Framingham's MBTA Zoning Solution Takes No Credit for Past Housing
Framingham is the odd man out, as the majority of communities use credit for past developments to reduce the burden of MBTA compliance
Argument In a Nutshell
While other Massachusetts communities, which have achieved compliance with the state MBTA Communities Act, have gotten substantial credit for prior residential developments, Framingham has explicitly rejected that approach.
Those communities have included in their compliance packages zones which exactly cover prior developments with no prospect of ever being redeveloped. The state has allowed that, and it is clearly a legitimate way for a city or town to get credit for the past effort it has put into residential development.
All through the Framingham planning process, residents have been puzzled at why Framingham must do even more than it already has to increase the residential housing supply. Why does Framingham not get full credit for all the housing complexes we see as we drive around Framingham?
The short answer is that Framingham has been hampered throughout its planning process by a Planning Department Director who believes, incorrectly, that it is contrary to the spirit of the MBTA Communities Act to seek any credit for past development.
The Planning Board has also completely aligned itself with that view for the entire duration of the planning process.
The City Council seems now to be also aligning itself with the Planning Board and the Planning Department Director, by accepting the plan the Mayor submitted to the state in late December 2024, with some small reduction of the Central Business District to bring the residential unit count down to the minimum required by the state: 4,355.
It is now up to the City Council to decide whether Framingham will stick with tweaking the Mayor’s Central Business District (CBD) plan or switch to a plan which gives Framingham a full measure of credit for its past residential developments, like so many other communities have, and which would cut the unit impact on Framingham from 4,355 to about half that amount.
The remainder of this article will lay out the chapter and verse of the argument that the City Council should ditch tweaking the Mayor’s CBD plan, and act decisively in this matter by insisting that Framingham get as much credit for its substantial existing residential developments as other communities have and cut the Framingham impact of the MBTA Communities Act in half.
There is time for the City Council to pursue this much more optimal solution, as Framingham still has 180 days to submit a complete compliance plan to the state.
Before diving into all the details, there is one example which is worth keeping in mind.
It concerns Legacy Place in Dedham. Most people will know this as a well-designed shopping mall in Dedham. It is also one of the completed developments which Dedham submitted to the state in its MBTA Communities Act (MBTA CA) compliance package. That package was approved by the state. Legacy Place contributed 487 units towards the required unit total of 1,569 units, or 31% of the required total.
If the Framingham Planning Board and Planning Director had been in charge of Dedham planning, they would have disallowed inclusion of Legacy Place in the package submitted to the state.
The Current City Council Approach
The starting point for the City Council effort is shown in this excerpt from the January 22, 2025, letter granting conditional compliance to the city is as follows:
Although the state only requires a multi-family unit capacity of 4,355 residential units for Framingham, the city’s submission estimated its submitted capacity to be 6,286. On review, the state found some serious mistakes in the city’s submission and lowered that figure to 5,348.
It is remarkable that the Mayor was quite comfortable with submitting way more unit capacity than the state required. It is fortunate that the state found errors that reduced that overcompliance to 5,348, but there still was no reason for the city to go beyond the 4,355 unit capacity requirement.
Further, the size of the CBD is 225 acres, way more than the 50 acres required by the state.
Even if the City Council succeeds in shrinking the CBD, so that the submitted multi-family unit capacity matches the required amount of 4,355, the CBD-based zoning solution still takes no advantage of the credit Framingham should get from all of its prior housing developments in other parts of the city.
If Framingham would simply embrace the approach so many other cities and towns have used, where they add MBTA CA zones which exactly cover existing developments with virtually no chance of redevelopment, the impact on the city could be reduced by a factor of two.
In the following it will be shown how the 4,355 units from the CBD could be replaced by 2,236 units in the CBD plus 2,122 units drawn from existing residential developments in other parts of the city.
This shows what can be done.
The approach could be further refined to adjust the total from 4,358 units to 4,355 units. The point here is that at least 50% of the units submitted for compliance would already have been built. That is how the burden on Framingham gets cut in half.
The fortunate thing is that this new approach to Framingham’s compliance with the MBTA Communities Act (MBTA CA) leaves the Central Business District intact, and capitalizes on all of the work done so far.
It returns to the original way the planning process was developed, with the identification of Multi-Family Overlay Districts (MODs) as the basic compliance tool.
We can first look at Wayland as an example of how to proceed, apply that approach to Framingham and then look at many examples of other communities which have done similar plans.
How Wayland Achieved MBTA CA Compliance and Got Credit for Prior Development
Four Wayland links contain most of the information used in the explanation which follows:
Article 26 Fact Sheet - Required MBTA Communities Multi-Family Housing Zoning Bylaw
Wayland MBTA Locations Vetted by the Planning Board
Wayland used the MOD approach and settled on 4 MODs: two aimed at commercial areas, and two exactly covering locations which are already built out and unlikely to be developed. They are described in their information as:
· Two sub-districts are within commercial zones where owner support is significant and disruption to existing neighborhoods is limited: o Rte. 20 West (sub-district 9A) – 7.8 acres, 20 units/acre maximum o Town Center (sub-district 9C) – 11.5 acres, 27 units/acre maximum
· Two sub-districts are where multi-family zoning is already in place: o River’s Edge West (Alta Oxbow sub-district 9B) – 5.8 acres, 32 units/acre maximum o Planned Development District (Coltsway in Stoneridge Village, a small portion of the Mainstone Condominiums, sub-district 9D) – 25.1 acres, 10 units/acre maximum § The nature of a condominium requires widespread ownership approval before redevelopment could occur
Two sub-districts are where multi-family housing already exists: Alta Oxbow (9B) and a small portion of Mainstone (9D).
The contribution of the already developed MODs: 9B, 9D to the multi-family unit capacity is 5.8*32 + 25.1*10 = 436.6, which is 58% of the MBTA CA required 750 units.
Anyone can take a look at the Alta Oxbow development. It is on the right as you drive on Rt 20 outbound right at the Wayland/Sudbury line.
Alta Oxbow development
Bottom Line
Wayland used already built residential developments to satisfy 58% of its MBTA CA requirements.
That is a good model to follow.
Applying the Wayland Approach to Framingham
We can take MODs from the work done up to the December 17, 2024, City Council meeting,
We can take MODs 1 & 2 from there:
MOD 1 – 67.8 acres – 25 units/acre = 1,694 units
MOD 2 – 27.1 acres – 20 units/acre = 542 units
That totals 2,236 units.
Then, following the Wayland approach, we look for residential developments which are already in place and highly unlikely to be redeveloped to create MOD 3. Good candidates are the large residential developments along Route 9 outbound past Temple St:
Waterview Terrace, 1500 & 1550 Worcester Rd 15 acres – 30 units/acre = 450 units
The Green at 9 and 90 23 acres - 30 units/acre = 690 units
MOD 3 – 38 acres - 30 units/acre = 1140 units
Further possible candidates, amongst many, are The Buckley, Avalon, and Century Estates, which could make MOD 4, MOD 5 and MOD6:
The Buckley: MOD 4 – 6 acres – 35 units/acre = 210 units
Avalon: MOD 5 -13.4 acres @33 units/acre = 442 units
Century Estates Condominium: MOD 6 – 11.07 acres -30 units/acre = 330 units
Totaling the MODs 3, 4, 5, 6, we get 2,122 units.
The total of all MODs comes to 4,358, close enough to 4,355 for our illustrative purpose.
Such an approach would achieve MBTA CA compliance with 2,122/4,358 *100 = 49% of the units made up from pre-existing developments. The downtown MODs 1&2 comprise 51% of the total and are within 0.5 miles of the MBTA Commuter Rail station, and both those MODs are more than 25 acres.
There are other condominiums which could be used. Here is the list.
Obviously, all of this can be adjusted, using the condominium list to advantage. It might be possible to trim MODs 1&2 or eliminate one of them.
Clearly, an optimal solution can be achieved, using the tool of adding MODs which cover pre-existing developments.
Bottom Line
Framingham could achieve compliance with the MBTA CA with just 2,236 units which could be developed, rather than 4,355 units.
Examples From Other Communities
While Wayland’s compliance model used 58% for pre-existing developments, other communities have been more aggressive.
Here are many examples. All of these have zoned pre-existing developments. The actual percentages are quoted on some, but not others, but all use very aggressive approaches. The cities/towns which have achieved full compliance are shown
Marlborough
Marlborough has opted for 100% of its submission being pre-existing developments, as reported in the Community Advocate: https://www.communityadvocate.com/2024/10/17/city-council-approves-mbta-zoning-district/
“The proposed overlay district would be divided into three subdistricts – Royal Crest/Briarwood, off Hosmer Street; Lincoln/Mechanic, adjacent to downtown; and Simarano, off Boston Post Road West.
The units at Royal Crest and Briarwood were built in the 1970s.
Simarano – the Green District – is under construction. Phase 1 (The Burrow – 235 units) and phase 2 (The Lodge) are completed; phases 3 and 4 have been approved by the city. The next two phases would add 475 dwelling units and nearly 700 parking spaces to the site.
The site at Lincoln/Mechanic – Alta Marlborough – is also under construction. The site will include 276 dwelling units and 448 parking spaces.”
Ashland
Ashland has opted for 80%: https://www.ashlandmass.com/DocumentCenter/View/14306/Ashland-MBTA_Pub_Dis_Presentation_8_27_24?bidId=
Further communities were reported on in the Boston Globe on May 18, 2024, with narratives on how they achieved their solutions, but without the percentages. If their submissions have achieved Compliance, it is noted. Some are still in review.
Norwood [Compliant]
“Norwood has achieved MBTA CA compliance with extensive use of MODs which cover existing housing. As an example, Norwood officials rezoned a 914-unit housing development, The Commons at Windsor Gardens, to limit how much housing could be created in town under MBTA Communities.”
Wellesley
“Wellesley is revamping the zoning where The Nines, an 850-unit apartment complex on the town’s border with Newton, now sits. On paper that fulfills some 60 percent of the new law’s local mandate.”
Dedham [Compliant]
“Dedham did something similar when it passed its plan last year, zoning over several existing and permitted apartment buildings and Legacy Place, a thriving mixed-use complex.”
Sudbury
“An even more extreme example is Sudbury, where local officials drew two zoning districts roughly five miles apart, each atop sprawling apartment complexes.”
The compliance status of cities and towns across the Commonwealth may be found here.
Conclusion
The City Council can get this right. It can ensure that Framingham does not suffer a much greater MBTA CA compliance burden than other communities who have taken credit for their prior investments in residential development.
The City Council can have a huge influence on the burden placed on Framingham by the MBTA Communities Act, not only in the character of future developments, but in the amount of stress which will be placed on the school district as more residential development adds more students, requiring an expansion of both classroom capacity and funding for more staff.
All the City Council has to do is to look beyond the borders of Framingham to find solutions which can be used to great advantage.