Newton City Council - July 13, 2026

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Recording in progress

Thanks for watching!

Thanks for watching!

All right, everyone. Let's kick off our festivities this evening with a lively rendition of the Pledge of Allegiance to be led by Councillor Greenberg. Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. Alright folks, so a couple quick announcements like we normally run through. We're being both audio and video recorded Joining us online are Councilors Dahmubed, Silber, Kalis, Micley and Lucas. So that puts us to a total of 19 is that correct? Including the 14 in the room

All right, we have 19 councilors present. I'm pointing that out because we have two items tonight that are on second call that require a vote of 16. So... Let's see, picking back up where I was leaving off. Anyone in the room who has got their laptops or iPhones on please make sure you're muted so we don't get feedback. Also, in the month of September My favorite little challenge of schedules and so on and so forth. We are going to end up moving both of our Monday meetings to Tuesdays because the seventh is Labor Day So we'll be moving that to Tuesday the 8th. And then, the 21st is Yom Kippur so we'll shifting to Tuesday 22nd We'll be posting that on calendars and you'll get a couple of reminders from us collectively, but just make a mental note.

There will be no Monday City Council meetings in the month of September. They will be on Tuesday. and we'll start both of those by the way I'll start at the regular time 7 45. So with that said can we jump into first call items here beginning with land use Councilor Kelley

Let's see if I can get this all straight tonight between what's on first call and what's second call. Your land use committee report starts on page 140, On that page, however, we have some items that are on second call and were held so I don't need to discuss them. We then met Again, those were things we met in June. We then met on July 7th and we took up item 131-26 at 93103 and 0 Thurston Road and that was approved subject to second call so I shouldn't have said that either. Sorry, number 190-26 at 335 Langley Road That was approved. It's not on second call so maybe we'll pass that tonight. Then I do have some public hearings to assign, Mr. President.

Yep, please proceed.

August 4th, I'd like to request a public hearing for item 225-25 which is a request to allow four story building with 48 feet in height and associated dimensional and parking waivers at 74 Needham Street. Another public hearing on August 4th number 226-26 which is a request to exceed FAR at 43 Newell Road. Sorry, I'm backing up going out of order because that's the way it's presented in my booklet. For July 21st which is sooner than the ones I just requested. Number 227-26, a request to exceed FAR and facade ratio at 22-24 Mechanic Street Also for July 21st, number 228-26, a request to exceed FAR at 33 Aspen Ave.,

and then hopefully also on July 21st, number 224-26 which will be a discussion on consistency rulings. I think that's it. Mr. Clark did I hit everything?

I believe so.

Thank you.

The other items are all on second. Great and for zoning and planning, I believe we've got Councilor Wright?

Thank you, President Obama. Thank you. We had two items 57-26 request for discussion ordinance amendment to dimensional Controls Aligning Use and Zoning that was held in 65-26 requesting discussion amendment in section 153 of chapter 30 zoning which is talking about setbacks to allow transformers to project into the setback. That was held because Eversource couldn't come to our last meeting and we're hoping that they'll be at our next meeting next Monday. Thank you.

Fantastic. For programs and services, Councilor Krintzman.

Thank you, Mr. President. Programs and Services Committee met on June 24th. Report begins on page 143. The one item, Item 213-26 was approved by the committee by a vote of six to zero. That item was Moving of the Ward 2 precincts two and three polling location back to the Cooper Center for Active Living that had been temporarily moved to the Cabot School during construction, so we're excited that that will be moving back. Passed by a vote of six to zero. also have two late filed items. These are requests to set the early voting hours for the state and federal primary on September First, and the state and federal election on November 3rd. So I would ask for a suspension of the rules to allow those matters to be admitted.

Councillor Krintzman needs a suspension in the rules. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Abstentions? Fabulous.

Thank you, with that I move the report.

Thank You sir. Let's see for PS&T Public Safety and Transportation Councilor Block

Thank you, Mr. President The report begins on page 143 There are two items to report Item 214-26, His Honor the Mayor requesting authorization to transfer $1,175,000 From the FY27 reserve funds current year wage reserve to the FY 27 patrol services full-time salaries, to fund contractual FY27 wage increases, to meet the obligation of the FY24-FY27 Newton Police Association Memorandum of Agreement. And item 215-26 is Honor the Mayor requesting authorization to transfer 710,000 from the FY26 reserve funds current year wage reserve with $500,000 going to the FY 26 patrol services full-time

Salaries, $105,000 to the FY26 Engineering Services full-time salaries and $105000 to the Traffic Safety Full-Time Salaries for Retroactive Wage Adjustments as part of a recently signed collective bargaining agreement and that is the report. Thank you

Thank you. Public facilities, Councillor Kalis.

Thank you Mr President the report begins on page 144 and the committee met on 6-3 26 Item 201-26, authorization for a potential lease for solar energy generation at Burr Elementary School and that was approved 5-0. We then met on 6-17 and covered items 40-26, request for discussion and study on the option of removing the Bullos Pond Dam. that was no action necessary and then 197-26 transfer of 900,000 from improvements to roadways sidewalks and ramps. And that was approved 501 We had amended that just to make sure it was the right accounts. Also, item 216-26 repurpose of $150,000 transfer of $177,000 for renovations at Fire Station 2, and that was approved 7-0.

And that concludes the report, thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Grossman for finance.

Thank you, Mr. President. The report begins on page 145. Committee met on June 22nd. The first item number 197-26 to transfer $900,000 for improvements to roadways, sidewalks and ramps was approved as amended. This had been heard in finance, came back then finance took it up a second time. So, it was amended to reflect the correct accounts and to change the allocation of money to snow and ice control and removal. Then item, and that was approved seven to zero. 201-26 the authorization for potential lease for solar energy generation at Burr Elementary School was approved 7-0 214-26 to transfer $1,175,000 for the Newton Police Department. For contractual fiscal year 27 wage increases was approved seven to zero.

item 215-26 to transfer $710,000 for retroactive wage adjustments was approved seven to zero and finally 216-26 to repurpose $150,000 and transfer $177,000 for renovations at Fire Station 2 was approved 7-0. With that I move the report.

Thank you. And finally, Real Property Reuse, Councilor Malakie.

Thank you Mr. President there is no report.

Thank You. Can we get a roll call vote please on the first call items?

Councilor Albright. Aye. Councilor Baker, Bixby.

Aye Councilor Block. Aye, except I vote no on 190-26. Councilor Charm.

Aye.

Counciler Dahmbabad. Aye Farrell, Aye. Councilor Getz?

Aye.

Councillor Golden? Aye Councillor Gordon? Aye Councilor Greenberg? Grossman, Irish, Kalis, Kelley, Krintzman, Leary. Aye. Councilor Lucas? Aye. Councillor Malakie? Aye Councilor Micley? Aye Aye. Thank you, Councilor Roach? Aye. Councilor Silber? Aye Councilor Wright? Aye President Oliver? Aye On this vote, the yeas are 23. One councillor is absent and there is a single exception on item

190-26, which makes the vote there 22. One absent and one exception on item 190- 26.

Thank you, sir. All right we now have three items all on second call. All land use items so Councillor Kelley if you wouldn't mind taking the floor please?

I'm going to try and be brief but thorough to bring the other 16 councillors up to speed on these projects. with a little bit of background. Item 175-26 which is at 9193 Newtonville Ave. The Land Use Committee met on May 19th where we received, reviewed and voted unanimously in favor of the request for a special permit subject to this second call. To exceed FAR and residential facade ratio allow three stories extend a non-conforming front setback, allow retaining wall over four feet and to alter non-conforming parking at 91-93 Newtonville Ave. The previous home had been condemned and raised before the current owners purchased the property Due to the small 4,000 square foot lot's narrow configuration and steep slope with a grade change of 22 feet

The resulting two-family plan requires several waivers including front setback, walls that exceed four feet in height and parking within the front set back for two surface stalls one per unit. The structure is deemed three stories due to the slope which has a rear basement and though it's unfinished, it counts as the first floor although it appears to be two stories high from the street. The committee approved the proposal subject to second call tonight because details and plans were not prepared by the May 19th meeting. The committee requested to see a plan and the intended use for the backyard, a landscape plan showing steps from the deck to the rear yard and what materials the retaining walls would be constructed of, and these were all later provided. We voted in favor eight to nothing subject to tonight's second call.

I believe it was Councilor Leary who put it on second call, in case you wanted to speak to him.

Is there any further conversation on this item or are all the questions addressed? All right, so I think that unless I have additional comments, I see no hands on line. I'm not seeing any in the room. I think we're ready to vote this one out. Can we get a roll call on this item, please? Councilor Albright.

Aye. Councilor Baker. Aye Councilor Bixby. Aye Charm, Dahmubed, Farrell, Getz, Golden, Gordon. Greenberg, Grossman, Irish, Kalis, Kelley, Krintzman.

Aye.

Councilor Leary? Aye. Councillor Lucas? Aye Councilor Malakie? Aye Councillor Micley? Aye Councilor Silber? Aye. Councilor Wright? Aye President Oliver? On this motion the ayes are 23, one councillor is absent. The motion carries.

Great, the next item that we have is item 10426. Also a land use item. Councilor Kelley?

Not quite as briefly, but hopefully adequate and thorough. Item 104-24 which is a request to allow four attached single family dwellings and associated relief at 60 Brookside Ave. This project first came before the city in October 2025 and has gone through several site plan and building configuration changes since then, in response to neighborhood and land use committee input. The project includes raising an existing two-family dwelling and replacing it with four units in two buildings. Despite some objections to the increased Density, there was overall consensus amongst committee members and neighbors that the design is attractive, fits in with a character of the neighborhood. gives the appearance of a single or two-family home, is set back quite far from the street similar to most of the other homes along the street. Resident parking for two cars per unit is under the building basically in below grade garages.

There is one at-grade parking stall for deliveries, visitors and so on. due to challenging topography of a long, narrow and sloping site. A series of retaining walls totaling approximately nine feet altogether requires a waiver to allow driveway and parking access After moving the location and reducing square footage of structures, a waiver for side setbacks is still required. The structure is set back over 55 feet from the street. The location and possible screening of the transformer is still a question, and one of the reasons it's on second call tonight. Initially, a petition opposing the project was signed by many neighbors. As the design developed over time some of those signers have changed their minds and are now in favor of the proposal as evidenced by the many emails we've all received over the last few weeks. That concludes my summary of this one.

Fantastic and this was put on second call by the committee, did we understand why that is?

Mr. Clerk, is it Councilor Farrell did you tell me put this one on second call? Does that sound familiar?

That does sound familiar. Councilor Farrell was the one who made the motion on one of the final two.

Thank you.

I thought that's what you told us.

So let me maybe rephrase the question. Is there someone who is speaking to the item as to why it's on second call? Councilor Block, here we go.

Thank you, Mr. President. I cannot take credit or blame for putting it on second call but I do have something to say about it. Is that all right? When the Land Use Committee meets to consider a special permit petition, we receive a lot of information. This is a typical list. architectural plans with renderings of how the project will look, site plans with engineering documents, zoning review memo identifying the relief needed for the plan. Planning Department Memo Analyzing the Impact of the New Structure, FAR Worksheet Stormwater Management Report Sewer Infiltration Inflow Mitigation Report Newton Historic Commission Report sometimes a landscaping plan and a list of abutters who've been notified about the plan. And, of course we hear public testimony and read emails sent to us.

In many cases, including 60 Brookside the petitioner and several members of the Land Use Committee compare the proposed plan to what can be built by Wright. If you watch the June 16 meeting of our committee, you will see this comparison played a major role in our discussion. How much information did the Committee receive about what can be built by Wright? Nothing. We received nothing that would show even what a hypothetical by right could look like, and it's easy to see why we don't. It's just too hypothetical. There's another reason to avoid considering the by-right alternative. It is irrelevant to our charge. Because we are acting as a special permit granting authority, we are required to make a quasi judicial decision.

Newton Zoning Ordinance Chapter 30 Article 7 Section 7.3.3 provides the criteria for approving a special permit petition. The key determination states the use as developed and operated shall not adversely affect the neighborhood. This list of criteria does not include whether the proposed plan is better than what can be built by Wright or whether it furthers our climate action plan, or whether advances certain housing policy goals. As the special permit granting authority, we are required to set all of this aside and make a judgment about whether the plan will adversely affect the neighborhood. Too often, our committee is drawn away from this mandate into interesting but ultimately irrelevant discussions about these other considerations.

since we are all bound by these rules regarding how we evaluate special permit petitions, and most city councilors do not attend land use committee meetings I suggest that all councillors spend a few minutes watching our June 16 meeting and to give everyone the time to do so, so we can have a more robust discussion. I charter this item. Thank you Mr. President

All right, that item is chartered. So there'll be no further conversation about item 10426 until we take it up at the next council meeting in August. The last item tonight is Item 131.26, also a land use item. Councillor Kelley.

Last but not least, item 131-26 which is a special permit request to allow 14 single family attached dwellings to allow reduced setbacks, wave rear lot unit areas, etc. This is all at 093 and... 103 Thurston Road. The public hearing for the proposal opened on April 14th and was continued on May 12th and July 7th before the Land Use Committee. This Upper Falls site near the Emerson School and Playground is a combination of three separate and abutting parcels at 093 and 103 Thurston Road that formerly held the Lupian Landscape Company. Since it first came before us, the plan has been modified after neighborhood and city council input to be reduced from 16 to 14 units. From eight separate buildings to seven. From six curb cuts for driveways to three

compliance with front and side setbacks, and a reduction in parking from 32 to 29 stalls. One loss during this process was an IZ inclusionary zoning unit, although the project still provides two. Some neighborhood objections remained to the increased density over the previous use and one unit being within the rear setback.

Thanks for watching!

Having a decades-old unofficial easement pathway referred to as Lupien Path still be available for walking access to the Emerson Playground was important to many residents and was agreed by the abutting owners and this developer. who promises a one foot additional easement for pedestrian access, which is written into the conditions. There was much neighborhood input on this proposal throughout the process by a large group of engaged residents, from site visits to Zoom meetings. And many residents sent the council emails with their thoughts too. Terrific Ward 5 Community Outreach by Councilor Irish. Planning noted some requested information that had not been submitted, but the development team presented responses to all of this at the July 7th meeting. Primarily clarifications around where trash and snow would be stored and removed discussion on the location of a transformer to be confirmed by Eversource at a later time.

Square footage estimates of the units, they're averaging around 2,400 habitable square feet per unit Whether turning radius studies were necessary for the parking stalls, they were deemed not needed because of the adequate provision of ample driveway aisle widths. Wordsmithing of a few conditions such as how screening for privacy with some abutters would be handled by the developer were going to be reviewed and edited by law in planning, which put this item on second call. The committee voted seven in favor, one absent. Second call. A simple majority vote is needed because of the proximity of this multifamily to public transportation and providing housing.

Fantastic. Thank you for that discussion on this item, please. Councilor Irish?

Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to move to amend the draft order for petition 13126 at 093103 Thurston Road to add a neighborhood liaison committee condition. This has been a process marked by real neighbor engagement, well attended community meetings and hearings that led to meaningful changes. And it became a better project because neighbors stayed engaged. This is a dense project, 14 units on a combined lot. But more important this density isn't happening in a vacuum. This site sits literally steps away from an active playground The playground where Countryside School Aftercare program runs and steps away from an elementary school bus stop. So construction impacts, including noise, dust, truck traffic and changes to sight lines will be felt directly by families and children nearby not just adjacent property owners.

I'd like the same engagement to continue through the construction process in a form that doesn't rely on goodwill alone. I move to amend the order accordingly and I thank you all for considering adding this condition.

All right, we have a proposal here, proposed amendment. Do you happen to have final language from legal yet?

I believe it was fun. I don't have it.

Which is okay, I'm sorry. Yeah, there was language. You do have it? Is there a way to get it to the clerk so folks can look at it? Hmm. Or could you literally just kind of slowly read it through so that we get a sense of, because I mean most of the liaison. committees the language is generally straightforward it identifies how many what their role is how many folks on the commission that is let's see if um

Legal's not online, are they by any chances?

I did not see anyone from legal.

Sorry. Yeah, he did. Let me pull this up.

Oops.

Okay. One moment, thank you for your patience. Wanna make sure I read the correct one here. Okay. All right. The language proposed by legal is, when not less than two months prior to the commencement of any site work and other construction activities related to the work approved this special permit site plan approval a neighborhood liaison committee shall be established consisting of one designee of the petitioner, the ward counselor and two to three residents from the neighborhoods surrounding the project. The President of the City Council shall appoint the resident neighborhood members. All meetings shall be open to the public. The purposes of the liaison committee shall be

One, to enhance and ensure communication as to the status and progress of the construction of the project by the petitioner. to provide a form for initial presentation of a construction schedule and any significant changes to schedule or changes of plans for which public review is appropriate. Three, to receive and deal with construction specific issues including without limitation noise, dust, parking and traffic. To monitor implementation of the final construction management plan and to receive notices and communications from the Department of Inspectional Services in the Planning and Development department. B, the liaison committee shall meet monthly for the first six months of the construction period and thereafter every three months unless there is consensus within the liaison community that no meeting is necessary. unless at least six months after the initial occupancy of the final building to be completed.

And lastly, the liaison committee shall at a minimum give written notice to the city clerk, commissioner of inspectional services and the director of planning and development of its meetings. Thanks for watching!

All right, thank you very much for that. So we've got a proposed amendment here. I'd like to entertain conversations about the amendment first and then we'll get on to the main item. Is there any conversation about the proposed amendment? Leary, followed by Councilor Wright.

I think it's a terrific idea and it's usually what we do, especially with the larger projects keeping the neighbors informed and other interested parties. And I remember Marie and I did that Wright.

I was going to say the same thing. For large projects, I wish all those projects do have a liaison group and it makes things go much more smoother so I support it.

Great, I see Councilor Lucas has his hand up as well. Sir?

Just as a point of order this amendment needs a second We have a second thank you for the reminder

Okay, I believe, oh, Councilor Krintzman.

Thank you, Mr. President. I support the creation of liaison committee. I think it is a good idea. I feel like you said the membership was essentially four people one of which was the ward councillor? Is that right to the two at-large counselors want to be on it, are they okay with that? I'd just love to hear from the two Ward 5 at-large counselors because oftentimes all three counselors from the region either have an opportunity to serve on it or are interested in serving on it.

I'm happy to speak up. I heard that all the meetings would be open to the public and so we would have the opportunity to join but not the obligation. Is that what you intended? That sounds great to me.

Gatz.

All right, I guess we don't have to stand. So I'm perfectly supportive of this and I'm fine with it in terms of being in Upper Falls. And it's appropriate for the ward counselor to be involved I'm a little concerned though, why was not this amendment circulated to the council before? You know in terms of just you read it into the record and we discussed it this evening but it sort of seems as if it should have been given to us in a timeframe, I don't know. We don't have any legal people online so I just don't about that piece.

I understand your point and I think it was kind of A late afternoon work item that they got to later in the day. I would think that what I heard, at least in that description of the liaison committee's work, it seems to be fairly straightforward but your point is well taken Albright.

I'll just say that typically these liaison committees do have one counselor who's named as the member to be there all the time and call the meetings, but the other ward counselors always attend as well. So it works pretty normally this way.

Kelley, followed by Councilor Charm.

Just to follow up a little on Councilor Getz's point, the wording came directly from the law department this afternoon to Julie Irish, the attorney who usually does our land use projects, was on vacation all of last week which is why we didn't get it ahead of time. But there are two options generally and this is a smaller project than most that have community liaison So he gave the wording for two different types to Julie and let her choose which one she thought was appropriate. And I agree that one counselor from the ward appointed, but the other counselors are always welcome and helpful if they attend too. Thanks.

Councilor Charm.

I was just going to suggest, given that we haven't seen this before and since this is maybe the first community liaison committee voted on. Is there a way that we can screen share the language just so we can all actually have our eyes on it before we vote?

Is there way to email that to the clerk? Will that work? theoretically, yes. We have progress.

all.

Just imagine there's a pinwheel in the middle of your vision because things are happening.

Can you just drag it over? Yeah, how about that? Can we maybe zoom in a little bit or I'm already seeing thumbs up like crank it up. Is that better folks? No. Is there a way you can...

Folks, is that readable yet? Okay I'm getting more thumbs up. All right, so folks now that we have it both verbally and written are we approaching comfort zone here? I need some thumbs up. How about the folks online can you read it okay? Was that a nope? Yeah. Okay, alright. All right, so I'm just going to ask for a show of hands in the room. Everybody OK with the language that they're able to read or that they've heard?

All right, I'm getting... There we go. I got everybody in the room. Online folks can we see maybe just the electronic hands if we can switch back over to our friends online? Just to make sure, show of hands. Everybody has had a chance to read that? Good, good. All right so everyone's had a chance to read it I'll ask again do we have any further comment question for the amendments to the amendment? We seem to be okay. I'm sorry, Councilor Block?

I'm Sorry to raise this question but

You're gonna anyway.

Yeah, if you go back to the language can you put the language back up? It just my experience on the Riverside committee is what causes me under section B The committee is going to meet every month for the first six months, I guess. And then every three months thereafter unless there's a consensus that no meeting's necessary. Well, there could be a consensus that the monthly meetings should continue so I don't wanna delay us Any longer? I think that's a weakness in this language, that the liaison committee ought to have the flexibility to schedule meetings when a consensus has decided how often they should meet. So maybe we just sort of keep it in mind that somebody could come back and amend this language at some point in the future, so that's just my comment on this.

So I'm not objecting to this language. I just think there's a weakness in this language

Well, it's only a weakness if you see it as such. It could also be a limitation on the authority of the liaison committee. Okay. Any further comments, questions? Anybody online? I can't see hands on my screen. All right, I am seeing none. I do have one quick question for the chair of land use. We are making an amendment to conditions that I believe the petitioner agrees to subsequent to our collective approval. Is that true?

Yes.

All right, so we don't need any further conversation with petitioners. We can approve this language as is and they will see it in its entirety after the council has approved it.

It is my understanding that planning and law fine-toothed the conditions that were questionable, that we're really wordsmithing not substantive. And this was one thing that we actually discussed with the petitioner after the Land Use Committee meeting while we are here in the chamber. So it will not strike them, and they verbally agreed to it. Fantastic.

I love it when a plan comes together. All right, so then I'd like to take a... Can I do the... Vote on the amendment as a voice vote. Understood, but okay. So can I get a motion to approve the amendment and we'll do that by voice vote? Can I get an approval to move? All right, I've got Councilor Kelley I'll grab a second from Councilor Roach just in case Councilor Lucas needs a second. All right, I'd like to take a voice vote on the amendment as we just saw on screen. All those in favor please say aye.

Opposed?

Fantastic, the ayes have it. All right so now in front of us is the item with the amendment we just went through I'm sorry, great thank you. Yeah there we go is there any discussion on the full item? Seeing none, I have no hands in the room. I'd like to call for a roll call on the item please. This is item 131-26. Councilor Albright? Aye.

Baker, Bixby, Block, Charm, Dahmubed, Farrell. Gatz, Golden, Gordon, Greenberg, Grossman, Irish, Kalis. Kelley. Aye. Councilor Krintzman?

Aye.

Councillor Leary? Aye Councillor Lucas? Aye Councilor Malakie? Aye, Councilor Micley?

Aye

Roche, Aye. Councilor Silber? Aye. Councillor Wright? Aye President Oliver? Aye On this motion, the ayes are 23, the nays are zero. There is one absence. Motion carries.

Fabulous. Thank you, sir. And before we go to our final motion of this evening, I would be remiss if I didn't point out despite her not wanting a round of applause We had a Councilor who made her first comments this evening in full council, Councilor Irish. Well done! All right, I think she's sufficiently read. Do we have a final motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourne. Fantastic. Thanks all. Have a great evening.

Recording stopped.