A Needham working group on residential floor-area-ratio (FAR) rules debated how to treat attic and third-floor space, with members split over whether to exclude nonhabitable attic volume from FAR or to offer a small FAR bonus to encourage finished third floors.

The group spent most of the meeting weighing two competing goals: reduce visible "bulk" on the first two floors of new homes, and avoid creating easy workarounds that would let builders finish space after permitting. Paul, who reported on a meeting with architect Mike McKay and builder Gary Losanto, said the architects told the group "the figure that we were talking about in that meeting was somewhere in the region of 300 square feet" as a possible incentive to make third floors worth building out.

Why it matters: the planning work aims to limit how heavy or bulky new houses look from the street while preserving flexibility for pitched roofs and attic space. Several members warned that a too-generous allowance would effectively raise house sizes across options the committee has modeled, while a too-strict definition would push square footage down into larger first- and second-floor footprints — the very bulk the committee wants to reduce.

Committee members reviewed three kinds of fixes under discussion: (1) a clear definition of "attic" that would not count toward FAR if the space is inaccessible except by a nonpermanent stair (for example, a pull-down stair); (2) a modest FAR bonus — figures discussed included 200, 225, 250 and 300 sq ft — that would be available only if a permanent (fixed) stair and a true third floor are provided; and (3) an area cap so that excluded attic area cannot exceed a fixed fraction of the second-floor area (a commonly proposed cap in the meeting was 50% of the second-floor area measured above the chosen headroom threshold).

"If you do a third floor with fixed stair, you get an additional 200 square feet of FAR," said one member summarizing a drafting approach preferred by several participants. Other members pushed back: "I just don't see how this adds much," said Joe, noting that many of the committee's modeling tables had assumed third-floor area and that giving back several hundred square feet could undo the intended bulk control.

The group also heard practical enforcement concerns from someone who had consulted the interim building inspector, John Mel, who warned that simple headroom thresholds can be gamed by reconfiguring collar ties or other framing elements. Oscar said he would try to address that risk by combining an accessibility test (no fixed stair) with a size cap and by making any bonus available only when a permanent stair and explicitly habitable third-floor are provided.

No formal roll-call vote was recorded during the meeting. The committee agreed on a procedural next step: Oscar will draft proposed zoning text implementing the attic definition, the optional bonus (recommended drafts ranged 225–250 or 300 sq ft as compromise figures), and the 50% cap on attic area above the headroom threshold. Unidentified Speaker 1 made the motion and Speaker 7 seconded it to have Oscar write up the text and circulate it to the group and planning-board staff.

The working group scheduled a follow-up discussion for Friday at 1:00 p.m. to review Oscar's draft, materials for the packet (graphics and Excel models), and proposed redline zoning language. The planning board will receive the committee's recommendation with the drafted wording and supporting graphics.

Next steps: Oscar will circulate draft language to Lee and Alex for packet inclusion; members agreed to review the draft offline and reconvene to vote on whether to include the new attic exception or a FAR bonus when the committee meets again.