FRAMINGHAM - The Framingham City Council continued their discussion on the MBTA Communities Act during a meeting on Monday, November 25, as a wide range of potential overlay districts will be either approved, rejected, or amended.

Legislative and executive officials in Framingham have worked to find a plan that would put the city in compliance with the state law—which mandates that cities and towns with MBTA service have to create at least one by-right multi-family housing zone—for months. Residents have voiced their opinions on various aspects of prior proposals Mayor Charlie Sisitsky and other figures within his administration have advised that Framingham could fall out of compliance with the state law by the end of 2024, which could potentially leave the city at risk of missing out on state funding for a variety of projects. The law does not require that any structures actually be built; the legislation only deals with zoning.

During their prior meeting on November 19, the City Council voted to open the door for the suggestion their own overlay districts for consideration after rejecting an alternative proposal from Sisitsky’s administration. That second proposal, which was published on November 14, accounted for 4,634 potential new housing units in Framingham; the state law requires that Framingham offer zoning for at least 4,355 units.

Chair of the City Council and District 6 Councilor Phil Ottaviani told attendees at the Memorial Building on Monday that a public hearing on the initial MBTA zoning plan, which was first recommended back in September, was continued to the upcoming City Council meeting on December 3. In the meantime, members of the legislative group were instructed to add any parcels they wanted to be considered for the final plan. Suggestions for overlay districts that would meet the MBTA law’s requirements were not final, as Framingham’s Director of Planning and Community Development Sarkis Sarkisian noted that their inclusion would prompt a public advertisement before being brought forth to the city’s Planning Board for another public hearing.

Essentially: the City Council’s goal on Monday was to bring up any overlay district that could satisfy the state law, so that there can be a final decision on their approval, rejection, or alteration during a future public meeting. Parcels added as a suggestion can be removed later in the process.

Prior to the City Council’s list of recommendations on Monday, Sarkisian reiterated the administration’s belief that Framingham should not be partaking in “paper zoning”—zoning in areas that are already developed—in order to comply with the state law. He told councilors that doing so does not fall in line with the “spirit of the law,” while a written statement from Sisitsky—who was not in attendance on Monday due to an illness—advocated for a solution by the end of 2024 that addresses the rising costs of home ownership and renting.

District 1 City Councilor Christine Long acknowledged challenges with home ownership, but contended that issue was not the one being addressed by her colleagues.

“No one’s saying we don’t need housing. There’s no disagreement on that in this room,” Long said on Monday.

“But what we’re saying is: the selection of sites is more important than trying to appease developers that are chomping at the bit and doing a back-door end run…to get to what they want.”

City Councilors offered a wide range of thoughts on Monday. Noval Alexander of District 5 provided suggestions for a total of 4,381 zoned units across Framingham, while Long submitted a proposal for zoning that does not exceed the 4,355 required units. Council members like District 4’s Michael Cannon supported the continuation of this matter into 2025 due to the long-term implications of what by-right zoning is approved, while others like Alexander said Framingham has to address the current housing challenges as soon as possible.

“I think this is a generational shift, and I think we need to respond to that,” Alexander continued.

“As much as we don’t want that—some of you might not want that, or you want it in a different way…but the time has come.”

Cannon said that he wants to ensure that the group is making the right decisions if the by-right zoning will be a permanent fixture of Framingham’s zoning landscape. He mentioned that he wanted to confirm what money from the state would be in jeopardy if Framingham falls out of compliance with the MBTA Communities Act at the start of the new year; specifically, he brought up resources provided through the Massachusetts School Building Authority for the planned school project on the city’s south side.

Some City Councilors such as District 8’s Leslie White Harvey vouched for full-on compliance with the law through zoning that is spread out fairly across Framingham, while those like Adam Steiner of District 3 advocated in favor of zoning that accounts for previously-built housing units as a way to get credit for initiatives already taken in the city.

One of the major points of contention throughout the MBTA Communities Act process in Framingham has been the proposed overlay district within Nobscot, as community members and elected officials alike have voiced concerns about the impacts of increased housing density in the neighborhood, with traffic, community character, and the economic fallout being some of the worries expressed. Attorney Jeff Roelofs—a representative of J&Co, the group that owns and controls around 28 acres of property in Nobscot—was on hand to outline a memorandum of agreement (MOA) to the City Council on Monday. Roelofs said the MOA was created based off of community feedback to provide assurances to residents that a “livable, walkable community” could be maintained in the area.

“We wanted to offer up other restrictions and commitments so that you knew that my client really does want to do something here that will be good for Nobscot, advance the economic development strategy, studies that you’ve done, and the MBTA Communities Act,” Roelofs continued.

Notably, the MOA requires that at least 50% of all multi-family units developed in any future Nobscot overlay district must be ownership units, while at least half of the total units must be townhouses with imposed height limits. The MOA limits the number of bedrooms that would be developed, as at least 85% of the units would only have one to two bedrooms. The document’s stipulations would provide marketing preference for military veterans and municipal workers for 5% of the units, while a 13% affordable component—compared to the 10% minimum that is required by the state—would be offered.

Roelofs mentioned that Long had not signed off on that MOA.

Eventually, City Council members voted to include eight overlay districts on Monday for eventual approval, rejection, or revision.

The pair of downtown zones to be considered will be the two districts that were featured in the November 14 proposal from Sisitsky’s administration; 2,253 potential units downtown will be considered. District 7 City Council member Leora Mallach noted that close to 700 units are currently permitted in that area but have not yet been built; she believes that the city should get credit for those units through the eventual zoning plan.

The City Council-approved proposal for Saxonville’s overlay district will include the Pinefield Plaza at 15 units per acre. A 50 apartment unit bonus that was initially recommended in the November plan will not be a part of the final review.

The Nobscot district recommended by the legislative body includes Edmands Road and B4 parcels. Members initially voted 5-5-1 for the inclusion of the B4 parcel and the removal of the Edmands Road property, but Ottaviani contended that including both parcels in their initial recommendation was in the best interest of cooperation in the advertising process, since the final decisions on those parcels will come later on.

The Shoppers World overlay district will encompass the area included in the November 14 plan, along with an additional parcel along Flutie Pass.

The City Council’s proposed zoning districts for consideration at the 9-90 area and on Speen Street remain unchanged from what was recommended by the administration in November.

District 2 City Council member Brandon Ward proposed creating a new overlay district at The Buckley apartment complex on the corner of Mount Wayne Avenue and Franklin Street, so that the city can potentially get credit for those units. The inclusion of that eighth zone passed with unanimous approval. Meanwhile, a proposal for a zone encompassing the Chapel Hill and Water View apartments did not pass following a 5-6 vote.

These recommendations from the City Council have to be sent out for advertising to inform the public. The MBTA Communities Act topic will continue in December; the group has meetings currently set for December 3, December 17, and December 19. The City Council has the final authority on what is and is not accepted in this zoning plan.

‍