After more than two years of meetings on the new zoning required under the MBTA Communities Act, the town has submitted two maps to the state for pre-compliance review.
The two maps, which include more similarities than differences, were expected to be submitted Tuesday to the state Executive Office for Housing and Livable Communities, according to Town Planner Chris Ryan.
The state now has 90 days to provide feedback on the maps.
In the final weeks before the pre-compliance review deadline, one major sticking point—both for residents and town officials—was whether to include the Purecoat North property on Hittinger Street. At several recent meetings, Planning Board and Select Board members shared the owner’s desire to be included in the 3A zoning–the technical name of the MBTA zoning law– which would allow redevelopment of the property to include ground-level retail and upper-floor apartments. To do this, the property would need to be rezoned from general business.
“There are a lot of genuine questions about Purecoat, whether it will work or not remains to be seen,” Select Board member Roy Epstein said at a meeting last week, which was attended by Planning Board Vice Chair Carol Berberian. “In terms of how you define what’s economically advantageous to the town, I think that also requires some study of what that actually means.”
As a result, one map includes the Purecoat property, while the other does not. The map that does include Purecoat eliminates a section of lower Belmont, whereas the one that does not include Purecoat includes a section of lower Belmont. Because of contiguity requirements, it isn’t as simple as removing or adding the property, explained Epstein.
The last several years of meetings — which began with the MBTA Communities Act Advisory Committee — came in response to the passage of the MBTA Communities law, signed in 2021 by then-Gov. Charlie Baker. The new law requires towns served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), such as Belmont, to create at least one zoning district of reasonable size where multi-family housing is permitted and that meets other criteria, including:
- a minimum of 15 units per acre;
- located not more than a half mile from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal, or bus station;
- no age restrictions, and suitable for families with children.
Belmont is required to zone for at least 1,632 new housing units. The final deadline for compliance is Dec. 31, 2024.
At one of several meetings on the subject last week, Town Planning Chris Ryan said the town will still have time to continue to “work on the intricacies” of the maps, once they’re submitted for review.
“We will be getting 3D graphics and renderings of the buildings that we are conceptualizing as part of this process,” he said. “If anything seems too tall, we can certainly respond to that as well. Our goal right now is to get the compliance model into the state.”
Ryan said his office has reviewed compliance feedback for other town’s maps. Many of those communities, he said, were denied.
“We’re learning from that and we’re trying to incorporate a lot of that learning in our proposal to the state,” he said.
Following a discussion by the Planning Board last week, only member Rui “Renee” Guo was opposed to sending both maps to the state for pre-compliance review.
“I still firmly believe the town should use prudence when it comes to the redevelopment of the purecoat site,” said Guo. “Personally, I would not recommend sending both maps to pre-compliance. I believe we need a holistic process for the Purecoat site. I don’t think we should just put it in 3A like this.”
Most members of both boards, however, were amenable to sending both maps for pre-compliance review, regardless of their thoughts about Purecoat. Some spoke in favor of a Purecoat redevelopment, while others expressed concern for potential traffic impact as well as whether replacing a commercial property with housing units was economically responsible.
“I think we’re all committed to an open and fair process and regardless of our views on [individual maps], I think we go through a fair open process and so it makes sense to vet these both,” said Select Board Chair Elizabeth Dionne.
Planning Board Vice Chair Carol Berberian echoed a similar sentiment.
“The more information we have, the better we are going to be,” she said.