Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Changes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board debates easing two-family review and trimming URB side setbacks
Summary
City planners discussed draft zoning amendments to exempt many two-family units from site-plan review (maintaining a special-permit threshold for large units) and to reduce Urban Residential B side-yard setbacks (options discussed included 12 feet or matching URC at 10 feet); board asked for visual examples and outreach to councilors.
At its Jan. 22 meeting the Northampton Planning Board reviewed draft zoning changes that would (1) exempt many two-family homes from site-plan review outside a higher-size special-permit threshold and (2) reduce side-yard setbacks in the Urban Residential B (URB) district.
Planning staff presented a draft that would allow two-family units "by right" up to a special-permit threshold retained for units larger than about 1,800 square feet; the draft also preserves an incentive for smaller "half-scale" units (defined in the draft as 800 square feet or less) in the B and C districts, with up to four allowed in some configurations. Staff and members identified a drafting oversight concerning placement of the half-scale language across the document and asked staff to correct the text to mirror the allowance consistently.
Board members debated the policy trade-offs. Proponents said removing routine site-plan review for modest two-family projects would reduce time and cost barriers for homeowners seeking an additional unit. Several members raised concerns that lowering setbacks from 15 feet to 12 feet (or to 10 feet to match URC) could change neighborhood character, squeeze side yards and porches, and make tall duplexes feel imposing. One member suggested pairing any setback reduction with stronger contiguous open-space requirements to preserve usable yards.
Members asked staff to prepare visual renderings and maps showing existing A/B/C district lot patterns and examples of infill at the proposed setback distances. Staff said the next steps would be to revise draft language (including the half-scale-unit wording), consult councilors representing affected neighborhoods, and present visuals and possible trade-off options — such as increasing open-space minimums if setbacks are reduced — at a future meeting or joint hearing with councilors.
No formal vote was taken; the board left the proposals under consideration and asked staff to return with revised wording, maps, and illustrative examples.
