AMHERST — A series of proposed zoning changes and design criteria for downtown Amherst are designed to spur infill development and construction of more housing, while preserving historic aspects of the commercial district and protecting nearby neighborhoods.
Yet while the comprehensive report, recently unveiled by representatives from Dodson & Flinker Landscape Architecture & Planning of Florence, is being praised by the Planning Board, some members at the March 18 meeting suggested it doesn’t go far enough in addressing the ongoing pressure on the housing stock in the college town, or reflect how the town has always evolved.
Planning Board Chairman Doug Marshall said he finds it unfortunate that the downtown design standards, through the creation of a downtown neighborhood zone, artificially restrict future development on the west side of Kendrick Park. Few of the houses next to the greenspace, which now features a community playground, strike him as significant architecturally, he said.
“To sort of ignore that transformation and to suppress the now high desirability for that side of the park, to be really wonderful housing for a lot more people, seems a real miss to me,” Marshall said.
The downtown neighborhood zone is one of four “character zones” of downtown, each of which would have its own rules and regulations. In addition to downtown neighborhood, the zones are downtown village, modern main and traditional main.
From building heights and appearance of buildings to sidewalk widths and materials used on walkways, the report, Marshall said, is wonderfully detailed and provides a broad vision for Amherst’s future, and may also demonstrate compromise.
“Maybe this is the best we can do, but obviously this board and some of the other boards and the council get to weigh in on it as we move forward,” Marshall said.
A similar sentiment was offered by board member Angus McLeod, who noted that, if the Planning Board recommended adopting what was presented, some changes would happen, but a lot of what already exists would stay.
“I think what I would encourage is maybe a slightly more robust vision of change and faster change than what is envisioned here,” McLeod said.
He suggested that planners pursue more intense development, while acknowledging that such growth could raise concerns regarding neighborhood transitions. However, he suggested this approach would foster a more cohesive downtown, noting that having four distinct character zones in such a small area felt “gratuitous.”
Still, he praised the report. “I’m really impressed by the design standards and really inspired by them, and I think there’s a real coherence there, a real beauty,” McLeod said.
Extensive research
The work began in September 2024, with various workshops, feedback sessions, walking tours and visioning, as well as online surveys and a working group that included developers and downtown residents.
Peter Flinker, president of Dodson & Flinker, said that zoning already has a lot of design elements to it, and one of the messages is there are a number of changes to achieve a new zoning vision, such as updating streetscape design features from the curb to the front of the buildings. A preference is for mature trees, outdoor dining and comfortable sidewalks where activity is happening, he said.
“Not surprisingly, people like a place that looks like a nice place to hang out,” Flinker said.
With so much diversity to the built environment, though, Flinker said it is hard to say what should be emulated, so proposals are based on rezoning different context areas, building upon and enhancing on those, rather than only choosing one style, one era or one use.
Flinker explained that the four proposed character zones were derived from five distinct design context areas: the historic core surrounding the Town Common; the “funky” college town vibe characterized by mixed uses and narrow alleyways; the “hinge” area containing St. Brigid’s Church and the Unitarian Meetinghouse; the modern context of the One East Pleasant and 11 East Pleasant buildings; and the “cozy” residential pockets west of Kendrick Park.
“There is no single character of Amherst, and it sort of depends on where you are, from the historic core around the common, to the north end, which even before the construction of new apartment buildings, was very different, much more automobile dominated,” Flinker said.
The first volume’s design standards could be used for subareas by applicants to understand how their proposals fit the vision of the town’s future, and for the Design Review Board to examine projects.
“This could be adopted as rules and regulations of the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Design Review Board,” Flinker said.
The second volume is meant to be used by the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals for special permit and site plan review applications, with recommendations intended for formal adoption into the zoning bylaw.
The third volume is for the design of space between the front of buildings and the curb, guiding the Department of Public Works and others in making improvements.
Flinker gave various examples of how this could impact the town. For instance, with the traditional main area, the Bank of America at 1 South Pleasant St., originally built in the 1960s as an Amherst Savings Bank, could be rebuilt with a curved front to wrap around the street. This would create a continuous ground floor with active uses, with upper floors rising five stories to provide office and apartment space that complements the streetscape.
The zoning changes would require a stepped-back fifth floor to mitigate the sense of a building taller than others and looming over the sidewalk.
The modern main area could accommodate streets that are occasionally closed to vehicles.
“It’s really trying to prepare the downtown for new uses and the kind of activity that’s naturally going to grow when you have more people living and working in the place,” Flinker said.
Downtown village would have a more residential scale and downtown neighborhood and would be exclusively a walkable, residential place.
Dillon Sussman, a senior associate at Dodson & Flinker, showed how setbacks and building heights would change, with 60-foot tall buildings to be allowed in the traditional and modern main areas.
Taller buildings would also be allowed elsewhere where historic structures are preserved.
Sussman said the consultants heard that the market for commercial is not hot, so pulled back from requiring ground-level commercial space everywhere, with some buildings to only be designed for commercial space.
The use of a district transitional buffer would limit the height of buildings next to existing residential neighborhoods. “It gives a little bit more transition between the downtown and the abutting residential areas,” Sussman said.
Other necessary zoning changes, in downtown village and downtown neighborhood, would make it easier to build more housing to meet demand, paired with design standards so they fit in with the existing context.
Sussman said dimensions and use standards would allow development in line with the limited business and general residence zones, to enable change. “From our analysis, without these changes, those areas are relatively frozen in place by the existing zoning,” Sussman said.
The public realm standards are included in the third volume. Sussman said a challenge is there are a lot of different designs in terms of materials and the layout of the pavement materials.
“The public realm in downtown Amherst sort of shows the history of experimentation,” Sussman said.
This would establish sidewalk width requirements, which vary widely throughout downtown and provide recommended materials, like concrete sidewalks with horizontal scoring and concrete unit pavers near street trees and benches.
Public feedback next
The Planning Board will continue to discuss the report, as will other boards. Many of the recommendations will need zoning changes, such as for front setbacks, heights, stepbacks and the relationship between building and sidewalk dimensions.
Nate Malloy, assistant director of planning and economic development, said the first step is to get reaction from the public and then focus on policy and other decisions can happen at later meetings.
Planning Board member Fred Hartwell said the work already done is exceptional.
He reflected on how the Amherst Savings Bank building singlehandedly led to the creation of the Design Review Board in 1983, when images were shown at Town Meeting. “That building put the Design Review Board over the finish line all by itself,” Hartwell said.
Planning Board member Jerah Smith said he appreciates that the consultants paid attention to the variety of architectural characteristics in downtown Amherst, but also that change has occurred regularly.
“I do want to encourage you to be open minded to a lot of other perspectives as you hear them this year,” Smith said.
Board member Jesse Mager wondered if there was a way to encourage more commercial uses, possibly by making spaces smaller. But Sussman said the consultants heard that people are seeking larger spaces for restaurants.
Board member Bruce Coldham said the report is a wonderful piece of work.
“I applaud the way in which this study Dodson & Flinker have taken the challenge of looking at our downtown and come to us with a pretty new, somewhat radical proposition, that we should think in terms of the modern main and the traditional historic main,” Coldham said.