Re: Need Zoning Law Expertise
From: Joanie Connors (jvcphdgmail.com)
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 06:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
Are you going to be defined as condos legally? I think that would offer
some protection for the city, to have condos in your combined size as
opposed to any living units because condos also have common areas.
In addition to the playspace and common room, what about greenspace? Will
there be any possible? The ugliest apartment buildings I know of are those
that lack green space. Perhaps some can be mandated.
Be sure the city mandates building maximum height, as overeager builders
will sometimes build up to gain more floorspace and therefore blot out
views and sunshine to neighbors.


On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 7:34 AM Philip Dowds via Cohousing-L <
cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org> wrote:

> Ellis —
>
> Congratulations:  You have just raised about the most interesting question
> I’ve seen in years on Coho_L.  I am not an attorney, and cannot provide
> legal advice to anyone.  But I do have solid, practical working knowledge
> of local zoning, the development process, and cohousing — so I will offer
> you some suggestions you might want to take back to your allies in the
> small city:
>
> (1) SIZE MATTERS.  I’m pretty sure most of us would agree that two
> households is too small to be cohousing, and that we’re unaware of any
> functional cohousing at the size of two hundred households.  Somewhere in
> between, we find the size range of cohousing that’s likely to work.  I
> suggest that 15 to 40 dwelling units is the appropriate size range.
> Obviously, there’s room for debate here — but the point is that your zoning
> definition of cohousing should include some size parameters.
>
> (2) MINIMUM INDOOR AMENITY HELD IN COMMON.  I don’t think we want to bog
> down in details, like cohousing must include at least two guest rooms or a
> kids’ playspace of at 200 sq ft.  No.  But I do think it’s appropriate to
> set a minimum target of X hundred sq ft for indoor common “habitable” sq
> ft, exclusive of stairs and corridors, per each dwelling unit.  I leave it
> to you to research what “X” you want to recommend.  Note that “habitable”
> has a specific, legal, building code meaning, and prevents the developer
> from counting basement boiler rooms or storage compartments as part of the
> common indoor amenity.
>
> (3) GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE.  Mass Chapter 183A provides two things of
> interest here: (1) The developer controls the project and community until
> sales exceed 50% — at which point, control transfers over to the unit
> owners, even when the developer still has many units to sell.  And (2) the
> elected Managing Board is a critical and essential feature of a condo
> association; it is where the buck stops, and is not optional.  BUT AND
> HOWEVER, there is still wiggle room room in how the transition and the
> management evolve or stabilize over time.  The draft bylaws of the
> developer — which apply as soon as property ownership tips over 50% to the
> buyers — can emphasize that plenary (the big meeting of everybody, as
> preferred by some communities) controls everything until and unless the
> stability and integrity of the property are threatened, in which case, the
> Board must exercise its duty to step in.
>      OK, we’re now in a murky legal can of worms … But the point is that
> the developer must agree to transfer power to the community in a specific
> form — a form consistent with the decentralized, participatory and
> egalitarian principles honored by the cohousing vision.  My more general
> point here is that it’s appropriate for the AHJs (“Authorities Having
> Jurisdiction”) to have review and approval over the Declarant’s
> (preliminary) bylaws … IF the goal is to ensure an open door to the
> cohousing lifeway.
>
> So:  There are some options; there may be others.  Feel free to contact me
> if you think more detail might be useful.
>
> Thanks,
> Philip Dowds
> Cornerstone Village Cohousing
> Cambridge, MA
>
> mobile: 617.460.4549
> email:   rpdowds [at] comcast.net
>
> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 9:00 PM, Ellis Cohen <e.cohen [at] acm.org> wrote:
> >
> > We're planning to build a dense 30 unit cohousing project on a
> relatively small plot of land near the downtown area of a small city in the
> Boston area.  To facilitate permitting, our supporters on the city council
> are trying to define a new cohousing zoning category. However, a number of
> them are concerned about finding a legal and enforceable way to define this
> category, that would, at the same time, preclude a developer from creating
> a dense rental apartment building with similar dimensional characteristics.
> >
> > If you know of someone who is doing or has done research on zoning law,
> that could be helpful to our situation, I'd appreciate it if you could put
> us in contact with one another.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Ellis Cohen
> > e.cohen [at] acm.org
> > Bay State Commons
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> > http://L.cohousing.org/info
> >
> >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>
>
>
>

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.