Mayors Task Force Land Use and Development Findings 2/1986L _
ri
LJ
Mayor David B. Musante, Jr.
City Hall
Northampton, MA 01060
Dear Mayor Musante:
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
February 11, 1986
I am pleased to transmit to you the findings and recommendations of the
Task Force on Land Use and Development which you appointed in March, 1985.
The Task Force met ten (10) times, beginning on April 8, 1985, and concluding
on December 16, 1985. The meetings of the Task Force were covered and
reported by the local press and radio station, thus helping to inform local
citizens of the issues, pressures, and choices facing our City.
So as to better study particular subjects of concern in depth -- notably,
housing, unemployment and natural resource protection -- the Task Force
formed three subcommittees which met numerous times in between meetings of
the entire Task Force. In each subject area, subcommittees identified problems
and opportunities of concern, formulated goals and objectives, and recommended
specific actions and steps the City can take now to begin to move in the direc-
tion of meeting those goals and objectives.
The work of each subcommittee was brought back to the Task Force as a
whole which discussed them at length and then voted to accept, modify or
reject the proposals /recommendations. The result of this process was that
the Task Force was able to agree on, and formally adopt, goal statements and
specific action - oriented recommendations.
So as to implement and act upon the conclusions of the Task Force, the
specific recommendations of the Task Force should now be forwarded to the appro-
priate City boards and commissions -- Planning Board, Board of Public Works,
Board of Health, Conservation Commission, and City Council. Recommended modi-
fications in the City's Zoning Ordinance should be drafted in the form of
proposed ordinances by the Planning Board and submitted to the City Council for
the public hearing process. The Task Force recommendations for Zoning Ordinance
revisions are moderate -- geared toward an incremental (rather than major)
change. It was the Task Force's feeling that some loosening in the City's size
and density restrictions is needed to allow middle income households to con-
tinue to live in Northampton, but we have taken a cautious approach in what we
have recommended for immediate implementation.
Among the attachments to this report is a listing of Proposals and Recom-
mended Actions which were discussed by the Task Force but which were not
recommended at this time. The failure of the Task Force to adopt these proposals
and recommended actions does not necessarily represent a permanent rejection of
these approaches. Indeed, some of these actions and proposals may become more
acceptable, desirable, or necessary in the future if the moderate initial steps
recommended herein are not sufficient. Again, the Task Force has been relatively
conservative in what it has recommended at this time, and the City may wish to
consider adopting some additional strategies in the future that are not recom-
mended now by the Task Force. Hence, the proposals /actions discussed but not
recommended at this time are included in the Attachments Section for future
reference.
On behalf of all the members of the Task Force, I would like to commend you
for your concern and interest in the important land use and development issues
facing Northampton and for inviting this representative group of individuals to
convene to advise you, the City Council, the Planning Board and other City
boards and commissions as to what constructive steps need to be taken. We have
tried to take our charge seriously and have labored to give you the benefit of
our best collective wisdom. We hope that some constructive steps will be taken
as a result of our work.
Sincerely,
Bart Gordon
Chairman
Mayor's Task Force on Land Use
and Development
Bart Gordon, Chairman
Cecil Clark
George Andrikidis
Kerrie Jones Clark
Theodore Towne
Robert Aquadro
Richard Carnes
David Shearer
John Stedman
MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMBERSHIP
William Ames
Gordon Clark
Robert August
Marion Mendelson
Almer Huntley, Jr.
William Brandt
Paul Stramese
Peter McErlain
Peter McNulty
A. Housing and Land Use
B. Employment and Land Use
C. General Recommendations
FINAL REPORT OF
MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. General Goals for Land Use and Development
II. General Position Statement:
Page -
1
3
3
III. Recommendations Related to Housing
A. Summary Statement on the Need for Affordable Housing 6
B. Recommended Zoning Initiatives and Local Actions to Address Housing 7
IV. Recommendations Related to Employment and Economic Development
A. Statement of Economic Development Goals
B. Specific Recommendations to Broaden and Improve Employment -- Zoning
Changes and Infrastructure Improvements
V. Recommendations on Land Use and Natural Resources
A. Statement on Land Use and Natural Resources -- Problems, Goals and
Specific Actions /Recommendations
B. Recommended Water Supply Protection Overlay District
VI. Resolution in Support of Planning Process to Coordinate Sewer Capacity
and Improvements with City -Wide Zoning
9
10
13
15
22
VII. Attachments 23
A. Mayor's Charge to the Task Force 24
B. Housing Subcommittee's Working Documents 28
MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
I. ,GENERAL GOALS FOR LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT (Adopted November 25, 1985)
1. Improve the supply and affordability of housing and provide opportunities
for a mixture of housing types -- including both rental and owner- occupied
units -- so as to meet the needs of households with a range of incomes.
2. Increase the number of jobs, and the salary levels of jobs located in
Northampton, so as to maintain and improve the opportunities that North-
ampton residents have to find suitable employment in Northampton. In
particular, seek to cultivate employment opportunities to take advantage
of the highly skilled and educated labor force in Northampton and sur-
rounding communities.
3. Maintain a balance between new residential and commercial /industrial
development.
4. Control the rate at which growth and development occur.
5. Channel development into areas where land is most suitable for development,
and where municipal services can most readily and economically be provided.
6. Channel development away from watersheds and aquifers, and control develop-
ment and land uses in these areas so as to protect Northampton's water
supply.
7. Protect and maintain important environmental and natural resources, such
as prime farmland, wetlands and habitat for wildlife, important scenic
areas along the Connecticut River and Mill River, etc.
8. Preserve and maintain the City's unique architectural and historic resources,
such as the Downtown Northampton Historic District, listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. Integrate public and private improvements
into the downtown area so as to complement the unique character and appear-
ance of the area.
9. Strengthen and improve commercial development in clearly defined and estab-
lished commercial centers -- Downtown, Florence Center, Pleasant Street,
and King street -- so as to maintain the traditional structure and character
of the community and so as to avoid the uncontrolled spread of commercial
uses into residential areas and along roadways throughout the City.
10. Utilize and coordinate capital improvements to achieve land use and devel-
opment goals.
- 1 -
MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
II. GENERAL POSITION STATEMENT - (Adopted November 25, 1985)
A. HOUSING AND LAND USE
The Zoning Map adopted ten years ago, in 1975, was a document for guiding
and controlling growth -- channelling new development into more centrally
located areas, and by allowing only single - family detached housing on 30,000 -
40,000 square foot lots throughout the rest of the City. The high cost of
developing single- family housing on large lots, and the limited local demand
for such costly housing, tended to limit the development of such housing to
remote sites, thus tending to reinforce the goal of controlled and limited
growth.
The 1975 Zoning Map and Ordinance represented a positive step in leading
to orderly growth and development in Northampton and helped to spur the renais-
sance in downtown renovation. However, adjustments in -the 1975 Zoning Map and
Ordinance are now needed to take account of changing conditions and needs, and
development which has occurred in the intervening period.
Over the ten year period, 1975 - 1985, vacant sites zoned for URC and URB
have been utilized. Vacant buildable lots which remain in existing URC and URB
zones are generally less than what the City's Zoning Ordinance requires --
meaning that very few of these sites can be used to accommodate future develop-
ment.
Thus, the only vacant areas in the City where new housing can be built are
in areas zoned for exclusively single- family detached houses: URA, single -
family houses on 20,000 square foot lots; SR, single - family houses on 30,000
square foot lots; and RR, single - family houses on 40,000 square foot lots. Given
this pattern of zoning, a developer cannot provide a mixture of housing types,
and cannot build two or three family housing, unless he /she undertakes a cluster
development. Moreover, given the high cost of land, and the high cost o'f devel-
oping housing at the relatively low density of 1 - 2 units /acre, it is difficult,
if not impossible, for a developer to build housing which is affordable to per-
sons and families with middle incomes.
The high cost of developing housing in Northampton under current zoning
(i. e., large lots) is no longer an obstacle that discourages development.
Indeed, the regional and statewide demand for expensive housing in Northampton
has increased dramatically in recent years. Given the increased geographic
distribution of potential homebuyers, it is quite possible that the demand for
expensive single - family housing could eventually exhaust the supply of vacant
buildable land in Northampton. Another problem with the current direction of
housing development is that it does little to meet the housing needs of people
currently living and working in Northampton.
Development is moving outward in all directions because the current Zoning
Map does not differentiate areas in terms of:
(1) Carrying capacity of the land.
(2) Availability of sewers and other public facilities, and /or the cost
effectiveness of providing those services.
(3) The need to discourage development around municipal wells and within
municipal watersheds.
(4) - The desirability of protecting and maintaining prime farmland for
agriculture.
Municipal decisions on extending and upgrading municipal sewers exert,
perhaps, the strongest force on the direction in which development occurs.
Current policy and decision - making places emphasis on extending sewers into
areas where pollution has occurred. The net effect is that sewers are often
extended into areas where land is not ideally suited for development -- and
these sewer extensions, in turn, encourage further growth in these very areas
where development is least desirable.
B. EMPLOYMENT AND LAND USE
It is desirable that Northampton try to retain its traditional balance
between housing and employment. In recent years there has been considerable
residential development activity which has committed a large amount of previ-
ously undeveloped land for residential use. Moreover, properties formerly
zoned for industry have been rezoned and /or developed for non - industrial uses.
While the total number of jobs available in Northampton has increased,
the number of jobs in manufacturing (a potential source of relatively well pay-
ing jobs) has decreased. Employment has increased numerically in the service
and retail sectors, but jobs in these sectors pay relatively low wages and
benefits, and there are relatively few opportunities for advancement. In 1969
the median family income in Northampton was 94% of the statewide median income,
but by 1979 Northampton's median family income had fallen to 90% of the state-
wide median. Rising costs in the City and the region make it doubly important
that the income scale of jobs in the City be increased to keep pace with state-
wide income levels.
Over time the percentage of the City's total property taxes coming from
commercial and industrial uses has declined. With the demand for residential
development so high, there is a very real possibility that Northampton could
become a "bedroom" community for persons forced to commute elsewhere for employ-
ment -- unless the City takes steps to rezone and reserve some areas in the City
for future industrial development.
C. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Steps should be taken by the Planning Board, Board of Public Works, and
Board of Health to discourage and control development in areas with limitations
on development and in areas affecting City water supplies.
o Those areas should be clearly identified based on hydrological studies
now underway.
o Sufficiently large minimum lot size requirements should be applied to
those areas so as to handle on -site sewage disposal.
o Sewer extensions into those areas should be avoided.
o A program of required septic tank maintenance and inspection should be
implemented to avoid pollution problems.
Decisions of the Board of Public Works regarding future sewer extensions
and improvements should be based heavily on the criteria of cost effectiveness --
the current and potential number of households to be served for a given expendi-
ture, giving the highest priority to sewering areas suitable for more intensive
development, and de- emphasizing the extension of sewers to areas where intensive
development is not desirable. The need to establish such a priority ranking
system, and to consider the likely impact of sewer extensions on patterns of
growth, is strengthened by the fact that public resources are limited. There is
a need to maximize the utility of public investments as well as to deflect growth
away from certain outlying rural areas of the City.
Adjustments in the City's Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map are needed to
designate areas where the development of new housing at moderate densities (4 -6
units per acre) can occur, including two and three - family housing. To accom-
plish this, certain areas in the City should be rezoned to allow higher densi-
ties. Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are also needed to expand the areas in
which it is possible to provide two - family housing (the Zoning Ordinance cur-
rently limits two- family houses to the URC and URB zones).
Planning for changes in the City's Zoning Map (responsibility of the Plan-
ning Board) and planning for extensions and improvements to municipal sewer
lines, water lines, roadways, and other infrastructure (responsibility of the
Board of Public Works) needs to be coordinated and integrated.
o Sewers should not and need not be extended into areas zoned exclusively
for single - family houses on one -acre lots.
o Areas currently served or potentially served by the City's sewer system
should generally be zoned to allow more than single - family housing on
lots less than one acre (i. e., URC, URB, or URA). Sewer extensions
should be discouraged in RR and SR zones.
The City should embark on a program to identify and acquire key property
around municipal reservoirs and within the City's watersheds. The Mayor and
City Council should direct the Board of Public Works and the Office of Planning
and Development to identify such parcels for purchase and to seek federal and
State grant funds to offset the costs of such land acquisition. A certain share
of future federal Community Development Block Grant funds should be allocated
toward the local cost of such land acquisition for water supply protection.
The Task Force recommends that industrial zoning along Route 10, south of
the Mill River, be extended to include some additional parcels, including the
38 -acre parcel of land (formerly part of the Northampton State Hospital) located
opposite the new Hampshire County Jail. It is recommended that a special zoning
category be created for this former State Hospital property and /or that restric-
tions be placed on the type of uses that could locate on this site so as to
4
minimize truck traffic and traffic impacts on South Street. A new connector
roadway between Route 10 and Route 66 would provide access to the site from
Route 10. A significant proportion of traffic to and from this industrial area
could be expected to approach and leave the site via Route 10 south to East-
hampton and Westfield (Mass. Pike). Also, a connector roadway between Route 10
and Route 66 would allow some proportion of Route 66 traffic to reach 1 -91
without travelling through the congested West Street /Elm Street intersection.
The ability to accommodate future industrial development along Route 10
will require the extension of the Fort Hill interceptor sewer further south
along Route 10. The City and the Board of Public Works should explore the
availability of State and federal funds for this sewer extension, based on its
potential benefit in terms of increased employment and tax base.
III. RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO HOUSING
A. SUMMARY STATEMENT ON THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING (November 14, 1985)
The Mayor's Task Force on Land Use and Development believes that is essential and
desirable that zoning and land use policies of the City allow the continued ability to
provide housing which middle income persons and families can afford. At present, very
little new housing is being created which average income persons can afford. New
single family detached houses now being built can only be afforded by persons with
incomes higher than the average income that prevails in Northampton, and potential
buyers for these homes must be drawn from outside the community. As a result, the
building of such expensive housing does little to free up local housing to meet the
needs of middle income persons.
Rental housing is also becoming very expensive; a rental survey conducted in May,
1985, in Northampton found that only 17 of the apartments available for rent at that
time could be afforded by persons able to pay a Fair Market Rent as measured by the
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Further, only one half of the vacant
apartments were affordable to families earning 80% of the median income, which corre-
sponds to a $21,600 income for a family of four people.
The Mayor's Task Force believes that the City must adopt and maintain land use and
zoning policies that increase opportunities for home ownership for people and families
with incomes generally at or above the median income of the City, and that maintain
opportunities for affordable rental housing for persons with incomes that do not permit
home ownership. Such actions are necessary not only in terms of fairness, but also to
maintain the economic health of the City and the traditional balance between housing
and employment. For business and industry to grow and prosper, it is necessary that
people in those businesses and industries be able to find housing (approximately half
of those persons now living in Northampton work in Northampton). If middle income
housing is not available in Northampton, then people will have to commute long distances
to their jobs in Northampton, and the City will no longer be a place where people live
and work. Also, business in Northampton will have more difficulty finding employees
for their job openings, thus limiting opportunities for expansion.
As a goal, the Task Force proposes that the City should strive to make it possible
to provide a certain number of new single family houses each year that are affordable
to persons and families having 120% of the median income of the area. Also, the Task
Force proposes the goal that the City should remove current restrictions on building
new two and three family housing so as to: 1) extend opportunities for home ownership
to persons and families with median incomes; and 2) to increase opportunities for
rental housing for persons and families with 657 -80% of the area's median income -- a
group currently not now being served by today's tight private housing market.
In making these recommendations the Task Force recognizes that the housing needs
of persons and families with incomes less than 657 of the median income will require
more direct state and federal housing programs and subsidies, which the Northampton
Housing Authority and other agencies should continue to pursue. However, local policies
can make a significant contribution to lowering housing.costs and extending opportunities
to people with generally average incomes, who are currently being frozen out of the
housing market.
6
. RECOMMENDED ZONING INITIATIVES.AND LOCAL ACTTONS TO ADDRESS HOUSING AND COSTS
1. Encourage the Planning Board and Planning Department to undertake a process
to recommend selective extensions of URC, URB, URA, and SR zoning to allow
for development of moderate density in areas best suited to accommodate that
development -- and to coordinate these zoning recommendations with plans and
priorities of the Board of Public Works for sewer extensions.
2. Require smaller minimum area for cluster development. The current ordinance
requires at least twelve acres; three to five acres is more reasonable.
3. Allow two - family houses by right in URB zones rather than by special permit,
subject to having required lot area and dimensions.
4. Allow two - family houses to be built in URA zones by special permit, subject
to having required lot area and dimensions.
5. Allow two - family housing by special permit in SR zones if lot contains 150%
of minimum lot area required for a single - family home.
6. Do not require additional lot size for the first unit in structure containing
two or more units (i. e., 10,000 square feet, plus 1,000 square feet for each
additional unit).
7. Encourage that developments containing five or more units provide a 20% mix
of their units in two - family or three - family structures.
8. Allow accessory apartments by special permit in single- family homes. To
assure that houses retain their single- family appearance and function,
include certain restrictions, such as:
a. Limit size of new apartment to 600 square feet. Accessory unit to be
smaller than main house.
b. Allow maximum of one bedroom in the accessory unit.
c. Limit facade changes to side and rear of house.
d. Retain same lot size requirements as for a single- family home.
9. Allow a side lot reduction which could be subtracted from the total lot area
required by the current ordinance. This would encourage two single- family
structures to share a common wall.
10. Consider the formation of a_ private, non - profit housing development corporation
(HDC) capable of delivering long term, lower cost housing. The HDC should
acquire existing housing when possible as well as build new units on scattered
sites throughout the City.
u)
0
•,-1
0)
0
bi
0
N
0
0
4-)
0
z
4)
a)
U
0
rd
0
a)
w
ra
al al 0 0
w
M
rd
E 3
cd o
w H
N
a)
u)
d
0
w
r-I
'8 rd
0 0 0
H
0 z z
Z
a)
°
rd
0
4-)
z o
O
O
O
u)
4
0
.
4-)
rd
0
U PI 4 0
U U 0 'I 0 0 0
rd rd r0 U) r0 a
0) 0) 0) -,-4
0)i U
M x M M 0
4 w
ai g
4 A A g 0)
UI a H
rn
4
4-)
u)
0
0 0)
gay
U 0
0
4-)
E
as a)
bi
rd 0
O U u)
P4 OI
0
cQ t 4-I
0 U)
a) a)
rd •4 A -ri
3 3 3rd
r4 H H
td ni ai 0
0000
4.4
T. m 0) ul 0
0 ( ) a) N
0 0 0 u)
x x x 0
w w - O
N N N
4-) 4J 4)
rd rd rd 4-1
0
00 0Lc)
0 0 U H
•k
* 4:
« 4)4)
-8-
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
A. STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS
During the period 1970 -1980, Northampton experienced a decline in the number
of jobs in manufacturing and an increase in jobs in the service sector.
The Division of Employment Security forecasts an increase in employment
in the State of 12% between 1980 and 1990. Increases are expected in such fields
as health services, with decreases in government and education. Increases are
anticipated in durable manufacturing, with a decrease in non - durable manufac-
turing. In 1984 employment in Massachusetts increased by 5.9 %. Within the
manufacturing sector, increases were seen in durables, including: machinery
electrical machinery, and instruments, with a slowed rate in non - durables,
such as apparel, textiles, and printing.
Recent articles indicate that as a State, Massachusetts is doing well in
"nourishing entrepreneurs" and in moving from the old industrial to the new
information -based economy. It is clear that the next decade will see the shift
to a "thoughtware" economy, which can provide for a range of jobs from produc
tion to professional /technical.
F F
Area studies project growth in Hampshire County in the next decade, with
Northampton experiencing much of the demand. The pressure for growth comes
both (1) from within, i. e., local firms needing room to expand and diversify;
and (2) from new entrepreneurs seeking local space /land for their enterprises;
and from without as the trend of decentralization continues and firms are at-
tracted to Northampton because of the quality of life and workforce that the
area has to offer.
The Task Force has determined that the principal goal is that of job
creation to:
- provide employment for Northampton residents which is appropriate to
their skill and interest levels and which provides adequate salaries/
income;
- provide tax revenues for the City; and
- maintain a balance between residences and businesses (between a living
and working environment) to avoid becoming a "bedroom" community.
The problem to be addressed is that the current employment base is not
providing employment for those whom the housing development attracts nor oppor-
tunities for local residents to improve their earning capacity and better the
low median family income level the Census figures reveal.
The Task Force recognizes the need to identify sites for business /industrial
expansion and development in accordance with infrastructure capacity (current and
anticipated) and to establish the capacity to develop those sites in accordance
with identified, shared goals.
After reviewing the current availability of industrial land and space, and
the projected absorption rates for the next decade, it was concluded that the
City should plan to identify and reserve additional land for business and indus-
try. The Northampton Industrial Park is almost full; much existing industrial
space has been converted to other uses. There is very little space available
for expansion or new construction. Area forecasters suggest that Northampton,
as the center for Hampshire County, can expect to feel pressures for expansion
over the next decade. Based on review of past and projected absorption rates,
a target of 100 acres to meet the needs of the next decade is suggested. Sev-
eral sites /areas suggest themselves for further consideration: the State
Hospital, Route 10, above the Easthampton line; Route 9, close to the Williams-
burg line.
B. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - Approved December 16, 1985
The Task Force has reviewed the availability of industrial land in North-
ampton and has considered what future demand may be. The conclusions reached
are:
o At least 100 acres can be absorbed over the next ten years.
o It is best to concentrate attention in one area rather than attempt to
extend existing or create new "pocket" zones for industry.
o The type of jobs needed are labor - intensive and non - service sector.
o The most appropriate area to consider for creating more industrial
land is along the Route 10 corridor.
The following specific recommendations are approved:
1. Rezone the approximately 38 acres of State Hospital property (across
from the jail) and an adjoining portion of parcel No. 49 to an indus-
trial zoning classification, with covenants and restrictions developed
by a public entity overseeing this property which will limit uses
allowed.
2. Propose that the owners of privately held parcels on Route 10, now
zoned GI (parcels 61, 62, 63, 64), be invited to join in an Indus-
trial Park Association.
3. Develop an access road from Route 10 through to Route 66 to provide
access to the Park Association and other State Hospital properties.
. Extend the sewer line to a point opposite the Park Association to
provide service to that area.
5. Change permitted use in General Industrial Zones throughout the City
to disallow the following uses: restaurants, banks, hotels and motels,
car dealerships.
6. Rezone from Suburban Residential to General Industrial parcels 29, 30
and 49 (privately owned).
As these changes are studied and implemented, careful attention to traffic
generation and impacts should be given. The permitted uses on the Park Asso-
ciation property should be determined after study of impacts of different uses
is made and forecasts obtained from PVPC for the Route 10 area as a whole.
This attention to the Route 10 corridor does the following:
- provides more industrially zoned land while providing for the type of
development appropriate for the area;
- does not rezone the few parcels directly on the border of Easthampton.
(e. g., the Nursing Home);
- recognizes that some of the area
is on a steep slope and that develop-
ment can and should be clustered in the Park Association area.
SPECIFIC CHANGES PROPOSED IN THE PERMITTED USES IN GI ZONES
Residential Uses GI SI
Planned Unit Developments P� delete
Mixed residential /business S delete
(area could be rezoned to URC or NB)
Community Facilities
Municipal parking lot or structure
Agriculture
Retail
Uses Zones
Temporary greenhouse or stand
Eating and drinking places
(consider only as accessory to business ?)
Automobile sales, new and used, tires,
boats, trailers
Hotels and motels
Medical center
Membership club
Professional and business offices
(inc. banks, insurance, real estate, legal,
etc.)
Automotive repair or service station
Commercial parking lot or structure
Wholesale, Transportation, Industrial
- 12 -
SP
Wholesale bakery, laundry, dry cleaning
plant A 5F/ change to SP
Bus passenger terminal and taxi facilities - delete
Heliport delete
Key: A = allowed by right
SP = allowed by special permit from ZBA
PB = allowed by special permit from Planning Board
delete.
delete
delete
delete
delete
SP change to SP
Xr delete
delete
delete
1 V. RECOMMENDATIONS ON LAND USE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Li
Fl
A. STATEMENT ON LAND USE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Protection of Public Water Supply and Sources
Problem: Drinking water supply contamination (both public and private) is one
of the most serious problems facing the state of Massachusetts and its
individual communities. Numerous towns and cities across the state have
had their local water supplies rendered totally or partially useless due
to contamination from a number of different sources. Potable water supplies
are relatively finite, and solutions for replacing them are expensive and
in some cases almost non - existent.
Goal: To develop a program to promote the health, safety and welfare of the
community by protecting and preserving the surface and groundwater resources
of the City of Northampton from any uses of land or buildings which may re-
duce or jeopardize the quality or quantity of its water resources. Said
program should: 1) identify those areas which are significant to the city's
water supplies (including aquifers and watersheds) for both existing areas
and potential resource areas for future needs; 2) identify problems affecting
those areas significant to the city's water supplies, both existing and poten-
tial; 3) evaluate alternatives and suggest solutions to appropriate agencies;
and 4) work towards getting these solutions implemented.
Specific Actions /Recommendations:
1) An inventory identifying all of the properties and land uses within the
watersheds of the city's three existing surface reservoirs has been com-
pleted. Discussions have begun with the Northampton Department of Public
Works to identify critical parcels within these watersheds for possible
acquisition (keep in mind that most of these watersheds are in abutting
communities where, in most cases, outright acquisition is the most effec-
tive measure for controlling potentially detrimental land uses).
2) The city has hired a consultant to undertake a hydrogeologic study of the
city's aquifers to determine their limits (both for the existing city
wells and other aquifers for potential future well sites) and to suggest
measures to protect against contamination and incompatible land uses.
This study should be completed by next fall.
3) The Sub - Committee and Task Force has developed and submitted a proposed
WATER SUPPLY PROTECTION DISTRICT Zoning Ordinance which would govern and
control land uses and development within areas of the watersheds and aqui-
ers within the City of Northampton to reduce the potential for contamination
of these resources. This proposal should come up for Public Hearings some-
time in January.
— 13 —
Specific Actions /Recommendations (continued):
4) The Sub - Committee recommends that the Northampton Board of Health adopt
the following additional requirements regarding septic system installatior
above and beyond the minimum requirements under the state Title V regu-
lations:
a) limit percolation rates to 20 min /inch,
b) allow only leaching trenches or pits, not leach fields,
c) prohibit the installation and use of garbage disposals,
d) require a minimum septic tank size of 1500 gallons,
e) implement a mandatory septic maintenance program whereby said systems
must be inspected and pumped out on a regular basis,
f) investigate requiring water savers on all toilets,
g) prohibit the use of Rid -X and other over the counter commercial septic
tank treatments and de- greasers,
h) educate the homeowners on the disposal of other hazardous and
detrimental products and household wastes
i) ensure that copies of,all septic disposal permits and applications
within public watersheds are sent to DEQE for review
5) The Sub - Committee suggests that the Northampton Department of Public Work:
review their winter road application (sodium chloride) techniques within
the watershed and aquifer areas to reduce contamination by road salt.-
Open Space Preservation
Problem: As the City of Northampton grows, so does the demand on the community's
existing open space resources, and so does the need for preserving more
open space and providing for additional outdoor passive and active recrea-
tional opportunities.
Goal: To identify appropriate parcels of land with a potential for passive and /or
active recreational use suitable for future municipal acquisition, especially
in those areas of active development where such resources are not presently
available.
Specific Actions /Recommendations: The city has just begun the process of updating
its Open Space, Conservation & Recreation Plan for the years 1985 -1990. This
Plan inventories the existing recreational resources of the community, deter-
mines the present and future recreational needs of its citizens' through
telephone surveys and public hearings, producesa list of goals and objectives,
and developsa Five Year Plan for how these needs, goals and objectives will b^
met, including future acquisitions. The adoption of such a plan qualifies
the city for funding assistance from the state and federal governments (up
to 90 %) for the purchase and development of passive and active recreational
areas and facilties.
— 14 —
Section 16.4 - Prohibited Uses
PROPOSED DRAFT
ARTICLE XVI
NORTHAMPTON WATER SUPPLY PROTECTION DISTRICT
Section 16.1 - Purpose: To promote the health, safety and welfare of the community -
by protecting and preserving the public drinking water resources of
Northampton from any use of land or structures which reduce the
quality or quantity of its public drinking water resources.
Section 16.2 - The Water Supply Protection District is an overlay district and
shall be superimposed on the other districts established by this
ordinance. All uses, dimensional requirements and other provisions
of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance applicable to such underlying
districts shall remain in force and effect, except that, where the
Water Supply Protection District imposes greater or additional
restrictions and requirements, such restrictions or requirements
shall prevail. Any uses not permitted in underlying districts
shall remain prohibited.
Section 16.3 - The Water Supply Protection District is herein established to
include all specified lands within the City of Northampton. The
intent of the Water Supply Protection District is to include lands
lying within the primary and secondary recharge areas of ground-
water aquifers which provide public water supply, as well as
watersheds of public surface water supplies. Said lands are
identified on the Northampton Zoning Map and the Northampton Aqui-
fer Protection Area Map.
a. Business and industrial uses, not agricultural, which manufac-
ture, process, store or dispose of hazardous materials or
wastes as a principal activity, including, but not limited to,
metal plating, chemical manufacturing, wood preserving and
furniture stripping, auto body repair, and dry cleaning.
b. Trucking or bus terminals, motor vehicle gasoline sales.
c. Car washes, except when located on public water /sewer.
d. Solid wastes, landfills, dumps, junk and salvage yards, with
the exception of the disposal of brush and stumps.
e. Business and industrial uses, not agricultural, which involve
f. Disposal of liquid or leachable wastes, except for:
g.
the on -site disposal of process wastes from operations.
(1) the installation or enlargement of a subsurface waste
disposal system for a residential dwelling;
(2) normal agricultural operations; and
(3) business or industrial uses which involve the on -site
disposal of wastes from personal hygiene and food prepa-
ration for residents, patrons and employees.
Underground storage of oil, gasoline or other petroleum
products, excluding liquified petroleum gases, unless such
storage shall meet all requirements for secondary containment
specified in 310 CMR 30.693.
h. Underground transmission of oil, gasoline or other petroleum
products, excluding liquified petroleum gases.
- 16 -
fl
7
0
'
J
k. The use of septic system cleaners which contain toxic chemi-
cals, including, but not limited to, methylene chloride and
1 -1 -1 trichlorethane.
Section 16.5 - Restricted Uses
Uncovered stockpiles for road salt or other-de -icing materials
or disposal of salt -laden snow.
Outdoor storage of pesticides or herbicides.
a. Excavation for removal of earth, sand, gravel and other soils
shall not extend closer than five (5) feet above the annual
high groundwater table. This section shall not -apply to uses
incidental to permitted uses, including, but not limited to,
providing for the installation or maintenance of structural
foundations, freshwater ponds, utility conduits or on -site
sewage disposal.
(1) Access road(s) to extractive operation sites shall
include a gate or other secure mechanism to restrict
public access to the site.
b. The use of sodium chloride for ice control shall be minimized,
consistent with public highway safety requirements.
c. Commercial fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, or other
leachable materials shall not be used in amounts which result
in groundwater contamination.
d. Above ground storage tanks for oil, gasoline or other petro-
leum products shall be placed within a building with an
impermeable basement or placed on a diked, impermeable surface
- 17 -
Section 16.6 - Drainage
Section 16.7 - Uses by Special Permit
to prevent spills or leaks from reaching groundwater.
a. All runoff from impervious surfaces shall be recharged on
the site by being diverted toward areas covered with vegeta-
tion for surface infiltration to the extent possible. Dry
wells shall be used only where other methods are infeasible,
and shall be preceded by oil, grease and sediment traps to
facilitate removal of contamination. Any and all recharge
areas shall be permanently maintained in full working order
by the owner.
Uses which may be permitted by the Zoning Board of Appeals in
accordance with the regulations appearing in Section 10.10 of
this Ordinance are:
a. Business and industrial activities permitted in the underly-
ing district (either by matter of right or by special permit)
shall file application for a special permit under this Section.
(1) Procedure: In addition to meeting the requirements of
Section 10.10 of this Ordinance, the applicant must file
six (6) copies of a site plan, as outlined below:
(a) Said application and plan shall be prepared in
accordance with the data requirements of the pro-
posed development, including, but not limited to:
• a site plan which shall show, but not be limited
to:
- 18 -
- provisions to prevent contamination of ground-
water by petroleum products, hazardous materials
or wastes;
- drainage recharge features and provisions to
prevent loss of recharge;
- provisions to control soil erosion and sedi-
mentation;
- provisions to prevent soil compaction; and
- provision to prevent seepage from sewer pipes.
• A complete list of chemicals, pesticides, fuels
and other potentially hazardous materials to be
used or stored on the premises in quantities
greater than those associated with normal house-
hold use. Those businesses using or storing such
hazardous materials shall file a definitive opera-
ting plan, which shall comply with the Design and
Operations Guidelines specified in Section 16.8
of this Ordinance.
• Evidence of compliance with the regulations of
the Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Management Act
310 CMR 30.
(b) The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) shall refer copies
of the application to the Board of Health, Planning
Board, Conservation Commission, and the City Engi-
neer, which shall review the application either
separately or jointly and shall submit their
recommendations and comments to the ZBA. Failure of
boards /departments to make recommendations within
thirty -five (35) days of the referral of the applica-
tion shall be deemed to be lack of opposition.
• After notice and public hearing, and after due con-
sideration of the reports and recommendations of
the boards /departments, the Zoning Board of Appeals
may grant such special permit, provided that it
finds that the proposed use:
- is in harmony with the purpose and intent of
this By -Law and will promote the purposes. of
the Water Supply Protection District;
- is appropriate to the natural topography, soils
and other characteristics of the site to be
developed;
- has adequate public sewerage and water facilities,
or the suitable soil for on -lot sewerage and
water systems;
- will not, during construction or thereafter, have
an adverse environmental impact,on groundwater
resources in the district; and
- will not adversely affect the existing or poten-
tial quality and quantity of water in the Water
Supply Protection District.
L_ rI
■
Section 16.8 - Design and Operations Guidelines
Businesses and industries shall make provisions for protection
against toxic or hazardous materials, discharge or loss resulting
from corrosion, accidental damage, spillage or vandalism, including
but not limited to the following:
• spill containment and clean up provisions to prevent hazardous
material spillage to the environment;
• provisions for the prevention of corrosion and leakage of con-
tainers storing hazardous materials;
• provisions for indoor, secured storage of hazardous materials
and accumulated hazardous wastes, and for protection from van-
dalism; and
• provisions for impervious floor surfaces where hazardous mate-
rials are used or stored with no drainage discharge to the
environment.
- 21 -
VI. RESOLUTION ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY NOVEMBER 25, 1985,
BY THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
The Mayor's Task Force on Land Use and Development recognizes the need to
make adjustments in the City's zoning map to allow for opportunities to develop
housing at moderate densities in Northampton, including two and three - family
housing. At the same time, the Task Force recognizes the need to coordinate
any zoning modifications with an assessment of current infrastructure capabili-
ties and with plans and priorities for future extensions and expansions of City
sewers. The Task Force also recognizes the desirability of discouraging develop-
ment in certain areas of the City, and of reinforcing low density zoning with
conscious plans not to extend sewers into those areas.
The Executive Office of Communities and Development has announced the
availability of Strategic Planning Grants to assist selected communities in
managing growth and at the same time in increasing the availability of affordable
housing. The Task Force urges that the City of Northampton apply for such a
Strategic Planning Grant, so as to allow for the hiring of an outside consultant
firm with both land use planning and engineering capabilities, to assist and
advise the City's Board of Public Works and Planning Board in the preparation of
such a coordinated plan for zoning modifications and sewer extensions -- such a
plan to be a tool for managing growth and for allowing housing to be developed in
appropriate locations which can be afforded by average income residents.
Bart Gordon, Chairman
Mayor's Task Force on Land Use and
Development
1 1
VII. ATTACHMENTS
A. Mayor's Charge to Task Force on Land Use and Development
B. Housing Subcommittee's Working Documents
1. Proposals Discussed but not Adopted
2. Request for Information -- Tabulation of 69 Responses
naire Distributed by Northampton's Office of Planning
3. Working Definition of "Affordable" for Rental Housing
4. Working Definition of "Affordable" for Owner - Occupied
Northampton
- 23 -
to Question -
and Development
in Northampton
Housing in
�
A. CHARGE TO THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT- February, 1985
A statement of proposed Land Use and Development Goals dated January, 1985
has been prepared by the Office of Planning and Development. These goals have
been submitted to the Northampton Planning Board for review and comment.
Taking input from the Planning Board on the refinement of these goals, the
Task Force should meet and hold public hearings as necessary to gain citizen
input so as to consider and recommend a balanced program of municipal policies
and actions to achieve these goals in a comprehensive, coordinated and effective
manner.
In order to accomplish its overall task of evaluating and recommending specific
policies and actions, the Task Force may utilize and consider the recommendations
of study groups and specialized sub - committees to study particular substantive areas.
For example, separate study groups (involving additional specialists, experts and
concerned individuals not represented on the Task Force itself) may be formed to
study 1.) particular techniques and policies for making housing more affordable,
2.) particular methods and appropriate land use controls to protect and maintain
the quality of city water supplies, 3.) the development of an appropriate design
review process, and design criteria, to guide development affecting the Downtown
Historic Distict, etc.
Recommendations of individual study groups should be transmitted to the Task
Force for its consideration and recommendation -- the purpose of the Task Force
being to formulate a balanced program of recommendations taking into account various
goals and competing interests.
Policy and program recommendations voted on and approved by the Task Force
should be transmitted to the Mayor and City Council, and to other city boards and
commissions as appropriate when recommendations pertain to areas of their jurisdiction
and authority -- such as Planning Board, Board of Public Works, Capital Improvements
Committee, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, etc.
The Director of Planning and Development shall serve as staff to the Task Force.
Other staff of the Office of Planning and Development -- in housing, economic develop-
ment and conservation -- will be available to the Task Force as needed.
The Task Force should attempt to bring forward its policy and program recommend-
ations for Affordable Housing within the first 3 months of its work. Recommendations
regarding municipal policies to achieve other goals should be transmitted as soon as
completed. The Task Force should attempt to formulate policy recommendations for all
proposed goals within a period of 1 year.
Planning Bd.
Goals
Recommendations
on zoning and
subd. regs.
MAYOR
CITY COUNCIL
T
MAYOR'S TASK FORCE
ON
LAND USE AND
DEVELOPMENT
T
Cap. Imp. Com.
Bd. of Health
6 "--÷ Cons. Comm.
STUDY GROUPS
i .e.,
Affordable Housing
Water Supply Protection
Economic Development
Downtown Design and Historic Preservation
Traffic Circulation and Pedestrian Safety
SUGGESTED SUBSTANTIVE AREAS OF CONCERN WHERE THE TASK FORCE MAY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS
TO CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS:
B.P.W.
February 1985
Planning Board Zoning for housing, business
and industry
Capital Improvments Committee Capital improvements infrastructure
priorities
Board of Health Standards
Infrastructure
Sewer extensions
Road improvement priorities
Road classification system
Curb cut and sight line standards
Conservation Commission Priorities for agricultural land
preservation
Conservation Commission Open space acquisition
PROPOSED GOALS FOR LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
prepared by
Northampton Office of Planning and Development
January, 1985
1.) Improve the supply and affordability of housing and provide opportunities
for a mixture of housing types -- including both rental and owner — occupied
units -- so as to meet the needs of households with a range of incomes.
2.) Increase the number of jobs, and the salary levels of jobs, located in Northampco:
so as to maintain and improve the opportunities that Northampton residents have
to find suitable employment in Northampton.
In particular, seek to cultivate employment opportunities to take advantage
of the highly skilled and educated labor force in Northampton and surrounding
communities.
3.) Maintain a balance between new residential and commercial /industrial development.
4.) Control the rate at which growth and development occurs.
5.) Channel development into areas where land is most suitable for development, and
where municipal services can most readily and economically be provided.
6.) Channel development away from watersheds and acquifers, and control development,
and land uses in these areas so as to protect Northampton's water supply.
7.) Protect and maintain important environmental and natural resources, such as
prime farmland, wetlands and habitat for wildlife, important scenic areas along
the Connecticut River and Mill River, etc.
8.) Preserve and maintain the City's unique architectural and historic resources,
such as the Downtown Northampton Historic District, listed on National Register
of Historic Places. Integrate public and private improvements into the down-
town area so as to complement the unique character and appearance of the area.
9.) Strengthen and improve commercial development in clearly defined and establishe
commercial centers -- Downtown, Florence Center, Pleasant Street and King Street
so as to maintain the traditional structure and character of the community and
so as to avoid the uncontrolled spread of commercial uses into residential arei
and along roadways throughout the City.
10.) Utilize and coordinate capital improvements to achieve land use and development
goals.
Fl
r-,
B. HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE WORKING DOCUMENT #1
PROPOSALS DISCUSSED BUT NOT ADOPTED BY
THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
1. Reduce minimum lot sizes required in certain zoning districts.
Task Force members felt that it would be better to rezone certain under-
developed areas to allow moderate density residential development once public
water and sewer lines were extended or upgraded.
2. Allow a reduction in minimum lot size requirement by special permit to
conform with the average lot sizes within 500 feet of a subject property.
Task Force members were concerned that a number of unintended conse-
quences might arise from this initiative, the main objection being that "too
many conversions within existing structures might occur.
3. Allow conversions of existing single - family homes to two - family structures
by special permit in areas where the majority of structures in the . area
already contain two or more units.
The Task Force felt that this initiative was too vague, and unintended
consequences might, again, result. They also believed that the other recom-
mended initiatives, at least in part, cover this proposal.
4. Require that 20% of the units in developments having five or more units be
affordable ( "affordable" defined as follows: single- family homes to be
affordable to families with 120% of median income; duplex homes to be afford-
able to families with 100% of median income; triplex homes to be affordable
to persons with 93% of median income; rental units to be affordable to per-
sons with 65% -80% of median income).
Though this type of "inclusionary" Zoning Ordinance has been used suc-
cessfully in other communities, the Task Force felt that they should get
more citizen feedback on the acceptability of this initiative. The City's
Committee on Fair Housing will include this proposal in their housing atti-
tudes survey.
Total Responses to Date 69
Response 51%
HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE WORKING DOCUMENT #2
City of Northampton, Massachusetts
Office of Planning and Development
City Hall • 210 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586 -6950
• Community and Economic Development
• Conservation • Historic Preservation
• Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals
INTRODUCTION
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
PROJECT SUMMARY
Total RFI's Distributed 135
Eight weeks have passed since RFI's were sent to a cross section of
people and organizations who hold a wide range of different concerns and
opinions about housing delivery in the City. By choosing the recipients
carefully, trying not to miss any distinct points of view, we hoped to tap
into the "pulse" of Northampton.
The RFI was designed first as a planning tool to find out what housing
activities were being undertaken by local social service agencies and the
areas in which they need help. Much good work is already being accom—
plished; the scope of services offered and one very clear need for assis—
tance will be described in the next section. By polling individuals and
organizations in touch with diverse constituencies, we also hoped to get a
feel for how much support could be expected for each of the policy changes
suggested in Part III. People expressed approval that their views were
being actively solicited in advance of any actual proposals for policy or
ordinance alterations. Many insightful and valid "conditions" were offered
and will be reflected in future proposals. Responses to Part III are sum—
marized in the second section of this report.
PART I: General Information
PART II: Planning Activities
SUMMARY
It should come as no surprise that a number of support services are cur-
rently being provided for almost every conceivable population residing in the
City. Major groups to whom housing placement services are offered include
displaced families, mentally and physically handicapped individuals, and
Northampton's elder citizens. Some social service agencies cover more specific
groups and needs. For example, Hampshire Community Action Commission provides
fuel assistance to income - eligible households, and Highland Valley Elder
Services offers chore and housekeeping services to elderly residents. Without
these corollary activities perhaps certain residents would be unable to remain
in their homes.
However, the fact that placement and support services are offered does not
mean that the people most in need of shelter are finding apartments. It is clear
from the responses that the City needs more accessible apartments for disabled
citizens, more affordable small apartments for single parents with children and
the elderly, more single room occupancies for homeless single people and our
deinstitutionalized populations, and more large apartments at reasonable rents
for large families earning only moderate incomes. It is a fair generalization
to say that we need to work toward placing the people mentioned above in apart-
ments of appropriate size at reasonable rents, with adequate support systems in
place for residents needing continuing supervision. No easy task, this large
goal will be accomplished primarily through new construction with incentives to
developers to produce affordable units.
One common gap in service specifically mentioned or alluded to by many
of the social service agencies contacted was the need for a central information
and referral (I &R) service. People or households in need of shelter often get
sent from one social service agency to another, because their particular
circumstances don't fall into any one agency's scope of services. A central
phone number is needed which people could call for "one stop shopping." Such
an I & R service might offer: a) an analysis of a household's financial
picture; b) a discussion of housing options; c) a network of sympathetic
realtors and landlords who would be willing to take a chance with a marginal
renter on the recommendation of the housing advocate.
The Hampshire County Housing Options Task Force has agreed to explore ways
by which an I & R service could be created; it is recognized that this lack of
housing service coordination extends across the County and is not specific to
Northampton. To do the job right, several people may be needed to run the
I & R service. Finding adequate funding sources will be a major challenge,
considering overstretched local budgets and the withdrawal of federal support
for housing programs. In my initial letter to you, you were asked to become
involved in local housing solutions. One way for you to do this is to think
creatively, to find a funding avenue for this badly needed I & R service when
few are immediately apparent. If any specific suggestions come to mind, please
call me, Joe Laplante, at 586 -6950, Ext. 287.
Of the eleven possible solutions suggested, all received generally positive
responses, with the exception of two ideas. The idea to zone certain areas of
the City for permanent mobile home parks received more negative than positive
responses. However, if aesthetic biases and park management issues could be
resolved, this idea might merit future study. Linking all new development to
housing construction also received a negative response. Most comments indi-
cated that people felt the market for commercial, industrial and office space
in the City was not strong enough to support a housing "surcharge."
The large majority of possible solutions received a check in the "agree"
box. When people attached conditions to their agreement, the conditions were
remarkably similar for a particular question across the board. Though specific
questions should be consulted for the response tally and the common conditions
rm mentioned in the survey, a general pattern has emerged which runs as follows:
People feel that affordable housing opportunities are needed, but, at the
same time, are anxious to preserve and nurture the older residential neighbor-
hoods. To this end a strong site plan review was encouraged to assure that
facades of older homes wouldn't be drastically changed when inserting a second
apartment, or perhaps, that extra parked cars wouldn't exacerbate an already
cluttered parking situation. It was strongly felt that if concessions were
made in development density, or the use of "free" public land, then agreement
must be reached to assure affordability on a long -term basis. Environmental
concerns are uppermost in people's minds. If higher densities are to occur,
then care must be taken not to exceed the land's ability to "carry" the develop-
ment. Higher density housing must be steered away from sensitive lands, such as
watershed areas and toward areas of the City where public water and sewer lines
are available.
PART III: POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO MEET HOUSING NEEDS
SUMMARY
These aesthetic and environmental concerns, as well as the desire to pre-
serve initial affordability of new housing, are only natural. Northampton is a
wonderful place to live and should not be developed to the detriment of the
City's current "livability." The plea expressed here is for sensitivity when
designing future living areas. This sense of caring will be of utmost impor-
tance to all participants involved in proposing policy alterations which could
accommodate affordable housing in Northampton.
1. Possible Solution: Rezone the City to provide larger geographical areas where
two, three, and four family houses are allowed "by right."
Agree
Agree with
Conditions
29 19 4 17
Common Conditions
- Choose areas carefully so as not to create conflict with single family
neighborhoods.
- Trade increased density for open -space buffer zones.
- Include strong site plan review provisions.
Disagree Missing
- Protect environmental resources by steering development to areas with
adequate public infrastructure (e. g., water and sewer).
2. Possible Solution: Encourage clustering of housing units to reduce site develop-
ment costs and create a better living environment.
Agree with
Conditions
Disagree Missing
Agree
29 8 10 22
Common Conditions
- Cluster provision is already part of zoning ordinance. Investigate why
it is not used more frequently.
- Assure that surrounding property values are not decreased.
- Address environmental concerns so as not to exceed "carrying capacity"
of land.
3. Possible Solution: Reduce lot sizes for densely developed areas of the City.
Agree with
Conditions Disagree
Agree
26 9
Common Conditions
- 1 -
Missing
14 20
- Take steps to assure that land cost per sq. ft. doesn't simply rise and
lead to just -as -high sale prices.
- Allow on case -by -case basis to make sure of adequate parking and municipal
services.
1
L i
•
4. Possible Solution: Allow accessory apartments in areas currently zoned for single -
family houses only.
Agree with
Conditions
26 15 5 23
Common Conditions
- Allow only if by Special Permit, not "by right."
- No change to front facade; parking must be on -site.
Agree
5. Possible Solution: Reduce requirements for on -site parking from two spaces per
unit to one and one -half spaces per unit in zones located close to the City center
which are already densely settled.
Agree with
Conditions
Agree
24 9
Common Conditions
- Allow only if parking is not currently a problem in the area.
- Supply supplementary parking space within short distance of site.
- Take into account the size of apartment - efficiency or one bedroom - one
car; two plus bedrooms - 2 cars.
6. Possible Solution: Zone specific areas of the City where permanent mobile home
parks would be allowed by right or by Special Permit.
Agree with
Conditions
Agree
17 10 23 19
Common Conditions
- Exercise control over: types of mobile homes allowed; design and layout
standards.
- Review property tax structure of mobile homes.
- Work out safety and park management issues first.
7. Possible Solution: Offer a density bonus if a percentage of new housing units
built would be available to low and moderate income people.
Agree
Agree with
Conditions
Disagree
Missing
Disagree Missing
16 20
Disagree Missing
Disagree Missing
24 12 13 20
Common Conditions
- Apply legal restrictions to assure that units remain affordable over an
extended period of time.
Agree
25
Agree
14
Agree
28
- Tie provision in with cluster development.
- Reduce real estate taxes to those affordable units.
8. Possible Solution : Require that 10 -25% of any new residential development be made
available (rental or ownership) to people of low and moderate incomes.
Agree with
Conditions
Common Conditions
- Examine the effect this would have on the rent level /selling price of
market rate units - developer might simply pass on costs to market rate
consumer.
- Put provision into effect only when housing market is strong. Remove it
when market is soft.
9. Possible Solution: Link all new development (commercial, industrial, office and
residential) to housing production.
Agree with
Conditions
6
5
Disagree Missing
19 20
Disagree Missing
26 23
Common Conditions
- Again, market would have to be examined to see if development environment
was strong enough to support the added burden. This provision may simply
act to restrict non - residential development.
10. Possible Solution: Allow narrower road widths within low density developments;
require wider roads only when needed to accommodate higher projected traffic
volumes.
Agree with
Conditions
8
Disagree Missing
9 24
Common Conditions
- Allow narrower roads, but don't compromise the structure of the base mate-
rials (sand and gravel layers) because this would lead to higher long run
maintenance costs.
- Assure that emergency vehicles have adequate clearance.
- Structure an agreement that cost savings would be passed on to consumers.
- 3 -
11. Possible Solution: Use land that the City could obtain at little or no cost to
reduce the cost of housing construction.
Agree with
Agree Disagree Missing
Conditions
31 9
Common Conditions
- Include legal safeguards to assure continuing affordability (i. e., no
windfall profits to first buyer when that person sells).
9 20
..
I I Working Definition of "Affordable" for Rental Housing in Northampton
Table 1.
1
2
3
HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE WORKING DOCUMENT #3
The housing study group of the Mayor's Task Force on Land Use and Development
compared the 1985 market rent survey, compiled by the Office of Planning and Devel-
opment, with the Springfield MSA (of which the City is a part) median incomes ad-
justed for household size that are published yearly by HUD. It was noted that the
median - priced apartment in each bedroom category substantially matched the price
that a household earning 80% of the median income could pay for an apartment while
using 30% of their gross income for rent, plus a standardized allowance for utilities._
To simplify the analysis, a household of two people was assigned a one - bedroom apart-
ment; a household of four people was assigned a two - bedroom apartment; and a house-
hold of six people was assigned a three - bedroom apartment.
Definition: Affordable rental apartment
An affordable apartment rent is one which Northampton households earning 80%
of the Springfield MSA median income could pay while using no more than 30% of their
gross income for rent plus utilities.
(1) (2)
# of Bedrooms # of People
in Apartment Occupying
Apartment
1
Breakdown of What People Can'Afford to Pay and Market Rents
2
4
6
(3)
Yearly Incomes
of Households
Earning 80%
of Median Income
$17,300
21,600
24,300
(4)
Monthly Housing
Payment Affordable
to Households Earning
80% of Median Income
$432
540
608
(5)
50th Percentile
Price Range of
Gross Market
Rents Available
in Northampton
$440 -450
530 - 540
600 - 610
HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE WORKING DOCUMENT #4
Working Definition of "Affordable" for Owner- Occupied Housing
The attempt to define affordability for people who wish to own their own
houses was conducted in a similar fashion to that of rental affordability. In
effect, the definition was "backed into" by first establishing hypothetically
what the minimum sale price could be for a modest "starter house" on a relatively
small parcel of land. Then the population that earned an income adequate to
purchase such a house was identified. The following pages summarize this work.
Assumptions
(1) A representative set of underwriting is used for all pricing scenarios.
These criteria, stated in Table 2, are generally similar to those used
by area banks which make home mortgages.
(2) Because the exercise was meant to identify the least amount of income
and equity necessary to purchase a house (usually a renter who wishes
to become a homeowner), it was decided not to consider second or third
time home buyers who may have bought under previous market conditions
and now have a large amount of market - generated equity from the sale of
a previous home to use for a down payment. Therefore, all pricing
scenarios reflect a "first time buyer" situation in which a limited
amount of funds would be available for a down payment.
Definition: Affordable Owner- Occupied Dwelling
An affordable single family or "plex" dwelling is one which Northampton
families earning 120% of the Springfield MSA median income could pay while using
no more than 28% of their gross income for housing debt.
It can be seen from Table 2 that an income of $32,442 is needed to purchase
a $65,000 house using the parameters set forth in the table. Table 3 shows that
a family of four people earning 120% of the median income has a yearly income of
$32,400, substantially the same income as is needed to support the payments on a
$65,000 house. Because in a real world situation the figures described in Table 2
can be manipulated to some extent (e. g., through a drop in the interest rate, a
larger down payment, or sweat equity contributed by owners), it is reasonable to
think that a family of two earning $25,950 (120% of median) could buy an "afforda-
ble" house, especially if they were willing to become landlords in a duplex or
triplex house.
Plex housing (small multi - family buildings, usually two to four units) may
hold the key to home ownership for many City residents. The yearly income neces-
sary to support housing debt for a duplex structure falls by $3,000 (column 13,
Table ). The reason for this is because the owner would be able to apply the
rent received for the second unit toward the mortgage payment. Notice that the
gross rent for the apartment is $540; this is the median price for a two bedroom
apartment found in the May, 1985, survey of market rents in the City. After
subtracting a standard allowance for utilities and a 5% allowance for possible
vacancy, the homeowner is left with $414 to help with monthly housing debt. The
drop in income needed for a triplex drops even more radically because two apart-
ments would be available for rent.
r�l
J
Why 80% of the Median Income?
A word of explanation is needed as to why the group of residents earning 80%
of the median income for the Springfield MSA was chosen when defining "affordable."
Stated simply, a conscious decision was made by the study group working on housing
that the 80% of median income level was a realistic and socially responsible cut-
off point around which a definition could be framed. Families earning that level
of income would have at least one -half the available apartments for rent in the
City to choose from when deciding on their housing situation. It was also a
realization that market forces had set the rent levels and that government
intervention of some kind would have to occur before prices would fall.
Had it turned out that only those families earning, say, 120% of the median
income could afford the median priced apartment, the study group's definition of
affordable may have been different. In that case, the study group may have recog-
nized that less than one -half of the families in. the City could afford an apartment
which falls exactly in the middle of the price range of rents charged on the open
market. If they had considered this an intolerable situation, then they may have
suggested lowering the incomes used in the affordable definition. By doing so,
it would have been incumbent upon them to also suggest a realistic method of at-
taining this affordable rent. Since the market couldn't supply these lower - priced
apartments, government would have to create the conditions for it to do so.
To return to Northampton's present situation, roughly 3,700 families (those
families earning 80% of the median income) out of the 6,247 families counted in
the 1980 Census can now afford the median - priced apartments. While the study
group chose to define affordable around this income group, they recognized that
families earning 50 to 80% of the median income would have a very difficult time
finding housing in the City. Locally- sponsored initiatives, such as: modification
of the current zoning map to create more areas in which plex housing could be built;
adoption of an inclusionary zoning ordinance requiring developers to price a certain
percentage of all new apartments at an affordable level; or use of local CDBG funds
and publicly owned land to leverage commitments for lower cost units, would be
necessary to offer adequate apartment choice and supply for families earning in
this income range. Families earning less than 50% of the median ($9,450 for a
single person and $13,500 for a family of four according to 1985 HUD figures) are
eligible for federal rent subsidies. Even though the Reagan Administration is
drawing away from housing subsidy or construction programs, many people feel that
it is still the moral obligation of the federal government to provide help for this
segment of our society. At any rate, such a deep subsidy would be needed to house
these families in today's market that it is probably beyond our local government's
ability to adequately help them through local measures.
The affordable definition, aside from being considered fair by the framers,
is also supported by a review of literature which examines how other communities
have defined affordable. Though some have, again, chosen to define affordable in
terms of some figure between 50 and 80% of median income, most have recognized
that the 80% level is the most realistic one with which to work.
cd • a)
p
M
•ri
W
+.1 0
cn
a)
� la
CL) 0
4-3 4H
r4
0
d
Analysis of Income Levels Needed to Support Monthly Housing Debt for 3 Housing Types
10% down payment; 2 points on closing; 28% of gross monthly income
can be used
H
u
a1 'U
$a 0 T1
CD
>-1 H Z
N
...t
N
M
N
-t
a1
N
N
..1"
U1
,—I
M
d1
N
H
....1
N
u1
00
^
t0
N
cc4
v
4-1 4-1
O a)
4-1 V
0 O
o a
U1
n
n
00
v0
Cr)
r-
M
\O
Li
u1
N
%.0
i
es,
,--1
a)
z
C. o
....1.
H
oo
N
00
CO
N
N
w
/\
O
r1
••
1n
O
H
0
9
O
O
is)
O
-4-
I
co
co
O
H
O
00
O
H
(6) (8) (L) (9)
Total
Housing
Debt
L 1
1--
O
r-1
u1
H
01
M
u1
-t
.
0
H
O
Cr)
O
•1"
O
-.
O
1.(1
0
1.r1
•
I W
0 di
cd
H
L
N
H
N
CO
H
N
CO
r1
O
M
N
O
co
N
Prin./
Int.
N
O
).O
O■
1■
00
O
N
01
H
1
r-1
r1
M
I•
1-1
r1
^
cr1
v
0
cd g
4J 0
N a
O
O
v.r1
00
ir1
O
O
Iry
Cr)
co
O
If)
N
O
01
O
O
O
O
co
r�
O
O
O
-t
rl
■—i
v
H 0 ,0
4-1 a)
O F4 a)
H I Z
-
005`6
O
O
1r1
M
rl
O
cr1
r--
CO
O
O
M
r-I
0
O
M
O
r-i
M
v
bO
0
.1 4-)
CO O
0 0
r-1 U
U
O
O
O
M
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
O
Cr)
O
o
Cr)
CV
v
5 a)
0
A cd
P-1
O
cr
O
1 r1
a>
Ns
O
.
N
rl
O
0
■0
v
al
CD b 0
x cda
000`59
patpulala
X
r
0
A
r--1 0
a)0
c 1n
U O1
O
K
1r1 O
Cr)
N
a) 0
c 0
U A
a)
ago
P
H
H 0
c 0 d (V
U 1
6\
crl
N 0
QJ 0
c a O
d o N
0 A r-1
cd • a)
p
M
•ri
W
+.1 0
cn
a)
� la
CL) 0
4-3 4H
r4
0
d
Analysis of Income Levels Needed to Support Monthly Housing Debt for 3 Housing Types
10% down payment; 2 points on closing; 28% of gross monthly income
can be used
i I
zoz
0 0 %0 O .o o � o
v1 u I� O N v1 I� O
10 co, H Li
n w w r. w w
N u1 a■ N --t O O
N N N Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr)
%00I
C+1 LC) M O CO u1 N O
I� N H O 03 I. u'1
c0 %.0 M O V0 01 O i�
n w w
00 H n 00 O N M
r--I N N N N c+"1 c+1 c+'1
Yearly Income as Percent of Median Incon
%08
O O O O O O O O
O O L l O L.r) O CC•1 co
H C'"1 - .0 01 cn ■0 O
w
Cf1 I. CS H N .t 1.11 I.
H H H N N N N N
%59
oQ %0 M O n - O N.
1/40 Ln co LC) �t �t �t Cr)
, O O CO u1 s.0 n 00 CS
CV - d' Ct1 r— c0 01 O H
H H H r-I r--I r-I N N
%05
O O O O O O O O
C+1 O in co co U1 LC1 co)
�' 00 H Ln 1/40 \0 i� 00
co N c•1 -t u1 1/40 n
r-I r-I r-I r—I r--I r•-i '--I
Family Size
--] Persons
H N C''1 d' ul 1/40 I• CO
•
L.
,—
Cll
U
N
0
l*Northampton is part of the Springfield Metropolital Statistical Area.
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA*
1985 INCOMES AS PERCENT OF MEDIAN INCOME ADJUSTED FOR FAMILY SIZE