In a potentially precedent-setting case, the first project seeking bonuses under the MBTA Act provisions of our Zoning Bylaw contains fewer Affordable units than required by the Bylaw itself. Nonetheless, the Arlington Redevelopment Board has indicated it is poised to allow developers a fifth floor bonus in contradiction to the Bylaw, based upon a novel “interpretation” of the Bylaw. This would open the door to future rule-bending in all projects built in the town’s MBTA Act Overlay going forward.
On October 20th, ten members of the public, including abutters, voiced concerns about the project at 126 Broadway, which proposes a 5-story building made up of 14 units for a small lot where a 2-family now stands. (One more person liked the proposal and one was neutral). The project is in a residential neighborhood full of houses and low-rise apartments. Residents expressed concerns about the building’s size, its ugliness, the impact of cars parked on the street 24/7 (9 of 14 units would have no assigned parking), accessibility, snow and trash, pedestrian / student safety, and - most importantly - the legality of the project as proposed. If the ARB is allowed to let this project go forward despite the fact that it contains 3 affordable units when 4 are required under the provisions of our bylaw, then every development seeking MBTA Act “bonuses” in Arlington will demand a similar reduction in the number of affordable units required to gain a bonus floor or smaller setback.
Arlington’s Zoning Bylaws contain very specific wording in the specific section on bonuses to be earned under by-right development in the MBTA Act Overlay, which these developers opted to use instead of our traditional Inclusionary Zoning. Specifically, the requirement for a fifth floor bonus in the Mass Ave/Broadway Multifamily (MBMF) district in Section 5.9.4.E(2) of the Bylaw reads:
- (2) In the MBMF Overlay District, one additional story may be added if the total percentage of affordable units exceeds the requirements in Section 8.2.3 Requirements of this Bylaw for a total of at least 22.5% of all units (emphasis added).
This is the bylaw on bonuses that was presented to the public and voted into law by Town Meeting. Clearly, the words “at least” are baked into the requirements. Our Inclusionary Zoning bylaw (8.2.3) is mentioned only in that these requirements are to exceed those. A developer must adhere to either our MBTA Act regulations or our older Inclusionary Zoning regulations. Mixing and matching is not allowed.
At the previous ARB hearing on 126 Broadway, a member of the Board told the developers they had not met any of the requirements for either a bonus fifth floor or for a zero setback from the sidewalk. At the October meeting, all ARB members suddenly opined that the requirement for a fifth floor had been met (and they agreed on the zero setback bonus, despite debate amongst themselves on that decision). In doing so, the ARB is letting developers bend a carefully worded law. The law was crafted so that adding a fifth floor (NOTE: on Mass Ave, sixth floor bonuses will also be in play), or getting permission to extend tall buildings right up to the sidewalk, would require stringent concessions. To any reasonable person, “for a total of at least 22.5% of all units” means what it says. It sets a minimum threshold. This building proposes 3 affordable units out of 14, which is not “at least 22.5% of all units.” There is no rounding down from a minimum threshold.
This is the first project on a main street seeking to use relaxed MBTA Act zoning rules. Do not let unelected individuals on the ARB twist and weaken the few safeguards established to prevent developers from thwarting residents’ wishes and flouting our laws. Do not allow them to set a precedent whereby they will seek to ignore the affordable unit thresholds required to earn bonuses for every single project under MBTA Act zoning going forward based on cherry-picking from different sections of our laws.
The NEXT HEARING on 126 BROADWAY is set for NOVEMBER 17th. Time is TBD. Please attend this meeting and ask the ARB to uphold our law as written and presented to our Town Meeting. Please also send letters to the ARB, the Planning Director, and the Town Manager, who appoints ARB Members, asking them to uphold the minimum threshold:
ARB Members:
