WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Planning Board on Tuesday discussed developing bylaw amendment proposals to allow "cottage court" development, facilitate mixed-use residential and commercial properties and create a limited path for manufactured homes on residential lots.

 

The manufactured home issue came to the board in the form of a proposal from Chair Peter Beck, who suggested that rather than allowing manufactured housing by right on any residential property the town could allow manufactured homes as accessible dwelling units to existing homes.

 

Beck framed the idea as a compromise from the bylaw the board advanced to the 2023 annual town meeting, where a majority of attendees favored allowing manufactured homes by right but the amendment failed to achieve the two-thirds majority needed for passage.

 

The bulk of the board's agenda was consumed by presentations from members Kenneth Kuttner and Cory Cambpell on cottage courts and mixed-use development, respectively.

 

Kuttner expanded on research that he and Roger Lawrence have done on the cottage court concept and steered the conversation toward elements the board might want to include in a potential bylaw to allow developments of smaller, higher-density single family dwellings.

 

"A typical cottage court layout is going to have small structures, by definition, closely spaced with small yards," Kuttner said. "But one of the distinguishing features of cottage court as opposed to other small-lot modes, is they're designed to be facing a common area — a little communal space that facilitates interaction among residents.

 

"Another key element of all cottage court designs I've seen is that off-street parking is available but screened from the street, so you don't see cars parked out front. Some, but not all, have a community building as part of the cottage court."

 

Kuttner looked at Cottage Housing Development bylaws in other communities and identified some of the decision points the board will have to consider, like the minimum square footage for the courts, the maximum density per acre, the maximum pervious surface area and design elements like whether municipalities regulate height, roof pitch and the presence or absence of porches.

 

"You see a lot of these cottage court developments, and the vast majority of them have these distinctive porches," Kuttner said. "Some of the developers feel these porches are really a big deal, as they create a community atmosphere facing the common area."

 

As for density, some of the examples in Kuttner's data set specified maximums ranging from 11.6 units per acre up to 17.4 units per acre.

 

"We're all talking about affordability," Lawrence said. "Many people in Williamstown see it as an issue for us. One of the advantages we look at with Cottage Housing Developments is affordability. The affordability aspect of it is not dependent on lowering the [construction] cost per square foot, as it is with manufactured housing. CHDs do not cost less per square foot. They achieve affordability because there are fewer square feet, and they're cheaper because we're permitting smaller lots so land acquisition cost is lower."

 

The board briefly discussed whether a cottage court bylaw would need a separate change to the town code to permit so-called "tiny homes," which are a potential housing type for the CHD model. But it was pointed out that the town code may not need amendment to allow the tiny homes as state law prohibits municipalities from regulating square footage for single family homes.

 

Lawrence said he and Kuttner would work to put together a draft CHD bylaw for the full board to begin considering at its September meeting.

 

Campbell took the lead on the top of mixed-use development and noted that while "upzoning" proposals in the town's residential zones (reducing lot size minimums, for example) have met with opposition from residents, the town's existing commercial zones have potential to accommodate more residences attached to commercial properties.

 

"If Williamstown is to grow economically, then it will need to grow somehow and somewhere," Campbell said. "Put simply, I believe it's better to build up than to build out, and the best places to do this are in the Village Business, Limited Business and Planned Business use zones.

 

"If I'm up on Pine Cobble or Mount Greylock and looking down [on the town], I'd rather see a small cluster of tall buildings than see the whole valley with mushroomed housing on it."

 

Campbell identified a number of provisions in the current code that are potential constraints on mixed-use development, including the maximum building height, maximum number of floors and the minimum number of square feet per housing unit.

 

Among the potential remedies he suggested were increasing maximum heights in the commercial zones or creating overlay districts within the existing business zones.

 

Campbell's colleagues encouraged him to continue looking at such solutions and told him to work with Community Development Director Andrew Groff to look at what bylaw amendments might make sense to propose to a future town meeting.

 

The board also agreed that Beck should look into a bylaw that would allow manufactured homes as ADUs on a residential lot, a strategy that he characterized as a "fallback position" after the board's unsuccessful effort in the spring to convince town meeting to allow that housing more generally.

 

"I know there's an argument about how much manufactured homes do or do not build up equity," Beck said. "Assuming for a moment that they do not, allowing them only as ADUs would respond to that argument. At that point, you still have a primary dwelling. Anyone putting up a manufactured home as an ADU already has a site-built home building up equity in town. It squarely addresses the idea that [manufactured homes] would be disadvantageous to folks moving to town.

 

"At the same time, it's a super limited way to test the concept of manufactured housing in town."

 

Beck said the change, which could be made as a modification to the existing ADU bylaw, would address the concerns of the town's farming community, which, through the Agricultural Commission, supported the manufactured housing bylaw that failed in May.

 

"They'd be able to keep extended family in the area and create employee housing … on a much more limited basis than with a general manufactured housing bylaw," Beck said.

 

The majority of the board told Beck to continue looking at the idea.

 

Kuttner said it would be "paternalistic" for the town to perpetuate a bylaw that prohibits housing out of a desire to protect potential buyers from bad investments.

 

Campbell agreed.

 

"It's up to the potential owner to make a decision on whether that's a wise investment on their part," Campbell said. "Even if the value deteriorates … it's a place where someone is actually able to live and raise their kids, at least for a generation. That has value. It has value for that family, and it has value for the community.

 

"I'm in favor of this."

 

Not everyone in town is. And, not surprisingly, the issue of manufactured homes more generally continues to generate feedback for the Planning Board.

 

Real estate agent Paul Harsch again spoke during the board's public comment period and promised the planners that he had more data to share at future meetings to bolster his opposition to the idea of allowing manufactured homes.

 

Lawrence read aloud a letter the board received from former Planning Board member Alexander Carlisle, who referred to manufactured homes as a "poverty trap."

 

"Potential home owners are lured by the chance for a lower entry level to home ownership, but will pay a higher financing rate over a shorter term, do not build equity, and after 30-50 years end up with an unsaleable home, or one worth substantially less than what was paid for the home to start with," Carlisle wrote in a two-page letter available on the town's website. "An additional, and often ignored problem is the cost of removal and disposal of the home at the end of its life."

 

Lawrence, who said he promised to read the letter on Carlisle's behalf, said there are portions to agree with and portions to dispute but, on balance, he disagreed with Carlisle on the manufactured home question.

 

So did Carin DeMayo-Wall, who made an unsuccessful run for Planning Board herself in 2022 and was drawn into the manufactured housing question this summer when Harsch invoked her father's name during his argument against allowing the housing type.

 

"[Richard DeMayo] didn't exclude pre-fab, manufactured, modular or anything, as long as safety standards were met," DeMayo-Wall said. "That was key. He was an electrician by trade. He was meticulous.

 

"My father definitely influenced my values and my views. And I don't believe that it's our place to dictate and protect those of lesser means from a housing type that some deem as not holding value or, what I think is a bigger issue in this town, that they're not aesthetically pleasing."

 

In other business on Tuesday, the Planning Board learned that the owner of Sweetwood Independent Living Community was not yet ready to present a draft bylaw to the board but still was holding out hope that it could work with the panel on a bylaw that would be ready for, potentially, a special town meeting between now and the annual town meeting in May 2024.