| | | | | | | | 
Town of Arlington, Massachusetts
| |
Article 38 | | | |
| | | | | | | | Warrant Article Title:
ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT/TWO FAMILY CONSTRUCTION ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN R0 AND R1 RESIDENTIAL ZONES | | | |
| | | | | | | | Warrant Article Text:To see if the Town will vote to or take any action related thereto: To amend Section 5.4 of the Zoning Bylaw by amending definitions and expanding allowable residential uses in the R0 Large Lot Single-Family District and R1 Single-Family District with the goal of diversifying the housing stock; or take any action related thereto.
| | | |
| | | | | | | | Requested by:
(Inserted at the request of Annie LaCourt and ten registered voters) | | | |
| | | | | | | | Report Excerpt:This Article aligns with the Fair Housing Action Plan which notes that in addition to many other impediments to fair housing, “The substance of the Zoning Bylaw also presents fair housing issues. The current Bylaw is more restrictive than its own historic development patterns, substantially limiting opportunities to build multifamily housing and create affordable housing options in town—housing options that can advance fair housing choice… Single-family districts have historically been employed as a mechanism to promote segregation and to prevent households that cannot afford a single-family home on a large lot from moving to town… While segregation is no longer the Town’s intent, the large share of land devoted to single-family districts remains an impediment to housing choice. When combined with the high cost of land, the Bylaw’s minimum lot sizes and single-family use districts ensure that only large, high-cost housing can be built in those locations. In R1 districts, where nonconforming two-family dwellings are fairly commonplace, the mandate to build only single-family dwellings is not rooted in the area’s architectural character but is rather the legacy of a specific historical social movement to restrict growth in the town” (Fair Housing Action Plan, pp. 56-57).
There was a robust discussion of this Article and many comments received from the public at the hearing and via email correspondence. The Board deliberated on the Article, discussing a range of interests and concerns. Three Board members in favor of the Article (Benson, Lau, and Revilak) chose to limit the maximum size of new two-family and duplex dwelling units to 1,850 square feet each, which aligns with the definition of starter homes in 760 CMR 59.00: Smart Growth Zoning Districts and Starter Home Zoning Districts.
Members noted that single-family homes are currently being torn down and replaced by larger single-family homes in the R0 and R1 zoning districts. That will continue with or without the passage of this Article. The Article, however, allows for two smaller units to be constructed instead of one single-family home, which is a better alternative to the status quo. Those two size-limited units should sell for less than one larger house, thus providing purchase options for families that would be unable to afford a larger home. The Board also believed that the rate of change would be modest, based on the rate of home replacements in Arlington during the past several years. The Board also noted the Article would not create larger buildings because the dimensional requirements in the Zoning Bylaw will remain the same and there is no change in the parking and open space requirements. The Board further noted the Article would not exceed the capacity of the town’s water or sewer infrastructure (per correspondence with the Director of Public Works) or negatively affect the value of people’s homes.
The two Board members opposed to the Article (Tintocalis and Zsembery) expressed their interest in this as an innovative policy for advancing housing choice. They expressed a desire for this strategy being implemented as part of suite of comprehensive and connected amendments created to work together to advance the Housing Production Plan, MBTA Communities, or both. Further, members in opposition felt that having a real estate transfer fee in place to generate funding for affordable housing would be ideal. [1] Tintocalis also expressed a concern that this Article did not adequately address affordability for different income levels in creating additional housing choice.
All Board members expressed concern about the lack of accurate information in the public discourse and the need for more robust data-driven information to explain the Article for residents and Town Meeting members. While all members were concerned about these issues, this factor was a consideration for the two Board members who opposed the Article.
In summary, the Article would not allow for larger buildings than currently allowed by the Zoning Bylaw. The Article does not change open space requirements, setback requirements, parking requirements, or height requirements currently set forth in the R0 and R1 zoning districts. This Article is not about creating deed-restricted affordable housing; it instead would create additional housing options, as noted in the Fair Housing Action Plan.
[1] Town Meeting passed a Home Rule petition in 2021to allow Arlington to Establish a Real Estate Transfer Fee for Property in the Town of Arlington. The bill (H.4295) was filed, had a hearing with the committee on Revenue, and was reported out favorably in March 2022 and referred to the committee on House Steering, Policy and Scheduling.
| | | |
| | | | | | | | Vote Language:The Redevelopment Board voted 3-2-0 to recommend Favorable Action on Article 38 as amended that the Zoning Bylaw be and hereby is amended as follows:
Definitions of the R0 and R1 districts in Section 5.4.1(A):
(1) R0: Large Lot Single-Family Residential District. The Large Lot Single-Family Residential District has the lowest residential density of all districts and is generally served by local streets only. The Town discourages intensive land uses, uses that would detract from the single-family residential character of these neighborhoods, and uses that would otherwise interfere with the intent of this Bylaw.
(2) R1: Single-Family Residential District. The predominant uses in R1 are single-family, two-family, duplex dwellings, and public land and buildings. The Town discourages intensive land uses, uses that would detract from the single-family residential character of these neighborhoods, and uses that would otherwise interfere with the intent of this Bylaw.
By making the following changes to 5.4.2A. Table of Dimensional and Density Regulations, R District Building Height and Floor Area Ratio Regulations, so that the first line for R0, R1 would read as follows:
|
R District Building Height and Floor Area Ratio Regulations (see 5.4.2(B) for exceptions)
|
|
|
|
Maximum Allowed
|
|
District
|
Use
|
Maximum Height (ft.)
|
Maximum Height (stories)
|
Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
|
|
R0, R1
|
|
|
Single Family detached dwelling, two family dwelling*, duplex dwelling*
|
35
|
2 ½
|
-----
|
* By deed restriction neither unit of a two-family dwelling or a duplex dwelling shall exceed 1,850 square feet of heated living space.
By adding the letter "Y" to the "Use Regulations for Residential Districts" table in Section 5.4.3, in the rows labeled "Two family dwelling, duplex" under the columns labeled "R0" and "R1"; so that the first two columns of said rows read as follows:
|
5.4.3 Use Regulations for Residential Districts
|
|
Class of Use
|
R0
|
R1
|
R2
|
R3
|
R4
|
R5
|
R6
|
R7
|
|
Residential
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Single-family detached dwelling
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Six or more single family dwellings on one or more contiguous lots
|
SP
|
SP
|
SP
|
SP
|
SP
|
SP
|
SP
|
SP
|
|
Two-family dwelling, duplex
|
Y*
|
Y*
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
* By deed restriction neither unit of a two-family dwelling or a duplex dwelling shall exceed 1,850 square feet of heated living space. | | | |
|