Zoning Forum Synthesis
SYNTHESIS OF COMMENTS FROM ZONING REVISION FORUM Report of the Zoning Revisions Committee, April 2, 2010 The following is a synthesis of the comments and input received at the Zoning
Revisions Committee public forum held on March 17, 2010 at Northampton High School. It is not a verbatim transcript of notes from the meeting, but rather an attempt to extract the main
themes to help guide the ZRC as it moves forward in recommending changes to the Northampton Zoning Ordinance. Many other sources of input will also be considered in developing these
recommendations, including meetings with various neighborhood groups and stakeholders, the experience from other communities, and the extensive public input that was a part of the Sustainable
Northampton process. The ZRC is distributing this document widely in the community to indicate what we heard at the forum and to invite further comments both from those who came and
those who were unable to attend. Since the main subject addressed at the forum was infill development, most of the points below are focused on the subject of infill. If you did not attend
the forum and would like to see the introductory presentation, which explains infill and other zoning concepts, you can view the presentation online at http://www.northamptonma.gov/planbd/zrc/docs/-j
ust scroll down to “Zoning and Sustainability (Public Forum Presentation). There was general support for the use of infill development to make the City more sustainable and to encourage
economic development, provided that certain safeguards are in place. The zoning should encourage rather than prevent infill that meets the criteria that follow (points 1 through 6).
1. Infill development should be in scale and character with its surroundings. a. Within residential neighborhoods, buildings should be compatible in scale and architectural character
to existing buildings; their relationship to the street should be similar; conversions of large houses, addition of units to existing buildings (encouraging 2 and 3-family dwellings),
dwellings), and conversions of garages and other accessory buildings are preferable to large-scale new construction projects. b. Larger scale infill should occur on already developed
or vacant but previously developed sites on heavily traveled streets, such as Downtown, King Street, Pleasant, and Conz; existing buildings should be reused as much as possible throughout
the City. Larger-scale infill should consist of mixed-use walkable areas as much as possible. c. Green spaces and trees should be retained as much as possible; open space uses and landscaping
should be part of infill, including neighborhood recreation, large and small parks, wildlife corridors, stormwater retention, and local food production, including urban agriculture,
CSAs, and community gardens. d. Infill should fill gaps in the street and be in scale with its surroundings (neither too large nor too small). e. Some felt that infill should contain
a mix of housing types and accommodate different income groups. Not all agreed on this. f. Infill should not disproportionately affect any one area of the City.
2 g. Infill should not adversely affect historic and landmark structures. 2. Mixed-use development should be encouraged to make neighborhoods more walkable, provided that it is in scale
with the neighborhood and does not generate too much traffic. a. Mixed uses should be allowed not only in commercial districts but also in rural areas, co-housing developments, and residential
areas, provided that it is in scale and compatible with surrounding uses. b. Infill development should put residences within walking distances of stores, offices, jobs, parks, bikepaths,
and other green spaces. Infill can and should support related goals of supporting local businesses and making streets safer by encouraging pedestrian activity and “eyes on the street.”
c. Greater density, in scale with neighborhoods, is needed to support local businesses and neighborhood schools, to make housing more affordable, and to make public transit cost-effective.
3. Design is important! a. There should be better design controls over new development. b. Traditional relationships between the building and street should be required c. Design should
consider not only the streetscape, but also views from the side and rear of properties. d. We should avoid ugly, cookie-cutter designs that do not fit the community. e. Parking lots
should not be prominent parts of the streetscape if possible (the issue of commercial viability led to a lack of consensus on how far this should go). f. Attention should be paid to
lighting and safety. 4. Infill should be energy efficient and take advantage of solar and other renewable energy opportunities; green roofs, water-efficient development should be encouraged.
5. Infill should help make housing more affordable by allowing greater density (within the character of existing neighborhoods) and by encouraging more residents to rent out part of
their homes, providing affordable units for renters and an income stream for owners, especially the elderly. 6. We need to remember to set aside land for industrial uses and the jobs
and tax base that come with them. 7. Cluster development in the more rural parts of the City should be done in a way that protects open space resources, especially farmland, and that
fosters a sense of neighborhood and community. The layout of the co-housing communities in Florence is a good model for how this can be done. 8. Complementary infrastructure strategies:
In order for infill to work, a number of nonzoning measures must also be instituted. While not part of zoning revision, these overarching planning strategies and actions are important
because they affect the sustainability of the city overall and of infill development in particular. (Some of these
3 strategies don’t work without greater density, but greater density won’t work without these measures – a “chicken and egg” problem.) These measures include: a. Better public transit
(more routes, more frequent service) b. Redesigning streets to reduce speeds and encourage pedestrians and bikes: narrower lanes, street trees, planting strips, bike lanes, pedestrian
crossings, onstreet parking, etc. c. Better bicycle infrastructure including bike parking and more bike lanes on major streets d. More parks and public open space e. Sidewalks: more,
better-maintained, and wider f. Better and safer intersections g. Better parking solutions in areas of mixed uses, including parking lots, on-street parking, garages, and improved management
of parking h. Better stormwater management, especially where infill adds impervious surfaces i. Stronger neighborhood organizations to advocate for and plan these measures, provide input
on planning and zoning issues, and build community spirit