Planning Board Recommends Modification of Inclusionary Zoning Amendment. ADU Bylaw Changes Still in Flux

Report on the Meeting of the Amherst Planning Board, August 20, 2025

This meeting was held over Zoom and was recorded.

Present
Doug Marshall (Chair), Bruce Coldham, Fred Hartwell, Jesse Mager, Angus McLeod, and Jerah Smith. Absent: Johanna Neumann 

Staff: Nate Malloy (Senior planner) and Pam Field Sadler (Assistant)

Increased Opt-out Payment in Lieu of Affordable Units Recommended
At the recommendation of the Amherst Municipal Affordable Housing Trust (AMAHT), the Planning Board agreed that developers who want to opt out of providing the 12% affordable units required by Amherst’s Inclusionary Zoning bylaw (article 15.171) should compensate by contributing more than the four times Median Family Income (MFI) required by the bylaw. However, Planning Board members thought that the range of four to ten times MFI suggested by the Trust is too large and recommended that the payment in lieu of affordable units be five to eight times MFI. This recommendation will be forwarded to the Community Resource Committee (CRC) of the Town Council, which held a poorly attended public hearing on August 14, and will again take the matter up at its August 28 meeting. The CRC and Planning Board recommendations will then go to the full council for approval.

Increasing the payment in lieu was triggered by developer Barry Roberts’ request to use the provision to avoid including any affordable units in the mixed-use building currently under construction behind the former Hastings building. The new building will be fully leased by Amherst College and used to house students. In its approval of Roberts’ request, AMAHT members thought that the compensation for not having any affordable units was too low and did not allow for flexibility. AMAHT proposed a range based on various factors, such as location, size, development costs, and unit costs. The Planning Board members agreed.

Planner Nate Malloy emphasized that the goal of the bylaw is to provide affordable units, so developers have to make an argument for opting out and making a payment instead.. Acceptance of a payment in lieu of the units, he said, is discretionary; and can be denied by the permit granting authority (either the Planning Board or Zoning Board of Appeals, depending on the circumstances).

Although Planning Board member Jesse Mager was uncomfortable with the idea of negotiating the payment, Bruce Coldham pointed out that the board already negotiates other factors, such as the amount of parking provided. Ultimately, the Planning Board unanimously recommended the highlighted changes to the bylaw.

The fee-in-lieu value for each affordable unit not provided shall be at least five (5) times and no more than eight (8) times the current Median Family Income of Amherst as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or successor agency. Precise payment amounts shall be determined by the Permit Granting Authority or Special Permit Granting Authority with consultation from the Housing Trust, and may account for market conditions, total development costs, unit sizes, project location, cost of postponement of delivery of affordable units, and similar factors.

Progress But No Final Agreement on Modification of ADU Bylaw
Amending the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) bylaw (Article 5.011) to conform with new state regulations meant to encourage ADU construction proved trickier. The current town bylaw allows ADUs of up to 1,000 square feet, but requires that either the ADU or the principal dwelling be owner occupied. The state or “protected” ADU regulations put the size of ADUs at 900 square feet or half the area of the principal dwelling, whichever is less, and prohibit towns from requiring owner occupancy. In both cases, the ADU can be approved by the Building Commissioner and does not require a site plan review or special permit.

A current draft proposal allows both “local ADUs” [those conforming to the existing town bylaw] and “protected ADUs”. At its August 14 hearing, the CRC appeared to prefer eliminating the larger, owner-occupied local ADU category and having only the state-mandated “protected ADU” category. This would make many of the 30 or 40 existing ADUs in town nonconforming, and they would keep their owner-occupancy requirement. Another option would be to increase the maximum size allowed for the protected ADUs to 1,000 square feet. Mager objected to increasing the allowable size because it might encourage additional bedrooms and occupants. “The impetus of the [state] law was to increase housing for residents and families,” he said. “That is not what will happen in this town,” where the additional units are likely to become student housing. 

Keeping the local ADU category would also allow the possibility of a second ADU being built on a lot, because there can be one local and one protected ADU, although board members felt that scenario would be rare.

Planning Board member Fred Hartwell advocated keeping the owner-occupancy requirement on existing ADUs, but it appeared that most board members were leaning toward having only one ADU category, until Jerah Smith pointed out that there might be instances when property owners want a larger ADU to accommodate extended family or a disabled child and would be amenable to having an owner-occupancy restriction. He suggested that the size limit for the local ADU be increased to 1,200 square feet or 90% of the area of the principal dwelling. Other board members seemed to agree with this suggestion, but a final decision was postponed until the September 3 meeting because of the changes needed in the draft bylaw.

Conditions considered for the amended bylaw are a prohibition of short-term rentals such as Air B ‘n B or VRBO, a separate entrance for the ADU, a need for a parking plan with a limitation of no more than three cars allowed per ADU, the least restrictive dimensional standards (setback and building height) allowed in the zone, no additional curb cut unless approved by the DPW, and rental registration if the unit is to be rented. A protected (smaller) ADU may be built on any site in a residential zone, but if a local ADU is planned for a site that has a protected ADU, a Special Permit will be required. Only one ADU of each type is allowed on a site.

Angus McLeod Will Represent the Planning Board on Community Preservation Act Committee
With Johanna Neumann absent from this meeting, the Planning Board deferred the election for officers and committee liaisons until the September 3 meeting. However, the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) will begin receiving applications for FY2027 grants in September, so it was felt to be important for the board’s representative to that committee to be appointed soon. Last year, the Planning Board did not have a representative on it because the appointed liaison Lawrence Kluttz stated he was unable to serve on the committee due to family obligations, and no other board member volunteered. Angus McLeod volunteered and was chosen unanimously. His appointment will have to be recommended by the Town Manager and approved by the Town Council.

Hearing for Archipelago Mixed-use Building at Atkins Corner Postponed Until September 17
Because the developer is still in the process of receiving approval from the Conservation Commission for the planned two building, 140-unit mixed-use project on Gould Way and Lannon Lane at Atkins corner, Kyle Wilson of Archipelago Investments requested and was granted a continuance until the September 17 Planning Board meeting. The hearing is scheduled for 6:35.