for Northampton buildings do not
meet the statutory requirements of M.G.L. c. 184 § 31-33, which require signature
approvals from both the MHC and the City of Northampton (see Table 3). Consequently,
these properties are not listed in the State Register of Historic Places, unless they have some
other historic designation described above. The Committee for Northampton, Inc.
acquired the David Ruggles Center Building, 225 Nonotuck Street, Florence, with a grant
of Community Preservation funds, and the city holds the 2009 preservation restriction. This
property is not currently included in the historic properties inventory or listed in the
National Register. The 2013 preservation restriction for the Florence Grammar School, 140
Pine Street, Florence was conveyed in connection with the sale and adaptive reuse of the
building. At this writing (2022), a development agreement with the city will establish a
preservation restriction for Florence Congregational Church, 130 Pine Street, as part of
expanded reuse of the property; the restriction has yet to be recorded at the Registry of
Deeds. These properties with preservation restrictions would not be included in the State
Register unless or until they are listed in the National Register or designated part of a local
historic district.
17
MHC is currently reviewing the 2002 preservation restriction on the former Masonic Street
Fire Station, 60 Masonic Street, located in the downtown National Register historic district.
The restriction document incorporates a signature approval from the MHC, yet does not
appear in the State Register. The City of Northampton, by and through the Central Business
Architecture Committee, holds the restriction, which was conveyed to ensure preservation
after the building’s sale as surplus.
Historic Northampton (formerly the Northampton Historical Society) holds preservation
restrictions on The Manse (Stoddard House), 54 Prospect Street, and Hortense Clapp
Pollard House, 70 Old South Street. The Manse was individually listed in the National
Register in 1976 and therefore is included in the State Register, though its 1986
preservation restriction is not. While the restriction is stated to run in perpetuity, ordinarily
preservation restrictions conveyed apart from M.G.L. c. 184 § 31-33 have a statutory limit.
Hortense Clapp Pollard bequeathed her residence at 70 Old South Street to Historic
Northampton, and the organization sold the house in 2004 with a thirty-year preservation
restriction that also is not included in the State Register.
18
Table 1
Northampton Listings in the National Register (by listing date)
MHC ID Historic Name Address Designation/Date
NTH.743 Smith College Alumnae
Gymnasium
83 Green St
(Smith College campus)
NRIND 1976 (Apr)
NTH.A Northampton Downtown
Historic District
(see map)
Main St and area
roughly bounded by
Hampton Ave, Pearl St,
Strong Ave, railroad
tracks, Bedford Ter, Elm
St, and West St
NRDIS 1976 (May)
NTH.625 The Manse (Stoddard House) 54 Prospect St NRIND 1976 (Oct)
NTH.294 Calvin Coolidge House 19-21 Massasoit St NRIND 1976 (Dec)
NTH.22 Dimock Estate-Grove Hill
Mansion
1 Florence St, Leeds NRIND 1982
NTH.L Downtown Historic District
Boundary Increase
2 and 8-10 Bridge St;
1 to 30 Market St
NRDIS 1985 (Jul)
NTH.2034 Dr. Silas Cooley Row House 8-22 Graves Ave NRIND 1985 (Nov)
NTH.K Fort Hill Historic District 124, 130, 134, 135, and
144 South St
NRDIS 1989
NTH.Q Northampton State Hospital 1 Prince St NRDIS/NRMPS 1994
NTH.111 Miss Florence Diner 99 Main St, Florence NRIND/NRMPS 1999
NTH.T Parsons, Shepherd, and
Damon Houses
46, 58, and 66 Bridge St NRDIS 2001
NTH.2439 Dorsey-Jones House 191 Nonotuck St,
Florence
NRIND/NRMPS 2005
NTH.V Ross Farm 123 Meadow St,
Florence
NRDIS/NRMPS 2008
NTH.M Northampton Veterans
Administration Hospital
421 North Main St,
Leeds
NRDIS/NRMPS 2012
(NRDOE 1980)
NTH.AI Pomeroy Terrace Historic
District
Pomeroy Ter, Phillips &
Butler Pls, Bixby Ct,
Hawley, Hancock &
Bridge Sts; includes
Bridge Street Cemetery
NRDIS 2018
NTH.AH Clarke School for the Deaf
Historic District
40 to 54 Round Hill Road NRDIS 2022
19
Table 2
Northampton Properties with Preservation Restrictions
Listed in the State Register of Historic Places (by restriction date)
MHC ID Historic Name Address Designation
NTH.794 Academy of Music 260-274 Main St PR 1986
in Downtown
NRDIS
NTH.2173 West Farms Chapel 185 West Farms Rd PR 1987
NTH.140 Slough Hill Public School
a/k/a Hatfield Street School
52 Hatfield St PR 2002
NTH.717 First Church of Christ
Congregational
129 Main St PR 2008
in Downtown
NRDIS
NTH.T Parsons, Shepherd, and
Damon Houses
46, 58, and 66 Bridge St PR 2015
also NRDIS
NTH.AH Clarke School for the Deaf
Historic District
40 to 54 Round Hill Rd PR 2016
also NRDIS and in
LHD
NTH.2057 Smith Charities Building 51 Main St PR 2018, PR 2021
in Downtown
NRDIS
NTH.2055 Hampshire County Courthouse 99 Main St PR 2019
in Downtown
NRDIS
NTH.AJ Bridge Street Cemetery 156 Bridge St PR 2019
in Pomeroy Ter
NRDIS
20
Table 3
Additional Northampton Properties with Preservation Restrictions
(by restriction date)
MHC ID Historic Name Address Designation
NTH.625 The Manse (Stoddard House) 54 Prospect St PR 1986
also NRIND
NTH.769 Masonic Street Fire Station 60 Masonic St PR 2002
in Downtown
NRDIS
NTH.2004 Alvin and Mabel Clapp House
a/k/a Hortense Clapp Pollard
House
70 Old South St PR 2004
n/a David Ruggles Center 225 Nonotuck St,
Florence
PR 2009
NTH.2689 Florence Grammar School 140 Pine St PR 2013
NTH.205 Florence Congregational
Church
130 Pine St PR pending
21
Table 4
Design Review Districts in Northampton (by date established)
MHC ID Historic Name Address Designation
NTH.P Elm Steet Historic District
(see map)
Parcels fronting Elm St from
West St-Main St intersection to
345 (odd) and 354 (even);
includes one property with a
Bedford Ter address
Added in 2013:
83 and 93 Bancroft Rd
12 to 96 Round Hill Rd
LHD 1994, 2013
--- West Street Architecture
District**
(see map)
Parcels fronting west (odd
numbered) side of West St
from 43 to Mill River; includes
64 Belmont Ave and portion of
Smith College parcel on
Berenson Pl
2011
--- Central Business-Core
District***
(see map)
Parcels fronting Main, Bridge,
King, and Pleasant Sts at core
of central business district,
roughly bounded by Merrick
Ln and Hawley, Pearl, and Elm
Sts; includes Crafts Ave and
Strong Ave
2022
** Per the City of Northampton Code of Ordinances, c. 156, § 2, the West Street Architecture District is an
“architecturally controlled” district as envisioned by G.L. c. 143, § 3A. Created under municipal home rule
authority, this district is not a local historic district as outlined under G.L. c. 40C, and therefore not listed in the
State Register of Historic Places.
*** Defined in the city’s Zoning Ordinance, c. 350 of the Code of Ordinances, the Central Business-Core District
replaces a larger architecturally controlled Central Business Architecture District created in 1999. Design review
here supplements form-based zoning adopted in 2022 for downtown Northampton. This district is not a local
historic district as outlined under G.L. c. 40C, and therefore not listed in the State Register of Historic Places.
For further information on the West Street Architecture and the Central Business-Core districts, see Section 3.6.
22
Section 3.5.
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES AND
REGULATIONS
Zoning Ordinance
Zoning Districts
Zoning ordinances are a city’s primary tool for regulating land use. They divide a
municipality into different zones or districts that each regulate the types of allowable uses
and the physical characteristics of buildings (e.g., maximum building height or minimum
distance from the road). While most sections of Northampton’s zoning ordinance do not
contain explicit references to issues of historic preservation, the use and dimensional
regulations of zoning districts could affect the character of development in historic areas.
Northampton’s zoning ordinance establishes sixteen zoning districts and five overlay
districts, but this section of the report is concerned only with those that overlap with the
City’s local and national historic districts, listed in Table 1 (at end of document).
The Urban Residential districts where the Elm Street Local Historic District is located allow
most housing types by right as long as the development consists of not more than six units.
A special permit is required for larger projects. The Suburban Residential District
(encompassing most of the Veterans Administration Hospital near Florence Center) allows
primarily one- and two-family dwellings.
The Farms, Forests and Rivers (FFR) District allows limited development but is mostly
meant to conserve open space. Development rights for a lot in the FFR District may be
transferred to land in the Planned Village (PV) District, essentially allowing development
that could have occurred in the FFR to be relocated to the PV, i.e., transfer of development
rights. The FFR District at the state hospital site is all permanently protected open space,
so no new development may occur there.
The reuse of historic educational or religious buildings for residential or office space is
allowed with site plan review2 in any district. The new use must be within the building’s
existing footprint and the property owner must grant the City a historic preservation
restriction to preserve “key character-defining” features.
2 Site plan review is a process by which the Planning Board can impose limited conditions on a use that is nonetheless
allowed by right.
23
Overlay Districts
Overlay districts are regulatory areas that are superimposed on top of underlying zoning
districts and introduce additional regulations to an area. The Educational Uses overlay is
located on the Smith College campus and overlaps with a portion of the Elm Street Local
Historic District. This overlay exempts the college from most dimensional regulations,
consistent with G.L. c. 40A, § 3, with the exception that building height may not exceed 85
feet.
Form-Based Districts
In 2022, the Northampton City Council adopted “form-based” or “character-based” zoning
provisions for downtown Northampton and Florence Center. Character-based zoning is
intended to further the goals of the Sustainable Northampton Comprehensive Plan, ensure
cohesive design between the public and private realm, create more detail and
predictability for design standards, and increase flexibility for mixed-use development.
Crucially for historic preservation, a key goal is to:
[Shrink] the area subject to Central Business Architecture Committee review to the historic
core of downtown Northampton [and expand] the area that is subject to a more detailed
review of architecture via the existing site plan review process by the Planning Board.
-City of Northampton Zoning Ordinance, §350-21
The first part of Northampton’s Character-Based Zoning Sections describes a general set
of standards applicable to all character-based zoning districts. The section breaks a
streetscape down into five components, starting from the center of road itself:
1. Vehicle Throughway – this is the roadway, which must meet the standards of the
Department of Public Works.
2. Furnishing and Utility Zone – adjacent to the road, contains street trees, benches,
lighting, and/or fire hydrants.
3. Pedestrian Throughway Zone – separated from the road by the Furnishing and Utility
Zone, pedestrian sidewalks are located here.
4. Public Frontage Zone – between the sidewalk and the lot line, this zone may not be
present at all on a particularly narrow street. It provides a space between a building
and an active sidewalk for people to linger momentarily.
5. Lot Frontage Zone – usually private property, this zone may include plazas,
storefronts, gardens, and other privately owned but public facing areas.
Every Character-Based Zone has a minimum and maximum setback that a building’s façade
must be located between, called the Build-to-Zone. There is also a minimum width for
buildings (called Building Frontage Occupancy), based on a percentage of the lot’s
frontage. This is meant to avoid large gaps in the streetscape. Other elements with design
24
guidelines include a building’s roof, façade, storefront configuration, windows, and
landscaping. Use of green infrastructure is also strongly encouraged.
The second part of the Character-Based Zoning Sections contains zone-specific
regulations. The Central Business District, which overlaps with the Downtown National
Register Historic District and the eastern extreme of the Elm Street Local Historic District, is
divided into three sub-districts with different form-based requirements, shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Central Business Character-Based Districts
District Name Description Height
(min-max,
in feet)
Min.
Building
Frontage
Occupancy
Build-to-
Zone
(feet
from lot
line)
Central
Business-Core
(CB-Core)
“[C]onsists of the highest-density areas in
downtown Northampton, with a mix of
commercial, civic, and residential uses…
characterized by a largely intact collection
of 19th and early 20th century commercial
buildings with masonry construction,
storefronts at ground level, and a high
degree of craftsmanship.”
30-70 90% 0-5
Central
Business-Side
Street (CB-Side
Street)
“[A] high-density mix of commercial,
institutional, and residential uses set within
an eclectic mix of buildings, including
historic commercial and industrial
buildings, historic residential structures—
many of which have been repurposed for
commercial use—and new commercial
buildings.”
30-70 75% 0-10
Central
Business-
Gateway (CB-
Gateway)
“[I]ntended to foster appealing gateways to
downtown… signals to motorists that they
are entering downtown Northampton
where pedestrians and bicyclists are
frequent and valued. The streetscape is
welcoming, safe, and attractive to all users.
The public realm is characterized by ample
street trees, sidewalks with adequate width
and functional and attractive furnishing and
utility zones, where possible.”
20-70 50% 0-10
Source: City of Northampton Zoning Ordinance, §350-22
None of the Central Business (CB) districts have minimum required lot sizes, frontage, or
setbacks, instead relying on design guidelines to maintain a consistent and desirable built
form in the area. Projects involving nonconforming structures and lots (those that already
25
exist but do not conform to zoning standards) need only comply with character-based
regulations.3
The CB districts have similar use regulations, with residential uses being generally more
permissible farther from the CB-Core. Mixed use development is allowed by right in all CB
districts – including residential located above the first floor – as are retail and personal
service uses. Nursing homes or assisted living residences require site plan review, while
manufacturing is allowed with a special permit. Ground floor residential uses, including
multifamily, are allowed by right in the CB-Side Street (with site plan review) and CB-
Gateway districts. Ground floor residential may be permitted in CB-Core if the property
does not abut a public way or public park.
Off-street parking requirements are much less intensive than in other zoning districts. The
reuse of existing buildings does not require the addition of any new parking spaces, unless
development results in an expansion of the existing building in the CB-Gateway district.
The City also accepts a payment in lieu of any number of required parking spaces in any
CB district. Bicycle parking is required for some commercial and industrial uses.
Other Zoning Regulations
Alterations to nonconforming structures in residential zones may be performed as-of-right
under any of the following conditions:
• If the change itself complies with zoning requirements;
• If a nonconforming use is being converted to a residential use; or
• If the change does not increase the existing nonconformity.
The zoning ordinances contain general regulations for lighting, signs, preserving
significant trees, and nuisance emissions and noises.
Finally, the Planning Board may issue a special permit to change dimensional requirements
if they are in line with surrounding properties and the project provides “infill development,
open space for public use, or affordable housing units.”
Demolition Ordinance
(Code of Ordinances, Chapter 161)
Enacted in 2005 and amended through 2022, the Demolition Ordinance applies to historic
resources in Northampton proposed for total demolition and located outside the Elm
Street Local Historic District and the Central Business-Core zoning district, two areas where
demolition applications are reviewed under separate ordinances. The Demolition
Ordinance regulates buildings and structures built in 1900 or earlier, and principal
3 This applies only to properties with dimensional nonconformities; nonconforming uses in any district are governed by
Section 350-9 of the City’s zoning ordinance.
26
buildings and structures constructed on a parcel between 1901 and 1945. Ancillary
buildings and structures from the 1901 to 1945 period, such as outbuildings, sheds,
garages, and fences, are not regulated under this ordinance.
In general, the Northampton Historical Commission reviews applications for total
demolition in most parts of the city.4 Building permit applications for total demolition of
regulated buildings and structures are reviewed to determine whether the resources are
historically significant to the city and preferably preserved. If a regulated building or
structure is deemed both significant and preferably preserved as defined by the ordinance,
the Historical Commission may impose a demolition delay of up to twelve (12) months to
allow sufficient time to explore alternatives to demolition. The Historical Commission then
advises the Building Commissioner and works with the applicant to identify alternatives or
reasonable efforts to mitigate the effects of demolition. These measures are intended to
protect the public interest in preferably preserved resources.
Northampton’s age-based demolition ordinance recognizes that potentially significant
buildings and structures have yet to be recorded in the city’s historic properties inventory.
The provisions of the ordinance ensure that an inventory form for a historic resource, while
ideal, is not required to conduct the necessary demolition review. Many communities with
demolition ordinances or bylaws attempt to survey historic properties as ownership
changes or a demolition application is filed. This approach, typically driven by market
conditions rather than objective planning analysis of historic resources in a communitywide
context, is not recommended.
Key to the demolition review process is determining a regulated building or structure’s
significance as defined in the ordinance. The Demolition Ordinance was amended in 2022
to allow the Northampton Historical Commission to proactively develop a list of significant
buildings and structures, which will streamline administration of the ordinance. Buildings
and structures proposed for the list may be added only following a public hearing. Until
such time as this list becomes available, most regulated buildings and structures that
already meet the significance criteria due to their listing in the National Register of Historic
Places may be identified through the Massachusetts Historical Commission’s MACRIS
database (https://mhc-macris.net) and companion mapping site (https://maps.mhc-
macris.net). Another measure for determining significance is whether the Massachusetts
Historical Commission (MHC) has found a historic resource eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places. Coordination with MHC staff is needed to confirm resources
with positive eligibility opinions. It should be noted that MHC reserves the right to revise its
opinions of National Register eligibility over time, especially if the historic integrity of the
resource has been compromised due to subsequent alterations. The Northampton
4 Demolition in the Elm Street Local Historic District is reviewed by the Northampton Historical Commission, serving as
the Historic District Commission under M.G.L. c. 40C and the city’s Historic Districts Ordinance, Chapter 195 of the city
code. Demolition in the Central Business-Core zoning district is reviewed by the Central Business Architecture
Committee under the Central Business and West Street Ordinance, Chapter 156 of the city code.
27
Historical Commission may delegate authority to make initial determinations of significance
to one or more members of the Commission or to a municipal employee, in this case the
city’s preservation planner.
The Northampton Historical Commission has taken a pragmatic approach to demolition
review. Of approximately 100 demolition applications reviewed through 2021, the
Commission deemed twenty-one resources to be preferably preserved, though a
demolition delay was not imposed on all. Most preferably preserved resources were
demolished following the delay period, while others were moved, restored, or converted
to museum use. To lift a delay before the end of the twelve-month period, the Commission
considers alternate plans and mitigation efforts such as photographic documentation and
architectural salvage. Nearly 75% of the demolition applications submitted have been for
buildings historically in residential use, or residential outbuildings such as garages and
carriage houses.
28
Table X. Demolition Review in Northampton
Location of Property Type of
Demolition
Regulating Board/
Authority
All areas of the city except
as noted below **
Total Northampton Historical Commission
Demolition Ordinance, c. 161
Elm Street Historic District Total or partial Northampton Historical Commission
as the city’s Historic District
Commission
M.G.L. c.40C and
Historic Districts Ordinance, c. 195
Central Business-Core District Total or partial Central Business Architecture
Committee
Central Business and West Street
Architecture Ordinance, c. 156
Chapter citations refer to Northampton Code of Ordinances unless noted
** See also Demolition Ordinance, c. 161, § 4, Exemptions
Central Business and West Street Architecture Ordinance
(Code of Ordinances, Chapter 156)
Established under municipal home rule authority in 1999, the Central Business Architecture
Ordinance and associated Design Guidelines Manual (1999, revisions forthcoming)
preserves and enhances the historic, architecturally rich, and pedestrian-scale character of
downtown Northampton, helping to sustain economic vitality and protect the investments
of property and business owners. The ordinance provides a flexible tool to encourage
building design downtown that is compatible with the existing historic streetscape.
Under this ordinance, the Central Business Architecture Committee issues permits for
construction, alteration, or demolition of buildings and structures within the Central
Business-Core District defined in the city’s Zoning Ordinance (Code of Ordinances, Chapter
350). The Central Business-Core District replaces a larger architecturally controlled district
created in 1999. With the adoption in 2022 of form-based zoning in downtown
Northampton, certain design standards have now been integrated with the new zoning
regulations governing the larger area. At the smaller historic core, the Central Business
Architecture Committee continues to conduct design review, in accordance with its revised
Design Guidelines Manual, as a supplement to the form-based code.
The illustrated Design Guidelines Manual articulates character-defining features of the
district’s architecture and provides examples of designs that are compatible, or
incompatible, with those features. Certain projects as defined in the ordinance are exempt
29
from review, focusing the Committee’s attention on projects that could permanently
detract from the historic visual character of downtown. The ordinance allows applicants to
design their projects to meet prescriptive design guidelines set out in the manual, or
propose non-traditional designs that may not meet specific guidelines but are consistent
with the district’s character-defining features. Typical applications reviewed by the Central
Business Architecture Committee have proposed façade modifications, addition or
expansion of porches, window replacement, mural painting, addition of universal access
ramps, demolition, and new construction.
In 2011, the City of Northampton amended the Central Business Architecture Ordinance
with establishment of the West Street Architecture District. The Planning Board issues
permits for new construction and alteration of existing buildings in the West Street district,
to ensure building and landscape design is consistent with the existing streetscape and
Smith College campus. Architectural review in this area is more limited, focusing on a
building’s massing, scale, placement on the parcel, and site treatment rather than the
composition of the building elevations. Applications for total demolition of a building or
structure in the West Street Architecture District are reviewed by the Northampton
Historical Commission under the Demolition Ordinance (Code of Ordinances, Chapter
156).
Table 1. Significant Zoning Districts in Historic Areas
Zoning District
Relevant
Historic
District Description
Min. Lot
Size (sq.
ft.)
Min.
Frontage
(ft)
Min. setbacks
(front/rear/side,
in feet)
Max
height
(ft)
Open
space
%
Urban
Residential B
(URB) Elm Street
“Primarily residential with single-, two-,
three-family units allowed in different
development patterns, including
townhouse units. New homes should
consist of units that maintain orientation,
rhythm, setback pattern and street
frontage green patterns of the
surrounding block face.” 3,750* 50 10/20/15 35 40%
Urban
Residential C
(URC) Elm Street
“Primarily residential with range of
building and unit configurations allowed:
single, multi-family, townhouse, home
businesses allowed. Some mixed uses
and institutional uses allowed.” 3,750* 50 10/20/10** 50 30%
Suburban
Residential (SR)
Northampton
Veterans
Administration
Hospital
“Lower density residential and
agricultural land. Conservation cluster
design is encouraged. Areas are typically
not within walking distance of
goods/services; some private and water
services required.”
30,000 or
80,000*** 125 30/30/15 35 70%
Planned Village
(PV)
Northampton
State Hospital
“[A] project [in this district] serves as a
pedestrian scale mixed village, and not
an automobile-oriented collection of
independent uses.”
0
0 0
Farms, Forests
and Rivers (FFR)
Northampton
State Hospital
“[The district’s purpose is] to protect
sensitive open space and ecologically
important features, to preserve the farms,
forests, river corridors, ecological habitat,
and recreational lands of Northampton, N/A 20/20/15 35 85%
31
Zoning District
Relevant
Historic
District Description
Min. Lot
Size (sq.
ft.)
Min.
Frontage
(ft)
Min. setbacks
(front/rear/side,
in feet)
Max
height
(ft)
Open
space
%
and to allow landowners the ability to
develop their property in a manner that is
sensitive to these unique resources.”
Central Business
(CB)
Downtown
National
Register, Elm
Street See Table X.X
Source: City of Northampton Zoning Ordinance