By CHRISTIAN MAITRE
Waltham Times Contributing Writer
After receiving additional information from Mayor Jeannette McCarthy and the Law Department, the CIty Council voted to put two proposed zoning changes – instead of one, as originally planned – in front of the public at a Dec. 16 hearing.
Both of the proposed zoning changes are intended to bring Waltham into compliance with the state’s MBTA Communities Act.
The MBTA Communities Act requires communities to have zoning that allows for higher density housing around mass transit stations.
The Ordinances and Rules Committee – a subcommittee of the City Council – at a Nov. 18 meeting had reviewed the two zoning change options.
Both options change the city’s original plan for lowering the setback requirements for buildings and the minimum number of parking spaces required per unit.
The first option proposed reducing the setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. This proposal maintains the city’s original plan of having the buildings hold four units each.
The second option would allow developers to construct eight-unit buildings, essentially just pushing two four-unit buildings together, and would reduce the setback from 20 feet to 12 feet. These buildings would still have a height cap of four stories.
Both options reduce the minimum number of parking spaces required per unit, from two to one.
The Ordinances and Rules Committee on Nov. 18 had voted to move forward with option two, scheduling it to be reviewed at the Dec. 16 public hearing.
However, with the Nov. 25 CIty Council action, the Dec. 16 hearing now will include discussion on both.
Looming deadline
The city crafted both proposals, according to Katherine D. Laughman, the city solicitor.
Laughman told council members at last week’s meeting that state officials have said each of the two options will meet the requirements set by the MBTA Communities Act.
Laughman said the city gets to decide which zoning option it wants to enact, although the state will have a final review process before any proposed zoning change is finalized.
Laughman said communities that do not comply with the law by the deadline risk becoming ineligible for state grants as well as possible legal action by the state.
The city needs to act quickly on which option to submit to the state, as the deadline to approve a zoning change must happen by the state’s Dec. 31 deadline.
Challenges to making deadline
Laughman and city officials said the multiple required readings of any proposed zoning change that are legally required as the proposal goes from the public hearing through various committees, including the City Council, could complicate the city efforts to make that deadline.
Ward 9 Councilor Robert Logan expressed frustration with the request to present both zoning proposals at the Dec. 16 meeting – instead of just the second option, as voted by the Ordinances and Rules Committee.
He said city officials have been working on the proposals for months before voting to move forward with that second option.
“To come in here tonight and at the last minute get a communication that was sent so recently that half of it was still on the printing machine is a little bit disconcerting,” he said.
He also said he doubted that he would hear anything at the public hearing that would change his decision to support the second of the two proposed zoning changes.
The full Nov. 25 City Council meeting can be viewed here.