[Massplanners] [EXTERNAL]RE: [EXTERNAL]Mandatory Mixed Use - 3A Zoning Question

Wed Jul 17 08:16:18 EDT 2024

Kate Kennen worked wonders for us in Dennis Port when the discussion
between the traditional 2 story commercial limitation and 3 story proposed
by the Economic Development Committee (35 feet versus 42 feet height).
Looks like she is at Northeastern U now. Maybe a fall class project?
https://camd.northeastern.edu/people/kate-kennen/

Daniel Fortier, AICP
 Retired Planner

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024, 6:42 AM Ryan, Christopher <cryan at belmont-ma.gov>
wrote:

> Thanks Dan, always appreciate your thoughts. After last night’s Planning
> Board meeting, I do not see them budging on limiting to three story height
> but would not be surprised by a floor amendment for an additional story at
> Town Meeting. It’s just one of many examples of trying to render this or
> that subdistrict either infeasible or paper compliant here in Belmont. But
> there’s a strong pushback against that too so there’s still hope.
>
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> *From:* daniel.j.fortier at gmail.com <daniel.j.fortier at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2024 4:46 PM
> *To:* 'Amy Dain' <dainresearch at gmail.com>; Ryan, Christopher <
> cryan at belmont-ma.gov>
> *Cc:* 'Mass Planners' <massplanners at masscptc.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL]RE: [Massplanners] [EXTERNAL]Mandatory Mixed Use -
> 3A Zoning Question
>
>
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> Old retiree here, going to follow up on Amy and Bill’s comments, probably
> with stories, apologize in advance.
>
>
>
> Market is everything, but financing trends also throw a monkey wrench in
> the equation at times as well. Going back to 2006 or so, had a commercial
> project, proposed with plenty of extra height and vacant attic space to be
> above 9,000 sf of commercial space. I had just had a talk with two local
> banks who were noting that commercial vacancy rates were climbing and they
> were afraid to lend to commercial projects without more rental housing
> being built. The Dennis Affordable Housing By-law was drafted to promote
> top of the shop housing, which the banks wanted to help us promote. Project
> got approved as 100% commercial even after I had advised the developer to
> consider second story housing. As his permit neared lapsing he came back to
> tell me I was right, he applied for the same building, with 8 rental units
> above. He had all 8 units rented before he had a single commercial tenant.
> Lesson, if there is no housing for employees, commercial floor space makes
> no sense and banks won’t provide funding. The follow-up, after he could
> only get two commercial units leased, and one skipped town sticking Subway
> with a franchisee mess, he came back and converted the entire building to
> residential, 18 units, under a different provision of the affordable
> housing by-law.
>
>
>
> Obviously, in 2008 we had the financial collapse. Markets had to readjust.
> As we were working on a proposal that never got beyond the Economic
> Development Committee, the financial picture had changed. Banks were having
> even more difficulty justifying commercial loans with the amount of vacant
> commercial space. This was well before COVID. As we tried to craft a
> “mandatory’ mixed use district it became clear that we needed to be careful
> in the approach. The ultimate decision was for a Planned Unit Development
> approach to the entire district. If the three major land owners, all who
> were working with us, could get together and file a single master plan for
> the district (roads, utilities, greenways, approximate building footprints
> and architectural concepts) then they could construct based upon market
> demands and financing considerations, as long as the PUD was built out to
> not exceed the floorspace maximums for each type of use in the district.
> This was probably around 2015 or 2016, at that point a couple federal
> entities backing loans were not supporting loans to mixed use buildings for
> fear that vacant commercial space could harm the financial viability of a
> residential structure.
>
>
>
> On this topic, I had provided my committee with a few business journal
> articles highlighting the evolving financing situation. Since we were
> zoning for an area that last had any real change in zoning in 1973 (which
> really just locked into place the approach for the area that dated back to
> the 1950’s) we figured that what we zoned had to adjust to market and
> financial approaches that might be in place long after we were all gone.
>
>
>
> Finally, in Dennis Port and West Dennis, which have 3 story in the core,
> we only insisted that the frontage that faced Main Street (Route 28) be
> commercial, allowing residential to possibly include the ground floor
> behind the store fronts or fully residential elsewhere in the district.
>
>
>
> I know none of these are in MBTA communities, but, all have built in
> flexibility to adjust to market conditions.
>
>
>
> Dan Fortier, AICP
>
> Retired Planner
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> *On Behalf Of *Amy
> Dain via MassPlanners
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2024 3:12 PM
> *To:* Ryan, Christopher <cryan at belmont-ma.gov>
> *Cc:* Mass Planners <massplanners at masscptc.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Massplanners] [EXTERNAL]Mandatory Mixed Use - 3A Zoning
> Question
>
>
>
> One thing I heard from a mixed-use developer recently who has been working
> in an area with a strong market for street-level retail is that the zoning
> for mixed use typically goes where there already is existing retail that
> has value... and owners don't find, very often, that there is enough new
> value created with a 3-story limit, to take on the costs and risks of
> redevelopment, including tearing down existing buildings that now generate
> revenue. He said that once you get to four stories or more, the financial
> rewards of redevelopment start to entice owners to do this. This is a
> slightly different framing from the question of whether 3-story mixed use
> is financially feasible. In this telling, it might be "feasible" but you
> won't see much redevelopment and gain much housing with a three-story
> limit. I guess this is a hypothesis to interrogate as you discuss this
> question with mixed-use developers.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 3:26 PM Ryan, Christopher via MassPlanners <
> massplanners at masscptc.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks, will do.
>
>
>
> One issue has been the assertion that at some point, the market will
> change and 3 stories will be feasible again…..maybe, maybe not.
>
>
>
> So logically, we zone for a desired outcome, not a market condition. But
> who knows if the state might balk at 3 story MMU based on development
> feasibility. I wonder if they’ve had the opportunity to evaluate this as
> yet.
>
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> *From:* Richard McCarthy <rmccarthy at norfolk.ma.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2024 2:01 PM
> *To:* Ryan, Christopher <cryan at belmont-ma.gov>
> *Cc:* Mass Planners <massplanners at masscptc.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL]Mandatory Mixed Use - 3A Zoning Question
>
>
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> Chris,
>
>
>
> It’s a challenging question to answer.  I’m sure you know there are so
> many variables in doing mixed use.   We struggle with the same questions
> here. I remember 3 years ago when we working on increasing building height
> from 2 ½ stories to  3 stories people were very concerned.  We have a great
> mixed use building in town center that is 2 ½ stories that is fully
> occupied. We explained how that project at 2 ½ stories was pretty unique
> in that that a local bank owned the property received site plan approval
> couldn’t afford to build a standalone bank. The bank partnered bank with a
> local developer to build a mixed use building which they are a tenant with
> other tenants.
>
>
>
> We are tackling this topic again if I have anything I will share.
>
>
>
> Please share what you have.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Richard J. McCarthy, Jr.
>
> Town Planner
>
> 1 Liberty Lane
>
> Norfolk, MA 02056
>
> 508-440-2807
>
> Office Hours- Monday through Thursday 9am to 6pm
>
> Closed Fridays
>
>
>
> *As a reminder, please do not reply all to this email. If you have any
> questions or comments, email me directly. *
>
>
>
> *Please be advised that the Secretary of State has determined that e-mail
> sent by or received by municipal employees is a public record.*
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> *On Behalf Of *Ryan,
> Christopher via MassPlanners
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2024 10:55 AM
> *To:* massplanners at masscptc.org
> *Subject:* [Massplanners] Mandatory Mixed Use - 3A Zoning Question
>
>
>
> Good morning planners
>
>
>
> I am having a lot of trouble finding resources to verify an assumption
> that mixed use buildings are generally not viable at 3 stories and require
> at least 3 stories of residential in addition to the ground floor
> commercial to be feasible to develop in the current market. We’ve been
> counseled on this by several consultants but have not been able to find any
> journal articles, newspaper pieces, memos, white papers, or anything else
> that definitively provides evidence for this.
>
>
>
> Since we are seeking to establish a mandatory mixed use zoning subdistrict
> in Belmont, we’d like to be able to provide information to our citizens who
> are skeptical about this assumption and would rather we limit MMU to 3
> stories total. Does anyone have information which could help us with our
> outreach for this provision?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> Chris R.
>
>
>
> ====================================================
>
> *Christopher J. Ryan, AICP, Ph.D.*
>
> Director of Planning & Building
>
> Town of Belmont
>
> 19 Moore Street
>
> Belmont, MA 02478-0900
>
> Tel: 617.993.2658
>
> Email: cryan at belmont-ma.gov
>
> Web: https://www.belmont-ma.gov/office-of-planning-building
>
> ===================================================
>
>
>
> --
> MassPlanners mailing list
> MassPlanners at masscptc.org
> http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://masscptc.org/pipermail/massplanners_masscptc.org/attachments/20240717/3574dbe4/attachment.htm>