AMHERST — The Town Council is permanently shelving zoning changes that would limit development of housing geared toward college students and conversions of existing homes into student rentals, along with a yearlong pause on construction of multi-tenant apartment buildings.
The proposals, brought by citizen petition, had already been rejected by the Planning Board at a public hearing in November, but the decision by the council at its Dec. 8 meeting to table the measures effectively kills them.
“I think that these bylaws are problematic, I think that they would do more harm than good in our community and they have pieces that would open us up to lawsuits,” said District 5 Councilor Ana Devlin Gauthier.
Though Devlin Gauthier, who was part of a 9-4 majority in tabling the package of zoning adjustments and part of a unanimous vote in tabling the moratorium, said her temptation was to ask the council’s Community Resources Committee to offer input and reject the zoning changes outright.
Kitty Axelson-Berry, a lead petitioner, said there is a growing imbalance between those who live in town and those who make their homes in Amherst just to go to college, and the proposals would serve to acknowledge this issue.
“We just want to have more work on it, thus the zoning amendments before the Town Council,” Axelson Berry said.
She said the Planning Department has not been given direction to deal with housing for yearround residents and how to provide more housing for all, not just students.
“Task the Planning Department with this effort, by supporting the proposals, actually, help the Planning Board and the committee respond on behalf of residents and the town’s health for this need,” Axelson-Berry said.
But even though councilors suggested there was merit to some of the ideas, such as defining student homes and limiting where they can be located, At Large Councilor Mandi Jo Hanneke said tabling would be the cleanest way to deal with the measures. That would indicate the council isn’t interested in pursuing the amendments at this time and being stuck within the scope of the proposals.
District 1 Councilor Ndifreke Ette said he understands a segment of Amherst wants these proposals passed.
“The council should listen and should get something done, but should not get railroaded into passing what we have now,” Ette said.
Council President Lynn Griesemer said the articles had to be taken up as is and not tweaked, because the Community Resources Committee didn’t have a hearing and hadn’t made a recommendation.
With the Planning Board not recommending by 6-1 votes, District 4 Councilor Pam Rooney said she was disappointed that members saw the proposals as a distraction or interruption.
“It really set me back, because it’s called citizen participation,” Rooney said.
District 4 Councilor Jennifer Taub, too, was perturbed.
“I think for the council to say we reject this, we don’t want to take this up, is not being responsible to many, many of our constituents,” Taub said.
Others voting against tabling were At Large Councilor Ellisha Walker and District 3 Councilor Heather Hala Lord.
Planning Board Chairman Doug Marshall explained his panel’s views.
“In the end we didn’t really feel a moratorium was necessary to advance the petitioner’s goals,” Marshall said. He pointed out that design standards for downtown will be coming, and that regular Planning Board and subcommittee meetings, where the public is welcome, can discuss similar topics.
The proposal to discourage purchase of homes by companies and renting to students, and strategies to zone for livability, affordability and balance, also would have been difficult to adopt.
“We all felt the proposal was not ready for incorporation as a bylaw,” Marshall said.
There were aspects where it was unclear if they would be legal, such as trying to limit where student rentals can go, and it was also interrupting a conversation that is already ongoing at the Planning Board.