[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6330359,"mediaKeyId","2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad","parentId",2314548,"title","Residents and planners flag Boston Avenue/Tufts corridor and institutional zoning as next steps","audioSeconds",483,"startMs",6203000,"endMs",6686000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad&start=6203&end=6686","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad/thumbnail_6203000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6330359/Medford-City/Middlesex-County/Massachusetts/Residents-and-planners-flag-Boston-AvenueTufts-corridor-and-institutional-zoning-as-next-steps","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6330359-d954e98eb8966ff76b6453bc2bb7e4ce/orig.mp4?Expires=1770842522&Signature=Ag2BLHINeUGvQP7UMWj8Xma1ORkHJ9MRTKiccX9V9G6foYqGtiB6haj~m4WJ~MNYEsFKV~5TdsqLQyZSQ50pIiFEoZcNTyZr0o6E4SO4MVQgsgcJsPazSS4Dd6UumfQF0zlU1Qz3jhjH3OAyzMFFceJZfUuvTKwXVXtztBATXPhI~uQxdwBcXAIi6sENmuNvZQpM7YNZpraIHAXCcxJg1sGdDRIiRevkxPxs1lIu2ajgC~IaZZag66R2S8Nbk~TvbzLcTSmlAJ3E~JP~MqCeZbBGUBH6g8hMnhaWnilMP7v9UOkXUXP68yG3bPmrA23YN9ioxjvPMhsz3XkOrYWYJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Medford City, MA","date","2025-02-12T00:00:00Z","article","A number of public commenters told the Planning and Permitting Committee Feb. 12 that the Boston Avenue corridor and projects by Tufts University require focused attention because height and scale there directly overlook nearby residential neighborhoods.

Resident Janie Talarita, who identified herself from Hillside, asked about a recent Tufts proposal for “two buildings 10 stories high” on Boston Avenue and said the corridor “towers above us.” She asked how the zoning work will address large institutional dormitories and protect the adjacent hillside neighborhoods.

President Bares and staff said the Boston Avenue corridor and university sites will be treated as corridor and institutional zoning in a later phase of the Plan 2025 process. Bares told the meeting the city is considering an institutional zoning approach for Tufts and said the goal is to “fix these broken elements of our zoning, to avoid outcomes like what we saw” with recent large projects.

Consultants said they will extend the dimensional and light/air analyses done for Salem Street to areas such as Boston Avenue and will work with staff and the council to evaluate setback, stepback and other standards tailored to topography and adjacent neighborhoods. Emily Ennis confirmed the team will “do those studies... to make sure that our dimensional standards work.”

Committee members also discussed specific projects already in process: the Wellington MBTA area and a CAPI site application were mentioned as examples where overlay rules, easement constraints and PDD timing affect what can be built. President Bares urged an approach that applies consistent district‑wide rules where feasible rather than ad hoc parcel‑by‑parcel fixes.

The committee said corridor‑level work and institutional zones will come later in the Plan 2025 schedule, and asked consultants to coordinate study work on visual impacts and dimensional standards so councilors and residents can review draft protections before final referral to the Community Development Board.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Medford City Council Planning and Permitting Committee 02/12/25","oneSentenceSummary","Public commenters at the Feb. 12 Planning and Permitting Committee meeting asked the city to address large institutional projects along the Boston Avenue corridor, including recent dormitory proposals by Tufts University, and councilors and consultants said corridor and institutional zoning definitions will be handled in a later phase.","taxTitle","Medford City, Middlesex County, Massachusetts","taxId",5091,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6330364,"Planners map small commercial 'neighborhood hubs' to support walkability",151,4089000,4240000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad&start=4089&end=4240","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad/thumbnail_4089000.jpg","/articles/6330364/Medford-City/Middlesex-County/Massachusetts/Planners-map-small-commercial-neighborhood-hubs-to-support-walkability","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6330364-b5ce98a193961472a2a219413eb9abb5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770842522&Signature=YJYOEfSDqc1cB9i1YKNCWEX0bBe-owhf9mAsp8n4s9B28tL58F7gQgSUKA-XB4adUb~aAhxYmjDQ1Jqgtch5GmyPkzbdFLcTgAfu37EPO0ivgI-catAzgmEmWJeXRExuJOJA6aJ0QwlbLPQzs03gRm1TXIcp3MDwE~xD~v1Ylg3GqdAH0juXI1KHCycwyzuqukHlRZQspHY8-IfGOgZAYDx25xVAf7p3Gy-4YWPpSqsr5rru7PipPqp3AFlhlvHfbRuk000pgAxyeu1WPZNOEADAjnqZLcmXcfla8DTNHLBu5vVmgSW8Ooux7fxp210wUy7skQpLWkZE9NLEt4HxIQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Consultants from Ennis Associates told the Planning and Permitting Committee on Feb. 12 that they have begun cataloguing small, existing commercial lots inside otherwise residential neighborhoods and are evaluating where to formalize those clusters as neighborhood commercial nodes.

Emily Ennis described red lots on the consultants’ maps as “existing commercial, small commercial buildings” that are now often nonconforming. She said the study is intended to identify where small groceries, cafes, a neighborhood co‑working space or other low‑scale uses could be allowed so those businesses can invest and remain conforming.

“We've noticed ... there's a little convenience store, there's a little neighborhood cafe,” Ennis said, and the consultants want to “make it easier for them, but also just sort of thinking through how are they used by the neighborhood and how do we make that a better thing to do?”

Committee members responded positively. Councilor Callahan framed the idea as “community mixed use,” asking that hubs include uses and programming for all ages — cafes, small groceries, coworking and “children’s and teens activities” — so the nodes help neighborhood social life and walkability.

Consultants said many of the scattered commercial parcels sit near bus stops or other pedestrian nodes; the team plans to identify logical groupings and propose appropriate size and use limits for neighborhood hubs. The committee requested the commercial nodes maps and supporting materials be uploaded to the meeting’s public portal after the session so residents can review them in color and at larger scale.

The consultants said this analysis will feed into later rounds of the zoning project as corridors and squares are drafted, and that some hubs could be limited to small‑scale neighborhood uses to avoid broader commercial expansion into stable residential areas.","Consultants presented an analysis of small existing commercial lots inside residential districts and proposed creating neighborhood commercial nodes — small walkable hubs for cafes, grocers and community spaces — to be made conforming in revised zoning.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6330369,"Medford committee reviews draft neighborhood and urban residential zoning",7539,49000,7588000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad&start=49&end=7588","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2314548-31889f1378789af184144090598934ad/thumbnail_49000.jpg","/articles/6330369/Medford-City/Middlesex-County/Massachusetts/Medford-committee-reviews-draft-neighborhood-and-urban-residential-zoning","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6330369-b9f0b969fb22935323231267fe78f88a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770842522&Signature=N4~EMFrouyIf7uQj9DHbLJTh2yJOfoF81Hj~dguPMBtLr-O8zauXIcb8wnEq8Ar4xrUevyMMrbfSqJjK51zLXLg643gU4u98rrPQxE8szXeNMHxlSOLI8uMLjUl5iChbdBFenbs4HJNQeQALsZLabn7ca5NczutlxVImSOsoxx3gcl03gFlJoenTW02Agy88P5-WJwUpEPBAV6ICe5iNhpB8AaiOnp8G2-v0xzIRxAiZrtEKIJ9pSo2nyP23sLHb6VelLhZOOByfgykJPuz9azgP4HlPmL89XhfRDMWNgqANMG-Sa5bKA6kt-eT8YQH9iIkdWugbrrQpbj2PV-gMiQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Medford City Council Planning and Permitting Committee on Feb. 12, 2025 reviewed a new draft of zoning ordinance updates (paper 20433) from Ennis Associates that would create five new residential subdistricts and recategorize parts of the city to better reflect building types, topography and transit access.

The proposal would divide residential areas into neighborhood residential (NR1, NR2, NR3) and urban residential (UR1, UR2) subdistricts, set a three‑story maximum for the residential subdistricts and map those categories over existing building types to identify where the rules would change. Consultants said the draft is intended to align zoning with the city’s Plan 2025 priorities and to concentrate greater density near transit and job centers.

Ennis Associates planner Paola Ramos Martinez said the team used “proximity to high frequent and efficient public transit, proximity to higher job density areas, lot sizes and topography, existing residential types, [and] transition between low and medium density areas” to place new subdistrict boundaries. She and Emily Ennis walked the committee through version changes; the third draft incorporates requests from earlier meetings and shows the first detailed urban residential maps.

Under the consultants’ definitions, NR1 would generally allow single‑unit dwellings with accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and limited historic conversions; NR2 and NR3 allow progressively more units and townhouse/multiplex types. UR1 would allow two‑unit dwellings, townhouses and small multiplexes (roughly 2–5 units by historic conversion) and UR2 would allow townhouses and multiplexes up to roughly six units, generally capped at three stories. Ennis said taller, denser buildings should generally be designated mixed‑use rather than an exclusive residential district.

Councilors and staff described several map adjustments already made: parts of West Medford were reduced in density, a portion north of Medford Square was scaled back from NR3 to NR2, and other small boundary moves were made to reflect existing house types. President Bares thanked the consultants for incorporating council comments from prior meetings.

Several councilors and residents pressed for clearer protections for existing single‑family homes that would fall inside new UR districts. During public comment Judith Weinstock asked for clarification: “...new single family homes would not be permitted in that area. Is that correct?” Ennis confirmed UR1 and UR2 would not allow single‑family dwellings as a by‑right use and said the team is “looking at language that would prevent [homeowners] having to go for waivers for common adjustments to single family homes so that they would not be... disrupted by the change.”

Committee members and consultants discussed options that would allow routine renovations, porches or ADUs without sending homeowners to the Zoning Board of Appeal while still changing the allowable new‑construction use on those lots. Emily Ennis said one approach used elsewhere is an exemption for routine work on preexisting nonconforming homes so an owner “would be able to do it as of right.” The committee asked staff and the consultants to draft suggested nonconforming protections and sample language for the next meeting.

The committee also debated how state ADU law interacts with the proposed districts. A city staffer noted that the state’s ADU rules treat ADUs as a protected use in districts where single‑family homes are allowed, and that if a district does not allow single‑family dwellings as a right, ADU entitlement under the state statute may not apply automatically. Councilor Callahan asked whether the zoning could explicitly allow ADUs on existing single‑family homes that become nonconforming; staff said that is an option to draft into the proposal.

Councilors signaled continued attention to dimensional standards: President Bares and others asked for the committee to see numeric setbacks, lot coverage and roof‑slope/design guidance at the next meeting so the board can evaluate how the new categories would work with existing lots and topography. Ennis said dimensional standards will be the next major step and that consultants will compare existing nonconformities to proposed standards before firming up requirements.

The committee set follow‑ups: consultants will circulate updated maps reflecting tonight’s boundary requests, prepare draft nonconforming/waiver language to protect ordinary homeowner projects, and bring initial dimensional standards at the next meeting (the committee expects to meet on the topic again in two weeks). Consultants also reiterated the timeline for Plan 2025 tasks and public meetings leading to referral to the Community Development Board (CDB).","Medford City Council planning committee reviewed a third draft of neighborhood and urban residential subdistricts on Feb. 12, 2025, discussing new NR/UR categories, three‑story height limits, protections for existing single‑family homes, ADU treatment and next steps for maps and dimensional standards.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents and planners flag Boston Avenue/Tufts corridor and institutional zoning as next steps

Planners map small commercial 'neighborhood hubs' to support walkability

Medford committee reviews draft neighborhood and urban residential zoning