AMHERST — In an era when many young families may be challenged in finding homes to buy or rent, placing various restrictions on existing properties to protect their historic value may limit future housing opportunities.
That’s a view offered by Planning Board member Jerah Smith at a meeting with the Local Historic District Commission last Wednesday. Smith said he’s frustrated by a lack of representation in the process of developing a policy that could create the town’s third Local Historic District — especially, he said, at a time when starter homes are already difficult to find.
“For us to prioritize adopting a regulation that makes it more challenging for people to access a life here in Amherst feels counterintuitive to what we should be doing right now,” Smith said.
In a sometimes tense presentation, representatives from the commission discussed how, after three years of study and deliberation, they have narrowed a possible East Amherst district to a core group of 22 properties, mostly along lower Main Street. The number of properties is well below the 55 that were in a proposal the Planning Board rejected on April 22, recommending against enacting a general bylaw for that size district in a 5-1 vote.
If adopted by the Town Council, the new district would impose regulations on what is visible from the street at homes, businesses and other buildings. Already, the town has one district centered on the Emily Dickinson Museum on Main Street, established in 2012, and the other encompassing the North Prospect-Lincoln-Sunset neighborhoods, established in 2017.
Commission member Steve Bloom called the revised proposal a “good and fair compromise” and that the historic character of the town matters, especially in what is the oldest part of Amherst, the original town center. Without protections, he said, “the character and fabric of our town would be irreversibly diminished.”
Two of the prominent properties are the Clapp Tavern at 6 South East St., a circa 1737 building converted into law offices, where some of the planning for Daniel Shays’ Rebellion took place, and the former Second Congregational Church at 742 Main St., where the Jewish Community of Amherst is located. Details of each property have been compiled by Chris Skelly of Skelly Preservation Services.
When Bloom responded directly to Smith, he suggested that character of neighborhoods gets people to move to Amherst.
Smith interjected that Bloom wasn’t making an argument in response to his concerns.
“You’re telling me you didn’t listen to me at all. You’re just completely negating everything I just said,” Smith said.
“No, I feel like I listened to you very closely, actually,” Bloom responded. “Your main point was LHD’s prevent affordable housing, and we’re tone deaf.”
“I don’t think we’re tone deaf, and I don’t think we’re preventing affordable housing,” Bloom added.
Bloom noted accessory dwelling units are now by right under state law and can’t be excluded from the districts, even as the commission can review other exterior alterations and any changes viewed from the street, accepting or denying such changes. In recent weeks, the commission has denied a property owner’s use of aluminum siding on a home, requiring that the siding remain wooden clapboards.
Elizabeth Sharpe, a commission member who is also co-executive director of Historic Northampton, said East Amherst is the first village settlement and first post office, with two of the buildings predating the town’s founding in 1759. The district, Sharpe said, would also protect the East Amherst common.
Planning Board Chairman Doug Marshall said he is concerned about “absolute power” wielded by the commission, and referenced a proposal at 98 Fearing St., where a three-unit, 10-bedroom project was withdrawn by a developer after the commission had concerns about this in-fill. Marshall characterized the commission’s process as a gauntlet.
“It was an instance where the absolute power of the district commission has in areas that are designated as such, was evident,” Marshall said. “I think that’s the thing that gives me pause, is that we never hear about the projects that don’t actually get proposed.”
Bloom said he was bothered by the questioning of the validity of the work the commission does, which is to preserve character of the town, not inhibit development.
“Your comments I find to be really disingenuous,” Bloom said. “Don’t criticize us for doing our job.”
Many of those who participated in the meeting, where no decisions were made, offered support for the commission’s work.
Former Historical Commission member Hetty Startup said the town can have affordable housing and history preserved.
Ken Rosenthal of Sunset Avenue offered oral comments, as well as a letter stating the benefits to his neighborhood.
“Although we’ve never expressly discussed it, I believe that our living in an LHD has been an impetus to maintaining and improving our properties,” Rosenthal wrote. “Improvements, of course, benefit the entire town as well as our small neighborhood.”
Jennifer Taub, a District 4 member of the Town Council, said the neighborhoods with Local Historic Districts are most active anywhere in town with new housing, with accessory dwelling units being built regularly.
“It by no means impedes development,” Taub said.
