ARTICLE 10 - PUD AMENDMENTS

As noted below, the Planning Board is again sponsoring a warrant article to amend the Planned Unit Development provision of the Zoning Bylaw. One of the posts below is in "question and answer" format and it addresses most questions that may arise. However, I also wanted to present this map because many have the mistaken impression that the PUD bylaw is for the benefit of a single property. The map above indicates the properties (outlined in blue)that are eligible for a PUD right now (because they meet the minimum size requiremnent of 60,000 square feet, as well as the location requirement). However, ALL of the properties within the Business General and Business Professional zoning districts are potentially eligible if they were to collaborate with their abutters to meet the minimum size requirement. The Planning Board wishes to encourage development under PUD because it provides more flexibility and more Town control. In fact, it allows the type of development that was most preferred by residents who attended two forums sponsored by the Planning Board last year, while the regulations of the Business General and Business Professional district actually prohibit that style because they require a 60 foot front setback which guarantees parking in front of any building.

As is the case with the proposed adaptive use special permit discussed below, there is currently no protection for any historic structures that are in PUD-eligible locations (except for the Clark House, which is eligible for PUD and is within the local historic district and subject to the regulation of the Historic District Commission). One of the express purposes of our PUD is to "preserve historic buildings by providing economically viable uses for them." Thus, PUD adds some protection of historic resources where none is currently in place.

Also, the article last year would have allowed a single retail outlet to be as large as 7500 square feet, excluding storage, kitchen and utility space. The proposal this year is to allow only one retail outlet up to 8000 square feet GROSS (including storage, kitchen mechanical and any other space). Thus, Article 10 is roughly the same as last year's article.

It is important to note that Planned Unit Development is not by right. It is only by special permit from the Planning Board. In order to approve a special permit the Planning Board must find that the project meets certain standards. Among these are the following:

-- "building designs that are complementary in scale and style to those of abutting properties and that are, in general, appropriate for a small New England village;

-- significant public amenities on or off site which may include, but are not limited to the following: landscaped open area with walkways, benches, fountains, monuments, and/or other features; bike racks and/or separate bicycle access; hitching posts and/or separate horse access; drinking fountains; awnings or pavilions; or other suitable amenity;

-- pedestrian linkage(s) with abutting properties that is (are) well defined and of a design and quality that will encourage significant use;

-- vehicular linkage with abutting properties.

These are in addition to the dimensional requirements that must be met. Also, among the submittal requirements in the application is a written statement comparing the effect of the proposed PUD to a conventional development that could be built on the parcel in terms of expected impact on tax base; town services; traffic; wetlands; groundwater; views from public ways and lands; historic structures; recreational wildlife, agricultural and forestry uses of land, and other relevant and applicable subjects.

These standards are already in the PUD bylaw. The only changes that Article 10 would make are to allow ONE retail outlet to be up to 8000 gross square feet and to allow residences to be part of a PUD project.

Please feel free to contact the Planning Board office at 508-651-7855 if you have any questions about Article 9 or 10.

ARTICLE 9 - ADAPTIVE USE SPECIAL PERMIT

At the request of affected property owners, the Planning Board is sponsoring an article that would allow, by special permit only, limited business uses in two properties (36 and 32-34 North Main Street - see map) with certain conditions. Among the conditions are that at least one residence must be maintained on the property and very limited building alterations will be allowed. The regulations of the Sherborn Historic District Commission will be used as a guide, though not strictly applied. The only business uses allowed would be professional offices, design studios and retail sales of art, handcrafted merchandise or antiques.

Some have argued that it would not be fair to allow something for these residential properties that is not allowed for others in the Residence districts. There is a big difference. These two properties are unique in that they are the ONLY residential properties on North Main Street whose frontage is directly across the street from the Business General district. One principle of zoning is that a street should be a spine and not a border between 2 zoning districts.

It has also been suggested that current zoning already allows offices in these properties with a special permit from the Board of Appeals. That is true except the current opportunity is very limited. First, under current rules, ZBA can only grant a special permit for a professional use if the professional lives on the premises. However, there is more to it than that. It is a very limited use under the current rules. For example:

(1) The professional use must be "clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the premises for residential purposes." Article 9 would not have this requirement. Using an entire first floor for professional use would clearly not be incidental and secondary.

(2) Only 1 person other than a resident can be employed, and no more than 1 member of the public may be served at a time under current rules, unless the ZBA grants permission for more. Article 9 would not have this restriction. It is likely that there would be more than a single employee and more than a single member of the public served at a time if an entire first floor were used for professional purposes.

(3) There could be no retail sales under current rules. Article 9 would allow limited retail sales of handcrafted merchandise, art works or antiques.

As stated above, these properties are unique due to their location. They are also historic buildings. There are currently no protections in place to preserve these buildings. This bylaw adds some protection by both providing economically viable uses and by requiring that the any adaptive use project "shall include restoration, renovation or improvement of the primary existing building(s) to maintain, restore or enhance the building's original integrity."

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT

This year, the Planning Board is again sponsoring an article to amend the existing Planned Unit Development provision of the Zoning Bylaw. The article proposed represents modest changes from articles proposed last year that received strong majority votes in favor, but short of the 2/3 required.Many questions have arisen about both the article itself and Planned Unit Development in general. In an attempt to answer some of those questions, the Planning Board has prepared the following:


What is a Planned Unit Development (PUD) – The Planned Unit Development provision of our Zoning Bylaw was adopted in 1998 in order to allow for more flexible commercial development but with more Town control than is provided by the business district rules. It also allows up to 75% of a development to consist of abutting land that is zoned residential. It is by special permit only and allows more flexibility in siting buildings but requires more aesthetic sensitivity as well as public amenities, and has more limits on what can be built than the business districts allow. To qualify, properties must have at least 60,000 square feet.

In what way does the PUD provide more Town control? – First, all of the standards for site plan review and approval for development in the business districts are also applicable to PUD’s, plus more. The applicant must submit a statement comparing the effects of a PUD to a conventional development in terms of the impacts on the tax base; town services; traffic; wetlands; groundwater; views from public ways and lands; historic structures; recreational, wildlife, agricultural and forestry uses of land; and other relevant and applicable requirements. Second, the Planning Board must determine that the PUD “will not result in a detrimental impact to the neighborhood or the Town and that it meets the design and linkage (with neighboring properties) requirements and includes significant public amenities. Finally, as a special permit, the Planning Board has wide discretion as to whether or not it approves a PUD.

Why is the Planning Board proposing to change the bylaw? – The existing PUD bylaw limits retail outlets to a maximum of 2500 square feet (excluding kitchen, storage and mechanical space). Our survey of residents in 2008 indicated strong support for a small market up to 7500 ft2. Also a recent market study indicated that Sherborn could support a market of 6000-8000 ft2. Therefore, we propose to increase the maximum size of just one retail outlet to 8000 square feet (gross).

Is that the only change? – No. The current PUD bylaw does not directly allow residences to be included. Our survey of residents did not indicate strong support for residences in the Town Center, but the survey did not address mixed uses. Mixed uses are consistent with Smart Growth/Smart Energy and sustainable development principles, and residences add vitality to a Town Center. Therefore, we are also proposing to allow residences to be included in a PUD, but limited to 50% of the total area of a PUD development, and with the requirement that at least 10% be affordable if 10 or more are included in the project.

Will this article expand the business district, contrary to the General Plan? – No. The business district boundaries will not change. The PUD bylaw, if viewed as an extension of the business district, was already in place when the General Plan was adopted. Responders to the 2008 survey indicated some acceptance of the idea of making better use of what was already business zoned. This article only allows a single retail outlet to increase and provides for residences within a PUD. It does not change where a PUD could be built.

Is the PUD intended to benefit a single property? – Absolutely not. Right now five properties in the Town Center could qualify for a PUD (plus 2 other properties – the Citgo station on South Main and Sunshine Farm on Kendall Avenue). Potentially, all properties within the Business General and Business Professional districts could qualify if the owners of abutting properties worked together to meet the minimum 60,000 square feet of area.

Could a retail outlet of 8000 square feet be built currently in the Business General district? – Yes. The only size limit in the business districts is that building footprints cannot exceed one-third of the lot, and the height cannot exceed 35 feet. Six of 11 parcels are more than an acre in size. Thus, they could each host buildings with footprints of 15,000 square feet or more.

What is the point of Article 10 if an 8000 square foot building can already be built in the Business General district? – The point is that PUD results in a preferred style of development with more flexibility but more Town control. For example, the preferred style of development that was favored by the people who attended the two forums held by the Planning Board last year is actually prohibited by the Business General district because it requires a 60-foot setback which guarantees an auto-oriented development with parking in front of the building. By contrast, the PUD bylaw allows for a 20-foot setback and includes the following requirements:

· building designs that are complementary in scale and style to those of abutting properties and that are, in general, appropriate for a small New England village;

· significant public amenities on or off site which may include, but are not limited to the following: landscaped open area with walkways, benches, fountains, monuments, and/or other features; bike racks and/or separate bicycle access; hitching posts and/or separate horse access; drinking fountains; awnings or pavilions; or other suitable amenity;

· pedestrian linkage(s) with abutting properties that is (are) well defined and of a design and quality that will encourage significant use;

· vehicular linkage with abutting properties.

PUD would allow parking to be in the back of buildings, requires appropriate building designs and requires public amenities, all of which will result in a more attractive and more pedestrian-friendly streetscape.

Will the proposed PUD amendments threaten historic structures and the character of our Town Center? – No. In fact the purposes of the PUD, stated right in the bylaw, include to “preserve historic buildings by providing economically viable uses for them” and to “perpetuate and enhance the appearance of Sherborn’s traditional small town New England center.” Other purposes include greater integration of land uses and promoting better building location and overall site planning than is possible under the Business General district.

Why is Article 10 needed when we already have business vacancies in the Town Center? – This is a forward-looking measure that we hope to have in place prior to the next upswing in the economic cycle.

How will these amendments affect well and septic requirements? – These amendments will have no effect on well and septic requirements. Any new development will still need to meet Board of Health regulations, as well as any other requirements of the Board of Appeals, Conservation Commission, Planning Board, etc.

What will be the impact on traffic? – According to the latest MassHighway traffic counts, about 27,000 vehicles per day pass through the Town Center. Any new development (whether PUD or not) would have to conduct a traffic study to determine its impacts and recommend measures to mitigate those impacts. However, if we assume a project of 20,000 square feet of retail space and 20,000 square feet of residential space (20 1000 ft2, residences) such a project would require about 100 parking spaces for the retail space and 30-40 for the residential units. Assuming that the retail spaces were full all day and turned over 5 times each, that would add 500 trips to the 27,000. Considering that the spaces would not likely be full all day and that many of those using them would be either residents who already make those trips or commuters who are passing by anyway, it can be estimated that the impact on traffic would not be significant. The residential units might add another 150 trips, which, again would not be significant.

What is the fiscal impact of Article 10? – That would depend entirely on whatever is ultimately built. Using the same example as above, based on estimated assessed values and the current tax rate, it would generate approximately $81,000 to $109,000 in new tax revenue. Depending on the size and type of residences built (and the special permit process would give the Town considerable control over this), the residences would not likely result in the number of children that single family houses would, but in any case the Town would be required to provide services to the new development that would offset the revenue to some degree.