CMRPC staff members developed a Central Massachusetts Model Village District Bylaw after interest in developing and implementing village district-related zoning was brought forth by seven (7) of our member communities (the participating communities are/were: Auburn, Dudley, Grafton, Holden, Millville, Upton, and West Boylston). The development of our Model began by review of existing models, including the existing State Model Village Bylaw, and examples of village-based zoning that have been implemented across the Commonwealth. CMRPC convened a March 30, 2015 Village District Bylaw Initiative Kick-off Meeting / Workshop that included attendance of representatives from five of our communities, and a team of technical experts who volunteered their time. CMRPC would like to thank all those involved in the development of the Central Massachusetts Model Village District Bylaw, and especially CMRPC’s Physical Development Committee who provided funding through the District Local Technical Assistance (DLTA) program.

 

New England Villages, including those in Central Massachusetts, were traditionally settlements based on a pattern of higher density and a mixture of commercial/residential/institutional land uses compared to the surrounding countryside. However, separation of land uses seemed to become more prominent with the implementation of Euclidian zoning that occurred in most Massachusetts communities initially starting after the 1926 Euclid v. Ambler United States Supreme Court case, but seemed to emerge especially after World War II. The United States then established a new untested model for town development based on the car and zoned our communities according to this model in favor of the time tested elements that had previously allowed our villages to grow and thrive organically to meet market and living conditions. Suburbanization that occurred after World War II and implementation of large lot zoning have, in many communities that have not adopted village-specific zoning, impacted the development of new mixed use village areas. Another impact of Euclidian zoning can be seen in how existing villages are now nonconforming in either use and/or dimensional criteria (Stoneville Village in Auburn is one such example in that no retail business and consumer service uses are allowed under current zoning, but there are a handful of such uses that exist in this former Mill village).

 

CMRPC convened a March 30, 2015 Village District Bylaw Initiative Kick-off Meeting / Workshop that included attendance of representative of five (5) of seven (7) of our participating communities who were interested in participating in this initiative and a team of technical experts who volunteered their time (eight such experts attended with five others who provided their input either via telephone or email communication).  The meeting notes from the workshop have been provided as Appendix A to the Model Village District Bylaw along with a list of the participants.  Based on the input CMRPC received at the Workshop, we believe that a goal for communities to consider is to make as many projects and uses as-of-right as feasible (see section 4.0 of the Model Bylaw for the discussion of allowed uses). The opening visualization/visioning process for each village zoning development initiative is a good place to start addressing this consideration. Requiring any Special Permits in the Village District zone, whether a base or overlay zoning district, for any uses that seem reasonable in good faith for village development, can present an extra obstacle. This is especially true for uses that are being undertaken in existing built spaces and where an overlay district makes village development optional.

 

In addition, the Village Zoning Workshop participants noted their support for a streamlined approach for site plan review in cases of change of use within existing structures.  The idea is to allow for a simplified review and approval process at the Planning Board or the administrative (Building Commissioner/Zoning Enforcement Officer) level if the allowed use is an as-of-right use, there is no change in use category (i.e. retail, office, industrial, residential, civic), and all dimensional requirements are met. The towns of Concord and Ashburnham provide examples of this approach and their provisions are included as Appendix B.

 

 

After preparing Draft Version 1.0 Central Massachusetts Model Village District Bylaw we circulated it to our member communities and the peer experts.    Based on comments received from their review, along with comments we received at various Planning Board presentations and village site walks, led to us preparing this current version identified as “Draft Version 2.2 for Distribution to Participating towns and MassPlanners List Serve for Comments.” It includes the Model Bylaw and the following appendices: