The central aspect of the proposed amendment is to enable the issuance of special permits for historic preservation across all zoning districts. The proposal, initially excluding industrial areas, now includes them to encourage the rehabilitation of vacant mill buildings into residential spaces, following feedback from the Historical Commission.

One specific project discussed was the historic property on Central Street, formerly a convent for Sacred Heart Church. Chair City Church, which recently acquired the building, plans to establish a community-focused café on the first floor, offering high-end beverages and pastries. This initiative aims to foster community engagement without directly competing with nearby businesses. Additionally, the church intends to use the basement for human services programs and the upper floors for community spaces, with potential emergency housing on the third floor.

The necessity of the zoning amendment arises from current restrictions in the GR3 district, where the café is not a permitted use, and obtaining a use variance has proven difficult. The amendment seeks to streamline the process, making it more feasible for projects that align with community-oriented goals while preserving the historical character of properties.

Parking and zoning criteria were points of discussion, with the amendment addressing the complexities of accommodating multiple principal uses within a single structure. Current zoning definitions are seen as insufficient for the broad range of mixed-use scenarios proposed. The amendment proposes relief based on historic characteristics, drawing from insights shared at the Citizen Planner Training Collaborative conference.

Concerns about “spot zoning” were addressed, with assurances that the ordinance would include objective criteria for historic structure eligibility, preventing favoritism towards specific properties. The amendment would allow modifications to zoning standards for uses, dimensional variances, and parking, tailored to historic properties’ unique circumstances. The process for granting parking and signage relief, particularly for commercial uses in residential districts, was clarified.

The procedural aspects of managing special permits were explained, with the ZBA handling smaller projects and the planning board overseeing larger developments. This division of responsibilities intends to ensure efficient governance and appropriate oversight based on project scale and implications.

The meeting also covered the application process for special permits, emphasizing that applicants must prove their property’s eligibility to streamline proceedings. If properties are not listed on relevant historical registers, owners would need to seek inclusion through state or local inventories. The Historical Commission’s role in reviewing applications and recommending preservation standards was underscored, with the ZBA relying on their expertise for final decisions.

Preservation easements were a topic of debate, with arguments against mandatory imposition on property owners. Instead, the Historical Commission could recommend easements on a case-by-case basis, allowing for flexibility and fairness in preserving historical structures while accommodating modern uses.