NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — The Planning Board on Monday voted unanimously to recommend the adoption of zoning changes that will create a so-called "Smart Growth" overlay district over parts of the downtown.

 

The proposal, under the state's 40R legislation, would allow for high-density residential and mixed use development in the area from Center Street south toward American Legion Drive and eastward along Union Street to past the Eclipse Mill. This would comprise two subdistricts within the overlay.

 

Adoption of the law puts the city in line for $600,000 in state funds to ameliorate any impacts from growth and another $3,000 for every unit built. There is the potential for about 563 units in these areas although officials are doubtful that that many will ever be constructed.

 

The zoning overlay was developed last year by the Office of Community Development and presented to the Planning Board last November. It has been presented at several public and informational hearings including Monday's joint hearing with the City Council.

 

"From the outset, I do want to state very clearly that I believe this is a beneficial, important and necessary community development, economic development and housing development project for the city of North Adams," said Mayor Thomas Bernard at the beginning of the Zoom-held hearing. 

 

"It also reflects a clear recognition in North Adams and elsewhere in Massachusetts that housing development can be a catalyst for commercial, economic, and retail development downtown."

 

The zoning proposal was informed by the Vision 2030 master plan. Last year, the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission did a needs assessment that found the city had a quality housing deficit across all income ranges of 800 units. 

 

The overlay would keep the underlying zoning and uses, but would allow the development of "dense" housing of 20 units per acre with at least 20 percent of those units (and no more than 60 percent) as affordable as determined by federal area median income. 

 

In North Adams, families of four making at up to 80 percent of the median income of $80,900, or about $68,300, would qualify for affordable housing, with an estimated cost of about $1,700 a month. 

 

In terms of mixed use, at least 51 percent of the development would have to be residential.

 

Lisa Blackmer, a member of the Planning Board but acting as president of the City Council, asked how it would affect existing apartment houses and if developers would be required to implement Smart Growth. 

 

Zachary Feury, project coordinator in the Office of Community Development, said the overlay should have no effect on current or future uses of existing buildings — unless the owner wished to use Smart Growth zoning. 

 

In that case, the developer would still have to abide by construction codes as laid out by the city, he said.

 

Planner Lynette Ritland Bond also noted that the mill subdistrict had a three-story limit on construction and the downtown subdistrict, five stories. 

 

State Rep. John Barrett III said he was concerned with "the expeditious manner that this is moving forward."

 

While there had been public presentations on Zoom, and information in the form of presentations and minutes on the city website, he said he had fielded calls from residents and businesses concerned about transparency.

 

"Mr. Chairman, I'm here tonight not to support this project, or be against it, what I'm here for more than anything else is I received several calls last December, regarding the process more than anything else in this whole thing," he said. "It seems to be on a faster track than what can be absorbed by myself, if I was not aware of some of the things out here, but most of the general public. This has to be an open process."

 

The representative said the Smart Growth had not been mentioned before being proposed last November and had not been brought up at City Council. 

 

"If this is a good project, good for the city, everybody will support it, but they have to understand what they're voting on, and especially the City Council," Barrett said.

 

He also cited a petition against the adoption signed by 125 residents.

 

Officials said the Zoom hearings had attracted more audience than the in-person meetings normally did and that there had been a number of meetings, as well as articles in the local news. 

 

Bernard said the petition had been submitted along with the city's recently approved application to the Department of Housing and Community Development. He noted that the 41 respondents who commented, not one referred to Smart Growth or 40R but rather to "affordable housing."

 

The mayor said earlier in the meeting that it was unfortunate that "affordability" was often used interchangeably with Section 8 when it actually refers to "workforce housing."

 

Those assumptions had played a role in several contentious hearings in Adams the year before but town meeting easily adopted the legislation last September.

 

Bernard also said he was "baffled" that he had heard nothing about these concerns since sending an email to Barrett in December seeking to address any questions he had. After the meeting, the mayor said he had not heard from any business owners and that some inquiries by residents had come through Community Development.

 

Barrett said he didn't need to be informed on Smart Growth but rather the public. 

 

"This doesn't have to be rushed through, we can take our time, make sure it goes right, and make the best decisions possible," he said.

 

The Planning Board voted on the recommendation in its regular meeting immediately following the hearing. The City Council will take up the matter at a later date.