Can A New Overlay District Create Housing That Orleans Needs?

ORLEANS – Imagine a downtown area with an intentional design, where architectural aesthetics such as building footprint, height and roofing all mesh together. 

 That’s the vision behind two zoning amendments that are proposed to go before voters at the Nov. 17 special town meeting. One will seek to create a new downtown housing overlay district, while the other concerns amending language to allow the district’s creation. The planning board on Oct. 2 voted on final versions of both articles for inclusion on the fall town meeting warrant.

 The new overlay district is rooted in “form-based zoning,” which places a sharper focus on building design and character. Prior to the Oct. 2 vote, the planning board held a public hearing on the proposed amendments on Sept. 30 alongside the design firm Utile, which is consulting with the board on the effort.

But the significance of creating the new overlay district goes well beyond aesthetics, officials say. By taking a design-oriented approach to zoning, the town can more readily attract developers to create the housing and businesses that it sorely needs.

“Instead of each project being a one-off, the idea is that eventually your village center will be reconstituted,” said Tim Love of Utile.

The new overlay district would be composed of a village-scale corridor subdistrict and a commercial center subdistrict, each of which would have their own regulations governing building height, footprint, roof form and “facade articulation.”

Buildings in the village-scale subdistrict would be allowed a maximum footprint of 4,000 square feet for primary buildings and 2,000 feet for secondary structures. The maximum building height would be 2.5 stories and 44 feet with a peaked roof. The subdistrict would require buildings to have a half-story pitched roof of no more than 18 feet. Buildings facing the front lot line would be required to have a maximum 35-foot continuous facade, while all other buildings can have a maximum continuous facade of 60 feet. 

In the commercial center subdistrict, buildings would be allowed a maximum footprint of 8,000 square feet. The allowable building height is higher at a maximum of 3.5 stories and 54 total feet, while a half-story pitched roof of up to 18 feet would be allowed. The facade requirements would be the same as in the village-scale corridor, except that front lot-facing buildings would be allowed up to 60 continuous feet of facade. 

At the Sept. 30 hearing, a rendering of property at what is now Post Office Square showed how new construction in the overlay district would look if the district is created. The rendering showed a series of buildings consistent in design and scale along a more walkable, less car-centric Main Street, with public open space, including patios, in between. 

George Meservey, the town’s director of planning and community development, said the form-based approach advocated for in the new overlay district could help bring in more housing for the area’s “missing middle” population, people who earn too much to qualify for affordable housing but not enough to rent or buy at market rate. It also could entice new businesses into the flagging downtown area.

“You need more people living in your village center for the business environment to be better,” he said.

But what if the housing that is created through the new overlay district isn’t available to the people who most need it? That was the concern raised by some at the Sept. 30 hearing who sought assurance that any new housing will go to year-round tenants instead of being rented seasonally. 

“Unfortunately, I fear this is a plan that works well in theory but not in practice,” Orleans resident Walter North said.

Jasmine Valdez, a West Road resident, said she attended a meeting hosted by Housing Assistance Corporation and Cape Cod Young Professionals in September where the struggles by young professionals to find housing in the region was discussed.

“We love downtown Orleans and we want to see the vision of an even more vibrant and walkable downtown realized,” she said. “However, we also recognize that if new residences aren’t limited to year-round housing, Orleans risks following the patterns of other resort towns. Attractive, walkable downtowns full of short-term rentals instead of year-round housing for the people you rely on to staff your restaurants, operate the boutiques and support the economy 12 months a year.”

Alisa Magnotta, chief executive officer of Housing Assistance Corporation, credited the board for putting forth amendments that allow greater density and larger buildings in the name of creating more housing. But she said there should also be stipulations calling for year-round deed restrictions or disallowing units to be rented in the short-term.

“Everything that’s not deed restricted will be a short-term rental, guaranteed,” she said.

Elizabeth Jenkins, the town’s assistant director of planning and community development, said that existing data doesn’t support the willingness of private developers to create the housing the town needs under the current zoning. She said fewer than 10 units have been developed in the private sector since she started working for the town last year. That figure is not on track with the select board’s expressed goal of creating 350 new units of housing over the next decade.

“We are not keeping pace with the housing that we need,” she said.

Orleans resident Tim Brady pressed officials as to how many units they expect might be created through the new overlay district. But Jenkins said it’s hard to provide a hard number.

“That’s the piece that really brothers me,” said Judith Bruce. North, meanwhile, suggested that the proposed amendments be tabled until more analysis is done to figure out how many units the town expects can be created through the new district.

Hearing these concerns, the planning board amended the criteria for the subdistricts to include some guarantee of year-round housing. In the village-scale subdistrict, those include requirements that 10 percent of project units be for tenants who make up to 80 percent of the area median income in Barnstable County, and that 15 percent be for tenants who make up to 200 percent of AMI. Developers who set aside 40 percent of their unit inventory for 200 percent AMI tenants would be allowed to build an extra story, pushing the maximum building height to 3.5 stories. 

The final version voted on Oct. 2 also calls for 75 percent of units to be deed-restricted, with 50 percent of those restricted as year-round units. For developers who allow 40 percent of units for 200 percent AMI, all project units would need to be deed-restricted.  

The same criteria applies to the commercial center subdistrict, except instead of the added building height, developers would be able to nearly double their project’s maximum footprint to 15,000 square feet if they set aside 40 percent of their units for those who make 200 percent of AMI. 

The warrant for the Nov. 17 special town meeting closed Oct. 3.