Planning Board Hears Update on Universal Design

A local advocate with a long career of professional and personal interest in access, inclusion, and equity for people who have disabilities, Lee Vorderer has often taken the lead in urging town boards to incorporate accessibility when considering housing developments.

Vorderer recently contacted the Institute for Human-Centered Design (IHCD) and shared their definitions of the seven principles of Universal Design with the Planning Board. She acknowledged the principles are abstract and do not address concrete rulings such as the width of doorways, etc.,  but are principles that could be incorporated in Planning Board and other town board decisions when housing issues arise.

These principles have been approved at the federal level and also by the World Health Organization:

• Equitable Use—The design does not disadvantage or stigmatize any group of users.
• Flexibility in Use—The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities.
• Simple, Intuitive Use—The use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user’s experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level.
• Perceptible Information—The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user’s sensory abilities.
• Tolerance for Error—The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintended actions.
• Low Physical Effort—The design can be used efficiently and comfortably, and with a minimum of fatigue.
• Size and Space for Approach & Use—Appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use, regardless of the user’s body size, posture, or mobility.

Planning Director Tony Fields asked at what level could the Planning Board include these principles? At the policy level? Incorporate into zoning by-laws? These could be easily adopted as a policy, he said. Board members were in agreement that the principles are, in member Amy Lloyd’s words, “good conceptual policy”  but in terms of planning use by themselves, they are too abstract and need to be fleshed out with concrete features.

Vorderer offered to seek guidance in more depth from the Institute.  Are there neighboring towns that have adopted the principles and how were they incorporated? The Board thanked her for her efforts to get more detailed answers. It should be noted here that the term “Inclusive Design” is gaining favor now, or sometimes the combined “Universal/Inclusive Design” is used.

Turning to the two major housing items on the agenda,  the board continued to discuss the ramifications of the recently enacted state housing legislation that calls for “by right” multi-family housing near transit stations in towns served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA.) Bedford is categorized as a bus service community, as it has no MBTA station.

According to the timeline, the MBTA is accepting public comments until the end of March.  By Dec. 31, 2022, Bedford must submit an action plan for how the town will achieve compliance by 2023, or submit a comprehensive plan that is ready to put into place.

If Bedford submits an action plan at the end of this year, the town will then have until Dec. 31, 2023, to submit its final plan.  To date, the state has only issued draft “Guidelines.”

The public comment period to solicit feedback on the draft guidelines is open until March 31. Click here to review the draft guidelines and to submit your comment. https://tinyurl.com/2p8tran4

After gathering public comment, the final Guidelines will be issued. Fields speculated they could be available as early as June.  Board members expressed some concern as to what constitutes compliance. Fields continued, “We will keep asking the state questions and continuing to look at ideas so that if Bedford chooses to comply, we will give you options to bring to Town Meeting.” If a town chooses not to comply, it will be ineligible for various state grants.

Two-family housing, one of the housing goals identified in the 2019 Bedford Housing Study, is currently a focus of the Planning Board.

As suggested in the Housing study, the regulatory strategy to achieve this goal is to “ease zoning restrictions for two-family dwellings. “The Board discussed potential changes to the by-law, eliminating the date limitation for conversion of existing single-family housing stock to two-family, and establishing different maximum floor area ratios for new construction in the four residential districts.  The Planning Department is looking at examples from some 14 towns around the state that allow for two-family dwellings in one or more districts. Concord revised its ruling a year ago.

The discussion focused on possible districts best suited to two-family housing: the Shawsheen District which encompasses the Great Road Shopping Plaza is an obvious choice, as is the North Road district.  Chair Shawn Hanegan suggested having an open forum in the fall to hear public opinion on proposed amendments to the by-law.