Zoning & Planning Committee - February 9, 2026

and so on.

Thanks for watching!

and all about Newton's.

This is the zoning and planning committee meeting for February 9th, 2026. I'm Lyle Baker, the chair. I'm joined tonight by several members and also Councilor Roche from Ward 6. Please feel free to pull up and sit at the table if you'd like. And Miles Farkey, our clerk, and we're also joined by Katie Hulot,

Discussion items only. We were trying to lay a foundation for work later in the term. The three items on the agenda tonight, 2226, a pre-budget planning discussion, 5726, and then 4626 periodic updates on DCOD. All of these are designed to sort of provide background information for members of the committee, especially those who are new to the council. so that when we get to the items again later in the term, we'll have a better understanding of what they're all about.

may come because we would like to follow the president's injunction to get our issues out on the table before budget comes to us in April. So the first item is 2226 by Councilors Baker, Wright, Farrell, and Getz requesting a preliminary discussion for the Planning Department, Inspectional Services Department, and CPA programming Okay, Ms. Whewell, are you prepared to brief us? Do you want to come to the table? Maybe Councilor Getz might swing around or...

Thank you.

Thanks for being so calm.

Farrell, Mornay, and many others. Councilor Dahmubed, Gordon Forge joining us. He's a member of the committee and joining us remotely. All right, Ms. Wewell.

Thank you. So yes, my name's Katie Wewell, the acting director for planning. I've been here seven and a half years almost, So learning everything. So for tonight, we were tasked with a pre-budget discussion, which is intended to be a very high level overview of the planning department. So the common question that comes up is what is planning? So planning is the process that local government regulates, manages, and guides the physical development, land use, Town or Municipality. So each planning department across the state and country will look a little bit different based on characteristics of the municipality.

So for example, communities near transit will plan differently than maybe a coastal community on the Cape who may have more considerations with Coastal issues, climate change, or impacts and patterns of seasonal residents. So the focus of this slide is how is planning implemented in Newton. So in general, planning in Newton is very multidisciplinary, responsible for guiding growth. Planners also administer local and state regulations to land in the city. We are also very cross-collaborative due to the interdisciplinary nature of the work. So one of the roles planning fulfills is staff assistance provided to the city council as well as boards and commissions. So there are approximately 25 bodies that the plan

So as stated earlier, planning is a multidisciplinary field. As such, much of our budget is dedicated to staff. In the planning department, there are about seven different divisions. Current planning, long range planning, Historic Preservation, Conservation, Transportation Planning, Housing and Community Development, and the Community Preservation Program. I think on this slide, if you see the two ladder categories, and these divisions can have staff ranging from one person to 10 people and we have 31 staff members total and they Planning Department.

So on the following slides, I'd like to give an overview of each division and what they are responsible for, the role they fill when interacting with the council, public, and our colleagues in the so current planning the main function of current planning is development review so when somebody is interested in consult the zoning ordinance as well as being aware of any state processes to determine the path forward. So should a project be approved, the planners also review applications for building permit as well as occupancy to ensure compliance with the decision that governs the land and overall

So next we have long-range planning. These planners work with the administration and the city council on zoning updates and long-term legislation for the city. So whereas current planning is implementing the zoning ordinance, the long range team is tasked with the research and analysis that informs any zoning updates as well as comprehensive planning. We also have staff who fall into this division Social media and further goals are making information easier to find, more accessible, as well as developing ongoing relationships with stakeholders and community groups.

So the historic preservation team reviews applications for demolition delay and work within the jurisdiction of the local historic Planners in this division communicate with applicants on materials submitted, scheduling, and projects on relevant agendas. Our conservation planners are tasked with wetland protection and permitting, managing 300 plus acres of conservation land. Natural Resource Management, including trail creation, native and invasive species, climate adaptation, etc. So the transportation planning.

The objective here is to support people of all ages and abilities moving around the city by foot, bike, subway, train, bus, vehicle, or other modes of travel. They also oversee city transportation. Bikes, including budgeting, data review, contract oversight, and coordination with those partners. Community Preservation Program is the Division or person responsible for administering Community Preservation Act funds. So you heard a little bit from the staff member at the prior meeting, Molly, about a proposal using CPA funds. So this program is funded solely with which is mainly local, but like some, I think the state matches.

as well. And they've seen approximately 100 projects over 25 years completed. And they are focused on the areas of expanding community housing, historic resources, Open Space and Recreation Opportunities. And lastly, we have our Housing and Community Development team, which their objective is supportive Housing Rehabilitation, Human Services for low and moderate income residents, Homelessness Prevention Support Services, and the Removal of Architectural Barriers for People with Disabilities. and they administer those grants that the city receives such as the Federal Community Development Block Grant, CDGG,

the acronym department, a lot of grants with different letters and acronyms. So that concludes kind of this high level overview. I'm happy to answer any questions or note Anything to follow up on when the time comes? Oh, that's, well, those are perfect. Senior Planner, Chief Planner for Current Planning,

In terms of your understrength by three people in a sense, right? O'Brien.

Zoning and Planning Committee. And we used to have Jen and Zach and Laura. So what's happening there?

Yeah, so we're Thank you so much for being here today. Well, I'm acting director. My permanent role is deputy director. So I was moved into Jen Kira's role and then placed in the acting director role. So I do kind of see that as a responsibility of mine as well.

Okay, sure. and so whenever her job is vacant, is that already posted?

The chief planner has posted since we just The senior planner, we will have to

So, you know, thank you for the high level. I actually am more curious about going into budget Free Cash, where you would want to put it. I mean, have you thought that through? Is it something that you've been in there?

Sort of, but more from like a personnel management I think things like trainings, maybe being able to go to more conferences

All right. And then, you know, if you had to sort of divvy up the pots in terms of like The amount of staff time that is being spent on specific arenas and in specific arenas, is that something you've thought about? I just sort of like, I want to value attribute each slot.

Yeah, I can definitely kind of look into that more. I think it also varies on the volume. You know, I know my background is mainly in current and there's no sort of lever to be like no stop applying so you just have to kind of manage and work with the applications that come in and the attention they warrant and when and more, not self-sufficient,

Yeah, yeah, sorry, I'm typing directly now. Oh, so that's the way that you should really be typing.

Yeah, I mean, I think a lot of time is spent on preparing for meetings, but also the administrative work that comes with it, the agendas, the meeting minutes, things like that. So I think we're also looking at ways to make that easier on staff, whether So yeah, just trying to balance the number of regulatory bodies we serve with all of that

I now have a count for Kalis, Logan,

I wish that somebody did this for me. and I'm sure like I do the work, I always, whether it's to streamline or to heavy up in certain areas because you know the city

I think one thing I've spent some time thinking about is kind of being proactive versus reactive. I think just in general planning you know how can we sort of achieve what we want through best practices and guidelines and maybe just looking bigger picture at things instead of maybe kind of, you know, I think reacting to an issue. So maybe just thinking, what aren't we doing that we could do more of instead of Something that had happened and kind of figuring out how to solve that, but more what are we trying to do instead of prevent?

In general, as we get into budget season, I'd love to hear more about what you're thinking.

How many people are in each of these serving each of these?

Do you want to describe what you're pointing at? Oh, I'm sorry, yes.

I'm looking at the word chart on page... Four?

So I think that I can't give an overview, just sometimes there's like admin staff who swing between different ones, so it may not. I'm just a rough idea. Yeah, I think current, we have four to five. Staff members, and that's the division that kind of responds to development. Long range, I think we're supposed to have two or three, I think. Right now you probably have like one and a half, Nora and probably half of me. Historic preservation is two. Conservation is two. Transportation planning is one. Housing and Community Development. I counted 10 earlier. And CPA is one. And then There's also people who kind of float between like our urban design person kind of splits between long range and current. So then there's other admin staff and our communications or outreach person

taking information from each division and

David, and I'm guessing, yeah, sort of what I was thinking about would be, are these staffed?

Yeah, I think particularly with transportation, there's transportation planning, but then there's the Department of Public Works, who also has a transportation division. I know

you know we work very closely with them but it's sort of where does one pick up where does one historically if I recall we've had Mr. Kosas who's been here a long time has been in Public Works are planning back and forth. I'm not sure. You know, he's still here, but his department changes. So. Physical locations. You have a question. No, but I have one.

The budget. And I kind of want to challenge you to not look at the budget and say, okay, we're just going to keep it flat. But to look at the different buckets and say, you know what, I don't think we need this. Maybe that's what consultants want. I just get the feeling we're moving away from that. And then there aren't many other lines.

That would just be hard to look at differently.

Not all of them. I think I'm still kind of learning who is and who isn't, but it's a mix.

Some are fully funded, some aren't. We'll find this. and so many of them are actually on our panel because we never, I don't think we see any of those people at this table. And if we are interested in housing, Maybe we should see them more often or see them at least occasionally. And maybe I'm jaded, but knowing, I mean, I feel like we're barely getting by in all and transportation is one person I don't know how we could do it less but I'm thankful that we have someone now we didn't used to have anybody there so and you know if we really like the other

I mean, you can't really get rid of current planning and say, well, let's do a master plan for Newton Center.

Maybe that's where consultants are helpful. and I think for consultants to come in is when we are tasked with something like the overlay district or We had to update our inclusionary zoning ordinance and they're kind of able to really dig in and focus all of their time, whereas Bend That frees us up. to be more responsive, I think, to the public, to people interested in the new zoning, things like that. But yeah, I think that's also where

Do you still have consultant money in the budget?

I think in this fiscal year, yes.

I mean, it's just impossible to go into new areas and new big areas without more help.

and consultant, but also, I think,

Transparent about the amount of money that's being used for consultants and things like that. And even I went through with some people and it still didn't make sense. So it would be good for this budget to start a new one, new people to have it be transparent.

I have a couple of thoughts. I think that the question that Councilor Roach raised about whether to render by effectively is what he's asking. And we have but one of the dimensions that's a little hard to do but it's a long range again is this is called the planning department not the reacting department but it often is the reacting department and but I think that the There are a lot of questions you all answer over and over again straightforward.

and opportunity as you think ahead about whether there are things that are being asked over and They have actual decision-making authority that's binding as opposed to advisory. So if you have to think about where your resources go, those are the ones that I think are going to take care of. But I appreciate very much for taking the time to give us this overview, and I hope members of the committee will think about other questions that can be posed when we revisit this, because again, I want to follow the president's request to have a conversation before we get to the budget. so that by the time you get to the budget, the budget conversation is really responsive to concerns that have been raised already.

Councilor Rowe? How can we meet the needs like

and now some of them are you know that's a longer conversation but it's been a while since some of those fees have been updated and again they're not major but they are revenue sources that can help support There again. Thank you. That's great. Now, don't go away. You get to stay for the next item.

This is Councilors Oliver, Wright, Getz, Roche, Malakie, Kalis requesting discussion to determine alignment of dimension controls, setbacks, FAR, et cetera, for residential developments within BU lots to focus consideration of lots in and adjacent to residential neighborhoods. And so, Councilor Oliver, you were the lead docketer on this one. You wanted to say a word about where this item came from because it was an item we had before which Revive for the new term.

Happy to. And I apologize for talking loudly. It's for their benefit, not necessarily yours. So where this originated... was, and no pun intended here whatsoever, but it originated in Ward 1 with a few projects that were going on that were easiest way to say it business I think they were all BU1 lots that were being utilized for 100% residential they were also utilizing the benefits of the commercial controls.

In particular, FAR and setbacks. And what was happening was, you know, I don't think it's any secret here, 20 Clinton Street. came about and drove people bonkers once we really started to see what that meant on the ground. And I think the item that's in front of us now is tackling a part of the challenge The way it's currently worded kind of focuses it a little bit differently than it was originally intended. But there are also lots where that are not adjacent to residential, that if used for residential, I still believe I'd like to have the conversation at least, about the simple fact that if you're using a lot for 100% residential, residential controls should be required.

Anyway, that's the quick overview of it. You know, without getting into the teardown item that I think is a little bit adjacent to this one. But that's the general gist.

So, now, congratulations.

I have called New England home since moving east for college but I am originally from Seattle.

Wait, before we just skip over that. Who were you rooting for last night?

Don't answer.

You can just say yes.

I'm married to the biggest Pats fans.

All right, then proceed.

I first started working with Zapp about two years ago. I supported with were the zoning amendments to expand opportunities for local businesses and what resulted from that project were if the expansion of uses for shared maker spaces and business incubators and then since then, like the work of the committee, my work has focused on preservation and shaping residential redevelopment So I may have been a little bit more behind the scenes conducting some of the analysis on teardowns and then, you know, working on the I'm excited to work with you all and keep improving Newton Zoning. I will share my screen.

So similarly in the vein of introductions, I will just be adding context to what Councilor, Council President, excuse me, Oliver, has started to kind of what the concern around the residential uses in business zones are. So there we go.

Let's see.

So here's the docket item 5726. And I just wanted to kind of hone in on the language of the docket item. we're really looking at alignment of dimensional controls. So setbacks, height, FAR for residential developments in BU lots with that focus on adjacent residential neighborhoods. I wanted to kind of watch, it's a bit of a web how this happens, so I just wanted to be Super clear about what exact scenarios we're talking about. This is when a residential use is pre-existing in a business zone. And so if that property owner applies for a special permit to redevelop fully residential that special permits either granted or granted with specific conditions.

And as Council President Oliver mentioned, that residential development occurs using those business So here you can see kind of zoomed in again going back to why that adjacent to residential zoning is particularly relevant. You can see the side setback and that is based off of the adjacent abutting district. where this is occurring in Newton. There's clusters throughout, but it's really a majority in their mantum. 94 of the 133 parcels that are residential in a business zone are in Ward 1. and here you can see kind of visually what we're talking about.

This is Adams Street and you'd see that, Many of the parcels almost all along the stretch of Adams Street are zoned business, including some of the Side Streets. And here you can see the land cover map from 2016. It's changed slightly, but not significantly since then. and you can see in the yellow that's all the residential uses with just some some smatterings of commercial And so how that kind of looks on the ground, here you can see the business on the corner of Adams Street. That's what you see kind of in that pinkish shade. Right there with a sequence of residential buildings going down Murphy Court.

and you can see all of those Murphy Court homes are zoned business.

So these houses just, I mean, I don't know. They look to me like they're typical residential properties that would meet the residential requirements. There are typical houses in that area and they're not gigantic things like the Clinton. Am I right about that?

Yes, definitely kind of a similar.

They want to tear it down and put something else up. And it goes for special permits. So does the Land Use Committee have the ability to say, you're in a business zone, but we want you to meet your residential standards?

I believe so, but I would prefer to... No? The lenders could request now.

They have the discretion, I think. I think it was interesting.

The law department might have a guidance on it.

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

The question was, does the land use committee have the authority to impose a residential setback in a business zone being torn down and replaced with a larger residential structure. Am I correct?

Yes.

The inspection permit granting authority could put those conditions, they would have to squarely put it in the rationale for why they're making those determinations. And as long as they do that, generally speaking, of course, we have to look at each project on a case by case basis, but generally speaking, that'd be permissible.

So it feels like, while we're considering what to do about this particular dogged item. The Land Use Committee should be informed that they can apply residential standards.

Interesting question. I want to phrase the same question just slightly differently. If a project like this got to land use and the requests were put in, hey, we know you only have to go use setbacks of, and I'm going to make this up, five side setbacks of five feet. But we're going to ask you to make it 10 feet because you're doing residential. Does the property owner have to do that? Or can they just say no because the zoning allows for it? And that's actually the challenge that I'm trying to or hoping to solve for. Not necessarily, and I think this is a really important part of this conversation, at least Now, even more so for the Butters than for that property owner.

That's the point. at least that I'm after because it wasn't the 20 Clinton Street property owners that I was more concerned about after we saw that structure going up. It was 12 and 24 that really currently bear the burden of the property that was built on 16-20. so it does seem to me that the question I'm trying to solve for isn't can we ask for it but do they have to actually follow that request and my like I don't see how that's at all possible because we're basically giving land use now the ability to say, the zoning, I want it to be smaller. I don't think that that's under the purview of land use on a regular basis.

If it's written into a condition, the applicant would be required to comply.

I think there's a few ways this could play out.

and say the land use happens in single residence sets too. The Land Use Committee also has the discretion to deny a project as well. So I think I think it's a very, I don't want to say choose your own adventure, but it'll work some.

Let me just point out historically, if I can recognize this for that,

I'm just jumping on the database here. Attorney Lee, Please confirm that these houses are like from the 1880s. So they predate zoning and they're on 15... 100 square foot lots so that they're, you know, it's a pre-existing non-conforming use. So one would assume that they would have the right to build up to what is on the lot right now, irrespective Am I wrong in that?

It would all depend on what it is that they're asking for. If they're just tearing down and they want to build something new pursuant to the current zoning, then they can do that. If they're looking simply to retain their non-performing status, we would have to look at exactly what they're building. or if they're just going to keep part of it and then extend their nonconforming status. But generally speaking, they can retain their nonconforming status if it's an existing building.

Yeah, and these are like maxed out, you know, just looking at this. They're like... They build it back the same way. I would think so.

If it burned down, they would be able to build it back the exact same way.

Thank you, Chair. Glad to be here. This is, I guess, a suggestion for The planning department. This fascinating conversation, by the way. I think it would help the land use committee if we're going to be kind of sensitive to this dilemma about... residential development in a business use zone. If we were informed just as a matter of course, what modifications would be necessary on the part of the petitioner to to meet, to comply with the residential zone requirements.

So if that were just laid before us as part of that standard memo, First of all, that would sensitize us to this question, which is really... I think appropriately being discussed in ZAP as opposed to in land use. So we would be reminded if we needed reminding, and I think sometimes we do, about this Tension, I guess we'll just say. And then it would be the specifics. Councilor Oliver gave an example of five feet side setback versus 10. And at least that would be laid in front of us. whether what we do with it in land use, how the petitioner would respond to urgings,

to move in one direction or another that that's going to depend on the situation. I thought Ms. Wewell's comment about it's frequent that someone comes in with a high FAR and we say, Well, that's a stretch. Can you reduce the FAR? And we hold it, and they go away, and they come back. And most of the time, there's some adjustment. Some of the time, there isn't. and it's a quasi-negotiation process. And I don't know that that really changes. because we have these determinations and we've got to always come back to the determinations

that are necessary as we decide whether to approve or reject a special permit petition. So that's just a comment and a request I guess of planning to consider.

So first of all, I deeply Wish I could take that. I do remember that public hearing on the changing to single residence near Bowen School. So it strikes me here that the situation that we had was, you know, whenever this was, there were buildings built residential

desire to create a business zone did not kind of overcome the built environment and it remained residential. And I think what we should be doing is asking the same question, which is what do we want to have here rather than tinkering with the dimensional controls and I don't know that there's do not wish to give up commercially zoned parcels because that's potentially higher tax revenue. On the other hand, the odds that this has turned and Height. Possibly this is an opportunity for denser, slightly

and more. Maybe this is an opportunity to say this is actually but I think the question that we need to ask is what do we want this to look like in the next 10, 15 years from there determine is this the right zoning and we need to tweak it? Do we need to just make this a single or multi-residence zone? Does this require an entirely different zone? Because one of the things that's really unique about this area

and then Councilor Wright.

Great. Actually, it does allow it. BU1, BU2, without a special Step on myself here, but BU1, BU2 does allow, by right, residential above commercial. So it is allowable. What I'm actually looking to investigate here, and Jen, Zach, I think you were there as well.

There are instances where, and Councilor Roche just brought this up, there are places where we're talking about lots that are well down a residential street. option or solution A might make more sense, perhaps even just changing the zoning to residential, moving on. But I also agree that, you know, I'm definitely one of the voices from last term. who has been calling out for like, hey, let's stop giving away the commercial properties, the lots. So The thinking that I had actually proposed, and I think we have that presentation that I hope we still have a chance to kind of bring to the table, kind of just spin through again, did say, I'm actually more interested in making this change when a lot is redeveloped.

If, for example, one of the properties along Clinton or even I don't know about the part that's a little bit of an anomaly itself given the small size of the lots. But that's what I think we need to take a look at. Because it does seem to me that if somebody comes along and says, I want to take down a residential house, one or two family, I'm not quite sure if it matters to me, or if there would be a difference in how I might want to treat it more to the point. If they're going to take down residential structure and put up, sorry, I want to make sure I'm saying this right. If they want to put up A 100% residential structure on a business lot in the middle of that community? 100%. You shouldn't have, we don't need to rely on land use.

to make a determination and say, you need to use the residential controls here. Why? You're building 100% residential. You don't have to, but if you choose to, residential controls. And that's kind of the, that's why I think last term, Mac and Jen were very focused on kind of breaking this up into a couple of different solutions, which it took me a while to finally land on why they were looking to do it that way, but I got it. And I think that's still the right way to roll. Councilor Alvarez?

So I'm thinking about There's something about the dependability and if you do it on a case-by-case basis, you lose that dependability. You don't know what will happen because sometimes depending on who's sitting around the table, you can have one outcome or another outcome and we'd rather know I'm going to live in a residential area and it's going to stay this way instead of having what happened. We don't know what happened. So I kind of resonate very strongly with what Councilor Roche

I mean, I kind of think that Murphy Court, is that the name of that street? That's not going to ever be a business district. and Rezone. But I do like the fact that you can have a coffee shop within walking distance of your house. And we don't often allow that. So if we could figure out how to do that at the same time to make some of this commercial Be okay.

I think everything I've just heard is, yeah, that.

I didn't understand what you meant by the case-by-case basis.

I think what I was saying is I don't want to leave it

So, according to the numbers, 90% of these lots are in Del Nanto. And what we've been talking about and Murphy. Two cars can't go by each other, you know, with cars parked. I mean, someone to put a business there, I don't think, worked very well at all. There's no parking, no things like that. So we're talking more of those side streets, which are now all residential. And the thing is, with the BU lot, on those spots and the setbacks too. And they don't even need setbacks.

One or two lots in from Adams Street and then the rest of those lots would be zoned residential because someone may take a lot there on Adams and take the next lot behind it, which is on that side street and create a

reinforces both of the notions that I heard here, which is I completely agree. Zoning also has an aspect of it that I consider to be a social contract between the city and the homeowner. And what you see there, when you buy your lot and you're in a residential neighborhood,

I'm not sure your marching orders should be clear, even if your department has the staff time to do it. But I'm hearing from and so on. which is the point that's been made that you should be expected to use residential dimensions as a matter of zoning rather than wait for the land use. So if that's the sense of the meeting, I think if you can take that back to what might be specific responses.

I'm open to exploring all the possibilities and continuing with this. I think to the point about the social contract, if there were to be a rezoning, My only priority would be ensuring that there was significant engagement because and so forth. Thank you. Thank you.

It's important to understand that the value is a construct of the zoning. There's nothing inherent in the house of a size of that size that says that, except that the city has made a judgment that is a business use rather than a residential would have this conversation to begin with. They would use residential sign. So I think there ought to be a distinction made between a value shift that is a function of something inherent in the property versus What amounts to really kind of an artificial construct the city has created. So we don't need to, I think those are different kinds of values. And we have not shrunk in the past from and so on.

I just want to make sure that we don't misunderstand ourselves.

and so many based on what we want built there. Is this a rhetorical question if it's a direct question?

There's been a question posed. Is there someone who thinks of that? Councilor Wright thinks of that. I want to recognize him.

is these side streets that are all residential. There are no businesses there. So it was zoned and they were built before the zoning. But when they zoned it, it didn't. Give it a BU. No idea why they did BU going down these side roads where there's all residential. So it's all residential now. It's been that way for 100, 125 years. and I don't expect it to change. Now the only thing that might change from a business standpoint is a personal business office but you can do that in residential if you're a CPA or something like that and that is allowed in like a 7-Eleven or something like that could go in there. But if you take, you should take a drive down the street.

So we've touched Lome. Oh, no, no, no, not at all.

Yeah, and we talked about it last time is we maybe we'll touch the first slot in and keep that as BU and and the rest of it would all be residential. None of the main streets we'll be touching,

Roche, and then I call on you.

Zoning. Zoning is going to change. It is a reflection of what we want and we see that in both good ways and bad ways and if the current Multifamily, or we should think, you know, as people redevelop, what do we want to see here, right? Because I think the key here is that these poems are not only non-conforming to BU, they're nonconforming to SR1, SR2, MR1, MR2, right? So what do we, do we want to

as in Oliver as well. Adams Street is a potential commercial corridor and it's deeper down the side streets somewhere.

I wouldn't ignore Adam Street and if we want it to be and Everett.

I agree.

There's no reason to just ignore Adam's dream. I think it goes without saying, though, that I would have completely different objectives. I want something different on Adams Street than I do downtown. That's really it. So I think Councilor Wright just said it. It's like What we're really after here is preventing residential use on BU lots that can have BU controls. I didn't docket this to modify that history. So it's kind of a different topic almost, but.

No, I think part of the question that I'm hearing Oliver has made the simple point that a property that is going to be used for solely residential should be using residential dimensions. Now, what kind of change that would require in our zoning? In the sense of table change, as opposed to what we've been talking about is really map changes. and that's a different thing to do. But it seems to me that at least the genesis of this idea was that there was an anomaly that someone who was trying to be wholly residential because it happened to be in a business zone got to play with a different set of rules. And I think the sense of the committee is, I hear it, is that the committee

As aside from rezoning and making map changes, I think that would be a question for you and the law department to examine whether there is a relatively simple modification to our zoning. and Howie.

I think it's possible for you guys to give... Could you just let us know what the areas are in our awards? Because we might want to do something similar.

Yeah. Mr. Dahmubed, you haven't been quiet.

I think we said at some point or so and so it seems like because we've considered this tonight so carefully kind of looking at the maps in Onantum if we are going to be considering a table change so if a map change then it seems like we should at least Context is there and what the impact would be.

I'm going to suggest that this is not a lot by a lot. I don't hear anyone desiring that we want to see buildings open So that part I hope the planning department will take home and say, okay, if you want to do that, what does that look like? Okay, thank you. Entertain a motion to hold on this item? Hold. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Abstain?

Okay, the ayes have it. For those of you who are new to this committee, this committee is very highly intellectually engaged, but we won on fuel.

Our next item, I'll read the chair's note. The discussion on the following item will be designed to help explain to his DCOD, and its relationship with other zoning ordinances to allow for future updates from planning, inspectional services, and law. So the item is 46-26, periodic updates on VCOD proposals. under the new Village Center overlay district.

and units, as well as a type of entity requested, VC2, VC3, MRT, with suggestions for change made about any of these. So this is just a discussion item on this and it's not the specific data.

The intent was just to have everybody

There are several of us who've lived through the entire war term.

And we began to throw these terms around like we knew them by heart.

But in fact, the general public, if you said, We're talking about VCOD. They have no idea what this means.

Try that again. Try that again with more enthusiasm. You haven't done to my head.

You know, you all one way or another, whether you were a resident at the time or a city councilor, worked to pass this zoning and what came of it. So there's that docket item. As I'm sure you all know, all zoning consists of a map and zoning language. And so here you can see the map of the COD and then Chapter 9 is what dictates the regulations within it. It applies to Newton Center, Newton Highlands, Elliott, Wobbin, Auburndale, West Newton, Newtonville. Oh. Can you have a last name?

She's zoning code official.

Senescuaso

Everything backwards and forwards. And I always go to her with my questions. I figured I'd just bring her to you. All right. So the VCOD consists of Transit or MRT is kind of an infill residential district intended for the residential areas near villages and transit and it includes a provision for and many more. We've got Village Centre 2, which provides moderate development It's a little purple when it's faded, but it's that blue section you can see.

And here we have Newton Center as an example because it really, I think, well shows kind of the ringed structure of the farthest out. MRT district, kind of the next ring being that BC2 and that is intended for smaller village centers and maybe and then we've got BC3, and that applies to major corridors and allows taller buildings and also

So diving a little deeper into MRT, this is specifically focusing on the new construction So if you have an empty parcel or you have demolished the existing structure in your building completely new, The footprint maximum is 1,500 square feet. The building height is two and a and the building setback is 20 feet or average. This is also MRT. And this is the adaptive reuse pathway.

So the image here is an actual project that just recently got approved. through the site plan review process with the planning board. This requires the preservation of the existing principal building. In this project's case, that was this home here. And and you can have multiple buildings.

I just want to jump in on the MRT. When you build new, it has to be either three or four units. Yeah, four. Up to four.

Yes, minimum are four. Yes, thank you. Thank you. It's a maximum of six units in the existing principal structure. So if let's say you had a very large Victorian you wanted to preserve and you could fit you could go up to six there's a minimum are triggering site plan review because they are adding an additional building on the site.

Can I just ask a clarifying question?

Yeah.

or, but you couldn't do two and four.

No.

Or four and two or one and five.

Correct. But you can do six and four. The maximum of the main house is six and the second building the maximum is four. You could have a third building there but then I think that's a special permit. You can have more than one.

Yeah, you can have multiple buildings, but that would be Cyclone Ripley. That would be fair. It definitely is possible, but most of the lots wouldn't allow for it and there's a 20 foot between each building. Jane has been the one at the counter talking through this with folks, but some people are having trouble preserving carriage houses because of that three unit minimum.

2 units into that, but since there's a minimum of three, then they typically have been opting to remove any existing structures on the site.

Last question, and then we're going to wait until the answer. Great. So we'll wait to the end.

Happy to come back to this. Did I get to all of that? Yeah. So then we have BC2 or Village Center 2. The maximum footprint is 10,000 zero front, sat back, zero side unless you're abutting a residential or public use district and then five feet in the rear no matter what or 20 if you're abutting a residential or public use. and then BC3, Footprint is Pitched roof, four and a half stories or 71 feet.

Flat roof, four and a half or 69 or 50 from our listeners. side zero, same side setbacks, same setbacks as EC2. In addition to the standard building dimensional requirements, and the requirement for BC3 is

There's also regulations around what we call mixed-use priority streets. The goal of this was to Thank you. Thank you. and many more. There's also Fenestration.

and again to make that village commercial feel. So you can see the is that sort of classic business window. And then the facade articulation are dimensions where a sort of job in the building is required. So you can't have There is also a pedestrian realm requirement, so it's intentional.

And then quickly, I won't go into detail on all of these, but happy to answer any questions on them, especially with Jane's help. There's additional regulations for uses, vehicle parking design standards, Bicycle parking standards

So before we start, I just want a little bit more history for some people. So we started as rezoning all the village centers. So this was only a few of them. But then as we were going through that, then the MBTA Communities Act came in. So then we kind of morphed those two together and some of the other village centers dropped out. they wouldn't have counted anyways towards the NVTA Communities Act. And also that's why you see that big connection of Newton Center and the Highlands into Elliott because part of the NVTA Communities Act

Okay, so, Councilor Albright, your first question. No, yeah, it was definitely, oh, I know what it was. How are we doing in getting people to do what we've asked them to do? I'm particularly interested in BC2. I know we're getting a lot of MRTs. And I know in my ward, I know of two VC3s, but how are we doing on VC2s?

Based off of my tracking, which picked up from Jen's tracking, We only have had one VC2

We did have a couple meetings with them, and they've applied for their engineering site interview. So that's to ensure compliance with the stormwater ordinance. What about VC3?

Because beyond the two,

Can you tell us which ones you know about?

In my ward, the ones that are the only ones I know about in my ward, and it's the one, there's a 100% affordable and there is another one coming. The church on Highland, it's been going through These guys probably haven't heard about it either. And that's VC2 and VC3. And they'll be coming to West Newton. They're not quite there yet to come. And one would be VC2 and two would be VC3. Do they have DRTs? Well, the one, La Roma, a while ago, they had a 6,000 square foot lot and they had a DRT for $27.

By the way, there was 6,000 square feet in 27 units. Yes.

Okay. Okay.

I'm the threshold for when I started tracking and I just updated this today to make sure I had it ready for this meeting. This is so that there's one VC BC2 and BC3, and then the rest of these are MR. being able to update maybe monthly with the new projects.

And then the other projects I'm talking about, they haven't sold the properties yet. So until that happens, are already forming plans. Okay, so now I have...

You said that people want to preserve their carriage houses, but they have trouble meeting the requirement If they were only trying to preserve it and use it as one unit, then it would be an ADU. It could be an ADU. Is that correct? Provided that it were under the various other...

make it two units. I can't be an ADU. and how does that relate to and do nothing or build something new. Okay, that's helpful to understand.

I'm assuming that they would be able to, in the carriage house, make one unit, so that then they would at least be able to keep that house and make it

but the challenge for making only one unit is that if an existing carriage house Most are.

It'll be easy to get.

We leave many stones unturned when it came to carriage houses. But then allowing them to be preserved in multiple different ways.

Yeah, as is, basically, as may be you.

You might need the rent of two units in order to make it affordable to have such a large carriage house be converted and be usable as space. I'm just trying to understand why this gap would occur where people say, well, I can't do it

Findings. and so on.

We had 40 Hartford and 50 Hartford come through. It was 50 most recently, 40 most recently. But they had, it wasn't a carriage house. and they didn't want to make it a unit for the resale and so they turned it into you know,

One of the units that so they have room to build an additional building. So they had the three units in the main building, the three units in an additional building, and then one of those three units in the additional building.

Next is Councilor Baker.

So to pick up on Councilor Albright's request, when you have the table, if you could just have the lots

I'm so grateful, I'm so proud of you. and then Nate. I want the table. We all want the table. Okay. I just want to No. MRT. I think that's very important. There are. There are parking requirements. In the MRT.

There are in MRT, but not in BC.

Now, BC3, if the lot is over 25, Yeah, between 20 and 30,000 square feet. They need, I think, a half of a space per unit. That's not a lot. Yeah, DC3 is an Yeah. And in MRT, you can explain. Yeah. No parking requirements.

One half per unit in the existing structure and then one per unit in the new structure. And so what that has resulted in in the most recent project. and they have typically been providing six.

So one for each typically. Okay, and Councilor Gatz. I really appreciate getting the table in terms of being able to see what we have. But I also think that I really like the idea I'm always wondering what ward it is and we have so few now that it would be kind of nice to even understand where they are because you've got the listing, the status, but you've already gone round and round and we're talking about They're hovering, they're hovering, you know, so that would be inclusive on this tip.

And one nice thing I was just The AssessIt database now, very exciting. They have a direct link to all the different drawings and documents from ISD. So you don't have to go through the ISD.

Yeah, one thing that I was grappling with just to the point about the what to include on the list is just sort of when to at what point do you add them just because you know projects can one can buy something and then sell it

I will say to Nora's point, I think

I'll keep noodling it if you have thoughts on what that threshold should be.

And generally, they may not know about it more. The counselor is talking to

But it also may have collateral impacts that you want to understand. So that's why I wouldn't just go straight to it.

But it's been documented. You know that it's been documented.

That piece?

I have another clarifying question.

You talked about, I think you mentioned some dimensional requirements.

Are there elevational requirements for the, and I'm asking these questions because I'm quite keen on preservation and adaptive reuse of existing buildings. at least of their character and context. Are there elevational requirements for floor-to-floors in BC 3 and 2 for first and My sense of it as an architect is that that creates a challenge to adaptive reuse because if you had an existing building that was not 15 feet

is something that just came to my and they had hoped to preserve the facade of that ground floor because it was in great condition and well-liked and that dimension actually was

Do you know how high that first floor was? and then you can, you know, But remember, we opted out of using the adaptive reuse for EC2 and EC3, so it's not even an option.

Use the floor to floor

The first floor was too tall?

and they're a year and a half away from doing anything. They first have to get rid of the tenants and that's still another year and then demo and stuff. So this is something We wanted to do something to dock it. We want to keep that facade of the existing building because that would be done before they would demo the building. Yeah, I think it's a minimum. Yeah, wow.

The balancing act that we did in all of this was to say,

that's so I would before you know I guess we have a running spreadsheet of ranging you know cleanup type things and you may and you may come in with

Yeah, I'd like to see the one where we allow business in the upper floor. and Mr. Rommel gave us a summary of the things that you'd like to see change. And I think was it just MRT? I think it was.

Yeah, I think most have come up with MRT.

It's the best. Yeah, and they came from the planning department. all these things right I guess they they win their Okay, all of those.

The motion passes. Withhold HCL. Thank you, ma'am. And this meeting is adjourned. Where are we coming, you ask? You're like, no, we're here at the table. He's all set.

No, we started getting other things.

I know, I know.

and it just got me thinking like

Thanks for watching!