Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Oriented Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Land Use Committee reviews feasibility analysis for transit‑oriented zoning bonuses, leaves amendment in committee
Summary
Somerville City Land Use Committee heard a staff update on feasibility analysis for proposed transit‑oriented height and density bonuses intended to generate additional affordable housing and community benefits; staff will return with draft maps and further fiscal analysis and the committee left the item in committee for later review.
The Somerville City Land Use Committee on a remote meeting heard an update from staff on a proposed amendment to the city's zoning ordinances to create transit‑oriented height and density bonuses for additional affordable housing and other community benefits, and left the item in committee for further work.
Samantha Carr, the committee's land use analyst, said the city is “currently closing out phase 1 of the feasibility analysis.” She told councilors staff reviewed permitting data since 2019 to compare urban residential and mid‑rise projects and to test whether existing lot dimensions could feasibly support redevelopment without simply upzoning for its own sake.
Carr summarized preliminary findings: urban residential projects averaged about 29 units per project; mid‑rise 3 projects averaged roughly 14–15 units and mid‑rise 4 about 20–21 units; mid‑rise 5 projects produced a wide range (about 18 to 59 units depending on building type); and mid‑rise 6 projects averaged the largest yields, about 81 units. Carr said the analysis also examined dimensional measures, including floor plate, building width and lot coverage, and noted corner lots were common among recent projects.
Planning staff and councilors discussed the practical constraints that affect whether an upzoning will actually produce housing. Dan (last name not specified), a planning staff member, and another staffer, Mr. Bartman, said many shallow commercial lots cannot accommodate efficient apartment layouts without consolidation of adjacent parcels. Bartman explained the spatial constraints, saying a typical “double loaded corridor” apartment layout requires about “65 or 70 feet in‑depth,” not including landscaping or drive aisles, and that many shallow fronting lots would need adjoining parcels included to enable redevelopment.
Staff said the assessor's office is conducting revaluations this year and expects greater capacity to answer substantive fiscal questions between late October and November. A fiscal impact analysis is underway; staff said they will model scenarios comparing current neighborhood residential lot conditions to conversions to urban residential to estimate fiscal differences. Following the fiscal work, staff plan to begin phase 2 and produce draft maps for committee review at a future meeting.
Councilor Wilson urged staff to also consider sewer capacity and school enrollment catchment areas when modeling impacts, noting potential effects on K‑8 enrollments if more family housing is created. Committee members discussed whether adjacency or lot consolidation incentives could be designed so that an owner of an adjacent small lot would not be unexpectedly rezoned without local control; staff said they were not aware of a municipal mechanism that grants zoning rights based solely on private property ownership and noted Massachusetts law requires the city (or its authorized body) to retain control of the zoning map.
The committee did not vote on the zoning amendment. Chair (name not specified) said the committee would continue meeting every other Thursday until staff return with more developed maps and analysis and that the item would remain in committee.
