Needham Voters Repeal Multi-family Housing Zoning, and Needham Gets Extension of Time to Comply with MBTA Communities Act

Image

Photo of Needham Town Hall by Magicpiano, CC By-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

On January 14th, Needham voters at Special Town Election have repealed the Multi-family Overlay District that Needham just approved at a Special Town Meeting only three months earlier. This development, along with the state's release of MBTA Communities Act emergency compliance guidelines - also on January 14th - means that the Town of Needham, along with other towns in non-compliance, has an additional six months to come up with zoning that complies with the MBTA Communities Act.

Generally speaking, the MBTA Communities Act requires municipalities with public transit hubs to create one zoning district of reasonable size that allows multi-family housing by right. At Special Town Meeting on October 21, 2024, Needham voters approved a Multi-family Overlay District ahead of an end-of-year deadline.

However, at the time of Needham's October Town Meeting, the Supreme Judicial Court had not yet spoken in Attorney General v. Town of Milton, et. al., a case in which the Massachusetts Attorney General sought to compel compliance with the MBTA Communities Act from the resisting Town of Milton. On January 8th, the Court issued a ruling finding the MBTA Communities Act constitutional, but because compliance guidelines were procedurally defective, it would be unenforceable until compliance guidelines were re-promulgated. This week, on January 14th, the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities issued emergency compliance guidelines.



However, also on January 14th, Needham residents at a Special Town Election voted to repeal the Multi-family Overlay District that Needham just approved in October. The vote to repeal followed a petition of 4,000 signatories expressing concern over the new zoning bylaw. Along with concerns such as the zoning's impact to traffic, classroom size, property values and growth, those opposed to the Multi-family Overlay District noted that the related housing plan would open the door to over 3,000 new dwelling units, which they called an over-compliance with the MBTA Communities Act. 

The Needham Residents for Thoughtful Zoning currently note on the group's website that under the MBTA Communities Act, Needham is required to have one 50-acre district for 1,784 units; however, the town’s housing plan would have allowed for 3,296 units on 92.5 acres.

With the threat of a lawsuit by the state to compel compliance in the background, proponents of Needham’s housing plan argued that a vote on January 14th to affirm the zoning bylaw for the overlay district would bring about MBTA Communities Act compliance. Housing options would become available for young families, seniors, and those who work in Needham, they argued. They suggested that the zoning bylaw would lead to increased vitality of the business and commercial districts in town.

Given the outcome of Needham’s Special Election this week to repeal the Multi-family Overlay District, Needham residents now have an opportunity in the next six months to formulate a revised housing plan and re-zone for an MBTA Communities Act compliant zoning district that better addresses the community's concerns.

Needham must submit an action plan by February 13, 2025. It has until July 14, 2025 to submit a district compliance application with approved zoning.

“The Town Manager will recommend that the Select Board and Planning Board advance zoning to the May 2025 Annual Town Meeting,” said Town Manager Kate Fitzpatrick in a statement on Wednesday evening this week.



You may also be interested in:

MBTA Communities Act is Constitutional, AG Has Power to Enforce It, But Not Right Now

Union, Business, Housing Leaders Express Support for AG Campbell's Enforcement of MBTA Communities Law

Select Board Endorses Westwood's First Development Produced in Response to MBTA Communities Act

Town of Milton Defends Against MA AG Suit that Seeks Compliance with MBTA Communities Act

I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive