Residents File Zoning Bylaw Changes for Balanced, Liveable Neighborhoods and Downtown

18 thoughts on “Residents File Zoning Bylaw Changes for Balanced, Liveable Neighborhoods and Downtown”

1. I do not understand the logic that building multi-unit housing in downtown will push out year round residents. Having multi-unit housing in downtown, if anything, will encourage students to stay in town year-round, and hopefully, ultimately decide to build a life in Amherst. Amherst is one of the only municipalities in the valley that is growing. Limiting new multi-unit housing (especially in the downtown core) is simply going to limit the supply of rentals, forcing more single family homes to convert to student rentals to fill a gap in the market. If you want single family residences to not become student rentals, you should support multi-family housing that better suits the needs of young people, single people, students, and those who want to experience the rural/urban setting that Amherst has worked so diligently to create. Put simply, students are going to continue to live off campus, and multi-unit housing will limit the pressure of conversions from single family homes to student rentals.

2. Within a stones throw of our house, their are at least 8 homes that were once occupied by families ,that are now student rentals . Noise complaint is on speed dial on my phone . The police and code enforcement have been an excellent resource ,as our neighborhood has dealt with this over the years . Last Saturday at 11:30 and again at 2am .
   Fortunately I have the owners phone , so when I get awoken ,they do to..And they have been responsive .
   Thank you for filing the zoning bylaw proposals .
   A moratorium is in order . Let’s catch our breath with development and not do this on the fly .

3. Mr. Judicki, Amherst residents should not have to choose between losing our downtown or losing our family neighborhoods. These two bylaws, when you look at them together, protect BOTH the downtown and neighborhoods. I’m guessing most people were not aware that our year-round population has dwindled to 13,000. That was a surprise to me. The pressure put on town residents to move away is caused in most part by the rising cost of housing. It makes sense to house students on campus and prioritize off campus housing for residents in need of low and middle income and senior housing. See what State College PA has done to define, regulate and control student housing so that long term residents still have a town they can enjoy.

   https://www.statecollegepa.us/218/Student-Home-License.

   Why on earth has Amherst not done one thing to define, regulate or control student housing when we are a college town too?

4. This is excellent but its long-term efficacy depends on having a Planning Board and Town Council that will be responsive to its emphasis on supporting the growth of housing for permanent residents, especially families. I don’t think that our experience over the past decade or so supports Mr. Judicki’s conclusion that student housing downtown preserves neighborhoods for families.

5. I welcome the amendment to Article 19! Protecting neighborhoods, our small knit pocket areas all over town – is long overdue. This proposal finally provides the opportunity for equity, fairness and balance needed. I trust that the TC will give it the attention it deserves.

6. David, I could have written your post. The mistake we keep making is discussing and then hearing “it won’t happen again!”, and then it does. There are always more cars (speaking of cars in Amherst recently), at these houses then there should be or supposedly allowed. There are more residents in the neighborhood that are fed up and not able to sleep.

   Thank you Kitty (and others) for filing the two zoning bylaw proposals.

7. Thank you for moving forward with the design of these two bylaw praposals. Altho just a first bite of the apple I believe they should go forward together. One is not enough, nor is the other. Any ‘mono culture’ is bound to fail and that is where we have been going for the last two and half decades. “More comprehensive” measures need be taken than these but we must get going to rebalance. It is already too late on many accounts. Just like planetary health – we can get it back with quick and decisive action. Do not wait any longer fellow residents…

8. Thank you to the researchers and authors of these zoning proposals and data. Quick data check – you state there are 13,000 year round residents and 9,000 part time residents..but… Amherst. gov rent permit section says there are 5,000 properties in Amherst registered as rentals.. Given there is a maximum 4 person per unit rental rule and presumably most the occupants are part time residents that totals 20,000 (not 9,000) part time residents living in Amherst properties registered as rental units. It appears that part time residents almost doubles the amount of year round residents . Clarification and or correction welcomed.

9. I just read an article about Greenland beginning to protect itself from over-tourism, and some regulations they’ve instituted, and wondered (via AI) how some of those might be scaled for Amherst’s challenges with balance between year-round and 8-month societies/economies:

   A summation of a lot more info was thus:

   Amherst continues to face challenges from the expansion of absentee-owned student rentals, leading to concentrated “student zones” and a shrinking proportion of year-round residents. Drawing on approaches from new Greenlandic law, the following proposals are recommended to strengthen neighborhood sustainability.

   Key Recommendations

   Landlord Licensing:
   Require all landlords renting residential units to students to obtain a municipal license, with renewal contingent on compliance with standards for safety, property upkeep, neighborhood impact, and responsiveness to complaints.

   Residency or Local Accountability:
   Institute policies that incentivize property owners who rent multiple student units to reside locally. Owners who do not live in Amherst would pay higher fees or face stricter oversight, increasing accountability and aligning with community interests.

   Zoning Adjustments:
   Adopt zoning controls that cap the density of student rentals in certain neighborhoods, preserving zones for long-term residency and preventing harmful clustering that affects quality of life.

   Community Contribution Requirement:
   Encourage or require landlords, especially those owning large portfolios, to contribute to infrastructure funds that support sidewalks, parks, and code enforcement services, ensuring that commercial rental activity benefits the broader community.

   Rationale:
   These recommendations maintain neighborhood health and foster diversity, ensuring student housing does not overwhelm community character or infrastructure. Licensing, residency, zoning, and contribution rules encourage rental business owners to act as responsible, invested members of Amherst, rather than absentee operators focused solely on profit.

10. Our Planning Board and Leadership has failed us . They have been so focused on being helpful to student housing developers, that they have forgotten the taxpayer who pays the bills .
    They have compromised our civil neighborhoods to rentals .
    You are supposed to have our backs . You don’t.
    Umass time to step up now , not 20 years from now .

11. In my opinion, U Mass should have a cap of how many students are allowed to go there.The impact on the TOWN of Amherst is overloaded with students taking housing that Amherst residents in their 20’s looking to move on in their lives and move out of their parents home and start living as responsible adults. But they can’t. The cost of living in Amherst is so high that young adults have to move out of Amherst, away from family and the support they need in their early years once they start living on their own. Also, doesn’t U Mass have property they can build on for the students? The number of off campus students outnumber the residents. As does the property for students now outnumbers people who live here year to year. UMass has to start building on their own property to provide student housing and, like I said, put a cap on how many students are allowed to be admitted. Amherst shouldn’t have allowed those 2 buildings in the center on the corner of Triangle street. It’s filled with students and took away the charm of our town. I sure hope that they don’t continue to build in the center of Amherst. A lot of people used to come to live here for the charm Amherst used to have. Please don’t destroy what’s left.

12. We used data from page 62 of the Housing Production Plan (2024) that the town is deciding whether or not to adopt: https://www.amherstma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/79787/Amherst_HPP_Full_Draft_06_12_2025

    The 9,000 students cited as living off-campus in Amherst live in one-, two-, three-bedroom units as well as four-bedroom units. While we’re on that page, I think you’ll find the rest of that paragraph and the following one to be of interest:
    “The presence of higher education institutions in Amherst has a profound impact on the local and regional housing markets. Amherst has a robust rental housing market, which has become increasingly expensive, driven largely by a growing off-campus student population. In small-group interviews conducted at the outset of this process, participants described an ongoing trend of student housing expanding off campus. Though student enrollment has increased, the production of on campus housing has not kept up. Approximately 9,000 UMass students live off-campus in Amherst, and another 9,000 outside of Amherst.”

    Interviewees felt that most new units built since 2009 have been driven by student demand. As discussed above, nearly all the increase in housing in the last five years has been due to larger multifamily developments, many of which offer only studio, one- and two-bedroom units, least suited to families. Many of the larger apartment buildings in the downtown area are rented mainly by students. Another concern interviewees raised was the increasing number of single-family homes being purchased by investors and converted into student rentals, taking them out of reach for non-student renters and buyers. Outside investors are typically more financially equipped to outcompete local homebuyers and raise sale prices. Additionally, as the 2015 Amherst Housing Market Study found, the bulk of the non-student rental market cannot compete with the ability of student households to pay.80 Landlords have begun charging per bedroom or per occupant, which typically raises rents beyond what families and non-student households can afford.

13. my comments for Oct 6:

    Neighbors, thanks for the chance to speak. I’m Ira Bryck—32-year Amherst resident, former UMass Family Business Center director, and someone who’s written often in the Amherst Indy about how our trajectory threatens the very character of downtown and our neighborhoods.

    Let’s speak plainly: Amherst has barely 13,000 year-round residents bearing most of the civic responsibility while nearly 29,000 come for the academic year, renting, then moving on. That balance is already fragile, and yet most decisions from this council push us further from sustainability. The trend is clear—a shrinking college-aged population nationally. Betting everything on student housing may seem like a quick fix, but it’s shortsighted. If enrollment drops as predicted, we’re stuck with vacancy, instability, and neighborhoods no one else can feasibly live in.

    A group of neighbors has just filed two sensible zoning bylaw changes. We’re simply asking for a one-year pause in multi-unit downtown construction, while we finish the design standards we’ve already been working on for two years, and get a real housing plan that values families, the workforce, and seniors, not just higher rents from students. We also want UMass to step up and house more of its own students, as they should.

    Let’s be honest: this echoes the earlier moratorium petition, with 900 signatures, that the council brushed off, ignoring a clear message from the public. That kind of disregard is why Amherst struggles to recruit candidates and fill committees—people feel their voices don’t matter.

    The council and its boards now skew heavily in favor of unchecked development, often appointing collaborators while sidelining our most qualified, independent neighbors. If we want to be a functioning democracy—especially when democracy itself is under threat nationwide—we have to act locally for transparency and fairness.

    This is not anti-student, nor anti-development. It’s pro-community and pro-balance. If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem—and sadly, at present, the council’s “solution” may be the problem. Please, let’s take this pause, clarify our direction, and prioritize people who choose Amherst as home.

    Thank you.

14. Great comment, Ira. The zoning bylaw requests are coming up at the Town Council meeting on October 6 for any of you who want to submit comments or attend. Here is the link to submit written comments. https://www.amherstma.gov/councilcomments

15. Have you read that Beacon wants to build affordable housing for seniors and families in Amherst? They’re talking about a high percentage – maybe 100% affordable. You’re going to stop this.

    Hampshire college is trying to sell village center land near Applewood. This stops progress there too. Life long learning potential for Hampshire. Like the impressive Veridian Village would have provided. Stopped.

    You talk about the evil developers but you’re talking about your friends and neighbors, and the jobs of the people who keep your world functioning: Your plumbers and electricians and contractors, shop owners… the townies who have lived here for generations whose parents and grandparents have done this for centuries. People who make a living with their hands and invest their blood and sweat into making something better for their kids and their town. We are your friends and your neighbors. We are not the enemy. Student behavior is the enemy. Why are you ambushing us instead of having conversations with us? And with UMass.

    It’s fascinating the disconnect between people who think and teach for a living and people who work with their hands, who build, create, own stores, try to make a living with the only economy this town has left – the student economy.

    This town went from farms and factories and making products like shoes and hats and planers, to today basically turning caterpillars into butterflies – we take young immature kids and we help them reach their potential. We graduate the next generation. Let’s get real. The problem isn’t the buildings or the investors or the free market, it’s student behavior. So why don’t we ask UMass to focus on that? Why don’t we have higher standards for that?

16. Corrections: Veridian Village was approved by the planning board but never built. A great proposal, but ahead of its time. The intended buyers weren’t yet ready to consider retirement options.

    Ms Jones is promoting a good projects for the wrong locations. Great for her shops but not her neighbors. There is no sewer connection, no sidewalk, problematic pedestrian connections to Cowls Road, traffic pileups even at 10a.m. And backups are worse after 3p.m. . . . Robin Jaffin cited them all.

    https://www.amherstindy.org/2025/09/12/opinion-mitchell-farm-the-wrong-site-for-the-right-goal/

    Most important, we don’t even know how much more population density our water, sewer, roads, et alia can support. I could support a considerably modified proposal IF all affordable units —100%—were limited to people who live or work in Amherst. There is no reason I can imagine that my taxes should support affordable housing particularly for residents of our abutting Franklin County towns who have not met their 10% obligation.

    Lastly, let’s find out NOT how much housing we need, BUT how much we can afford to build so we don’t lose more homeowners to lower tax locations. When and how can we balance the need for housing for people who live and work here with the cost to provide the required services and infrastructure? When can we consider the town is built out?

    Cinda, it has very little to do with students! It’s about my need to continue living my remaining few years in my own home of 51 years in the Outlying Residential Zone in peace and solitude without looking out my windows at an “Empire State” building across the hay field 200 feet to the south.

17. Amherst and Hadley are developing in ways that, while logical on paper, risk creating an unhealthy imbalance across our neighboring towns. The same developer now building large senior communities in Hadley is also behind private student dorm projects in Amherst—yet isn’t building any senior housing here, despite strong community interest. Meanwhile, Hadley officials welcome senior housing but make clear they don’t want student developments. The result is an informal zoning of Hadley for seniors and Amherst for students.

    This isn’t about being anti-development. It’s about balance. Amherst deserves thoughtful community planning that welcomes a genuine mix of people—students, seniors, year-round residents, young families, returning alumni, and faculty. A well-balanced Amherst would strengthen the town’s economy, sustain local businesses, and maintain the diversity that makes this place unique.

    Encouraging a range of housing and development types within Amherst would not only create a more resilient and connected town but would also mean real opportunities for builders, contractors, and other trades. Planning with balance in mind benefits everyone—helping both towns grow in ways that reflect their shared values and mutual well-being, rather than reinforcing a divide that serves neither community in the long run.

18. Cinda, I appreciate all the hard work you are doing to fill North Square with local businesses. I love Furtura Coffee and am heading to Provisions today for some cured meats. I also hear you about poor behavior of some students in residential neighborhoods and that impacts the viability of the neighborhoods. Long-term year-round residents provide both stability and a lot of civic strength and we have fewer and fewer of them. Will we watch this go on and on? On the two projects you talked about, local residents have come to me wondering why the developers are not following the zoning and wetlands requirements. It’s a good question. Harrison Street Partners and Archipelago would not face neighborhood pushback if their proposed project was 3 stories as required by the zoning bylaw and complied with wetlands law. (Their track record on filling commercial space is dismal.) Make the project smaller and move it over. Beacon’s senior housing proposed project on Mitchell Farm is on land that is not zoned for a project of this size. Why doesn’t Beacon propose its project in a zoning district that allows it? Where does the expectation come from these developers don’t have to follow the zoning bylaw or wetlands laws?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.