NEWTON CITY COUNCILORS signed off on the wealthy Boston suburb’s first substantial zoning overhaul in more than 35 years, approving a plan on Monday night that aims to bring more housing to region in desperate need of new units, but they balked at going beyond the mandates of a new state law after proponents of a more ambitious proposal were beaten in a municipal election a month ago.
The MBTA Communities law presses 177 communities to allow for multifamily housing – three units or more – to be built by-right close to public transit stations. Lexington, Arlington, and Brookline are among the communities that have gone beyond what the 2021 MBTA Communities law requires in their respective zoning overhauls.
Officials in Newton, which has seven Green Line stations and several commuter rail stops, were initially planning to do the same in a bid to bring more housing and foot traffic to more than 10 village centers. But voters who went to the polls in November tossed the city councilors who backed going beyond what’s required under the MBTA Communities law.
What passed on Monday night was a scaled-backed version of the more ambitious proposal, and billed as a compromise. Just six villages, including Newton Centre and Auburndale, “will benefit from the opportunities to welcome young adults, young families, and seniors looking to downsize, into smaller homes near transit, shops and restaurants,” Greg Reibman, president and CEO of the business-backed Charles River Chamber, said in a statement after the vote.
Reibman lamented that the zoning plan comes with reductions in building heights from what was originally envisioned. That could mean some projects “won’t pencil out,” financially speaking, he said. “We’re also concerned that the state may not approve some elements of this since it has been scaled back and may ask the city to reopen the process in order to be in compliance,” he added.
The threat of a voter referendum has also loomed, as some residents who opposed more housing development and helped oust some of the pro-housing city councilors have said they would go to the ballot if they’re unhappy with the outcome of the council vote.
Deb Crossley, one of November’s ousted councilors, also voiced concerns that the new council, when its members are sworn in next year, might have to revisit aspects of the overhaul to ensure its economics work, such as limiting building heights to three and half stories. She joined 20 other councilors in voting for the overhaul. Just two councilors voted against the plan.
Victoria Danberg, another city councilor, said the zoning changes will allow for more housing, a positive outcome. “It has been shown in many studies that increasing the amount of housing does crack the rents and slow down the increase,” she said. “Not reduce the prices of homes, but slows down the increase in rents and in prices of homes.”
City Councilor Brenda Noel, one of the two “no” votes, called the zoning overhaul a “huge disappointment,” since it didn’t go further. “It was the state that got it done. Not us,” she said. “We’re doing what the state’s asked us to do.”
City planning officials told councilors that Newton must submit its application for compliance with the MBTA Communities law by the end of the year. They did not have a timeframe for how long the state’s review of their application would take.
In the weeks before the final vote, as councilors spent hours debating which blocks to add to the zoning plan and other details, Ed Augustus, Gov. Maura Healey’s housing chief, sent a letter on November 15 to city officials laying out the stakes. He didn’t take a position on which plan they should choose, but noted that communities that aren’t compliant with the MBTA Communities law won’t receive grants and infrastructure funding from the state. As examples, he noted that Newton received in 2022 a $2 million grant for improving an intersection, and $500,000 for a feasibility study of the redevelopment of an armory.
City Councilor Alison Leary, the other “no” vote, voiced her own disappointment at the end of the evening, arguing that her colleagues should’ve gone beyond the law. “We have a climate crisis, we have a housing crisis and I’m concerned we’ve undercut so much and given up so much that very little will get built,” she said.