Framingham planning subcommittee recommends approval of CB district submission with conditions

The Planning & Zoning Subcommittee of the Framingham City Council voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the Central Business (CB) District submission that the mayor sent to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC), provided the city meets conditions and submits required follow-up materials within the state’s timeline.

The vote came after a lengthy review of an EOHLC conditional-compliance letter that identified discrepancies in the city’s submitted compliance model, asked for an economic feasibility analysis, and warned that the state office could rescind conditional compliance if subsequent information reduced the district’s estimated multifamily unit capacity.

EOHLC’s review flagged multiple technical issues. The letter said the city’s footnote on unit capacity requires a special permit for multifamily development under 30,000 square feet; accounting for that cap reduces a previously submitted unit estimate from 6,286 units to 4,275 units. EOHLC also noted that Framingham’s dimensional rules permitting greater height and lot coverage on parcels of at least 20,000 square feet were not accounted for in the city’s model; adding that permissiveness raises the unit total to 5,348 units. EOHLC reported an adjusted gross density of 25.4 units per acre and said Framingham must submit an economic feasibility analysis no later than 180 days after the letter.

Council members framed the vote as a practical step to keep the city on the state timeline while they refine the zoning map and dimensional rules. Councilor Long said the subcommittee would press planning staff and the city solicitor to work with EOHLC on the specific amendments EOHLC requested. “I can reach out to them as a chair of the Planning and Zoning Subcommittee,” Long said, noting prior meetings with EOHLC staff.

Several councilors said they want to reduce the geographic size of the CB District on certain side streets to limit by-right six-story construction and to protect neighborhood scale and parking. Councilor Bryant criticized the tone of the EOHLC letter: “I don’t like the tone of the letter at all,” he said, while urging careful attention to how new development “fits in with the neighborhood.” Councilor Ward and others repeatedly raised parking and neighborhood character concerns and proposed map tweaks that would remove some side streets from the CB District.

EOHLC cautioned the city not to use design standards or site-plan review in a way that would effectively reduce estimated multifamily capacity; the letter said such discretionary use could render the district noncompliant with the criteria under which it was approved. The letter also identified other regulatory issues — special-permit triggers for land disturbance of one acre or more, stormwater management obligations, and language requiring designs to “relate harmoniously to the historical character of the surrounding neighborhood” — and warned against applying those rules in ways that would contradict the as-of-right allowances EOHLC reviewed.

The subcommittee’s motion recommended approval of the CB District as submitted to EOHLC, with conditional compliance and the committee’s proposed amendments (the motion described the map changes presented at the meeting). The committee’s recorded vote was: Councilor Ward — yes; Councilor Aviani — yes; Councilor Ian Bruno — yes; Councilor Bryant — yes; Councilor Long — yes. The tally was 5 yes, 0 no, outcome: approved (recommendation to City Council).

Next steps discussed at the meeting include sending the subcommittee’s recommendation and the proposed amended map to the full City Council for its vote, having the city solicitor confirm procedural steps, and completing the economic feasibility analysis cited by EOHLC within the 180-day window. Planning staff, the planning board and EOHLC were discussed as parties that will need to coordinate on the follow-up work. The subcommittee also noted that EOHLC staff offered assistance to interpret EFA (economic feasibility analysis) requirements.

Votes at a glance: the Planning & Zoning Subcommittee voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the CB District submission to EOHLC with conditional compliance and the presented amendments.

The subcommittee left the substantive technical work — recalculating unit capacity, revising dimensional allowances, and producing the economic feasibility analysis — to city planning staff and the solicitor, with direction to keep the process on the 180-day schedule outlined by EOHLC.