<div dir="ltr"><div>I will just add that while <b>missing middle</b> housing is often if not usually less expensive than single family housing in the same market, technically missing middle refers to the housing type (small multifamily units that fit into residential neighborhoods) not the price range, so missing middle units can include multi-million dollar condos affordable to few. </div><div><br></div><div>I am a very strong advocate for missing middle and in many situations it makes sense for communities to add missing middle units by right, subject to height and bulk controls and design standards, in many if not most areas within a mile or so of urban and village centers. I just want to make sure that we are all using the same terms.</div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><br><i><font color="#0000ff" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Wayne Feiden FAICP</font></i></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 4:42\u202fPM Daniel Fortier via MassPlanners <<a href="mailto:massplanners@masscptc.org">massplanners@masscptc.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="msg-1120591035272286488">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Not as much a critique as a clarification. I have qualms about IZ unless it is tied to a Special Permit under Chapter 40A Section 9, a this for that arrangement. So, working from this, I am assuming that the relief requested under 6.10a is for density that
is not a by-right increase in units. In that case, if 6.10c modifies projects under 6.10a, then I think it is a workable, and defensible proposal. Defensible within the parameters of Chapter 40A Section 9 allowing increases in density for, among other things,
affordable housing. You probably want to be sure that you address what affordable may mean in this specific instance, not necessarily units at 80% of median, such as units restricted to 100% or 120% of median income, the so called missing middle that is overlooked
by Chapter 40B. I would direct you to look at the two Davenport v Dennisport Partners (<a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ma-court-of-appeals/1506097.html" id="m_-1120591035272286488LPlnkOWA78357985-3a3c-ff89-44e0-a4769417ce1b" target="_blank">v. (2010)
| FindLaw</a> ) cases, Walsh on the Veterans Home ( <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ma-court-of-appeals/1994005.html" id="m_-1120591035272286488LPlnkOWAb4a5c9e4-3400-1b1f-be53-29e8d9b8ff8d" target="_blank">
WALSH v. PLANNING BOARD OF DENNIS (2019) | FindLaw</a>) and more recent Mariani v Planning Board of Dennis (<a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ma-court-of-appeals/114979970.html" id="m_-1120591035272286488LPlnkOWA94d262e7-90d1-ebc2-0bb7-df7d17d13ab8" target="_blank">MARIO
MARIANI v. PLANNING BOARD OF DENNIS (2023) | FindLaw</a>).</div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
While Walsh and Mariani both swung on standing, in both cases the judges also discussed the validity under 40A Section 9 to do this zoning. Davenport I (linked above) might need to look to the Superior Court decision as the Appeals Court sent it back to us
to make some revisions to items they felt was unclear.</div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Dan Fortier, AICP</div>
<div style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Retired Planner</div>
<div id="m_-1120591035272286488appendonsend"></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="m_-1120591035272286488divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Ryan, Christopher <<a href="mailto:cryan@belmont-ma.gov" target="_blank">cryan@belmont-ma.gov</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 30, 2025 9:44 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Daniel Fortier <<a href="mailto:daniel.j.fortier@gmail.com" target="_blank">daniel.j.fortier@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Mass Planners <<a href="mailto:massplanners@masscptc.org" target="_blank">massplanners@masscptc.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [EXTERNAL]Re: [Massplanners] Inclusionary Housing Bylaw Question</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div>
<p>Thanks Dan</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I suppose it would have been more helpful to share the impetus for this question and I appreciate your seeking more clarity.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>We have a large older apartment complex with market rate affordable units and long time residents that is currently undergoing a sale due to the passing of a long time owner. Guessing that the property will be sold to a hedge fund or
some other investor that will try to extract maximum value from the purchase, thus putting at risk the market rate affordability of the units.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Belmont is looking to add language to our inclusionary housing bylaw that covers rehabilitation in addition to new construction and we do not expect new units to be added. I have found some good language here and there from places such
as Provincetown (thank you Thaddeus), Somerville, and Worcester, but are still poking around.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Addressing sections like Definitions, Applicability, and Incentives are the primary focus. The proposed new language in Applicability is worded as:</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Applicability</span></b></p>
<p><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">This Section 6.10 shall apply in all zoning districts to the following uses:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<ol start="1" type="a" style="margin-top:0in">
<li style="margin-left:0in"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Any development that results in a net increase of four (4) or more dwelling units, whether by new construction, alteration, expansion, reconstruction,
or change of existing residential or non-residential space or use, or to any division of land for the development of six (6) or more dwelling units, except as identified under b) below.</span></li></ol>
<p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<ol start="2" type="a" style="margin-top:0in">
<li style="margin-left:0in"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Any health care-related development that results in a net increase of six (6) or more independent living units.</span></li></ol>
<p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<ol start="3" type="a" style="margin-top:0in">
<li style="margin-left:0in"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Substantial rehabilitation may vary in degree from gutting and extensive reconstruction to the cure of substantial accumulation of deferred maintenance.
Cosmetic improvements alone do not qualify as substantial rehabilitation under this definition.</span></li></ol>
<p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Note that this applies to projects that intend to alter, expand, reconstruct, or change the use of at least 50% of all units in a Development simultaneously or phased over no more than
five (5) year period.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Critiques are welcome\u2026</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks again Dan</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Chris</p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p><b>From:</b> Daniel Fortier <<a href="mailto:daniel.j.fortier@gmail.com" target="_blank">daniel.j.fortier@gmail.com</a>> <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 30, 2025 10:23 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ryan, Christopher <<a href="mailto:cryan@belmont-ma.gov" target="_blank">cryan@belmont-ma.gov</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Mass Planners <<a href="mailto:massplanners@masscptc.org" target="_blank">massplanners@masscptc.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL]Re: [Massplanners] Inclusionary Housing Bylaw Question</p>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div style="border:1pt solid rgb(156,101,0);padding:2pt">
<p style="line-height:12pt;background:rgb(255,235,156)"><span style="font-size:10pt;color:rgb(156,101,0)">CAUTION:</span><span style="font-size:10pt;color:black"> This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.</span></p>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p>Chris, </p>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Not sure exactly what you are looking for. Substantial Rehabilitation without a density change would not seem to trigger any additional zoning relief. Thinking the rehab is entirely within the existing building envelope a d just brings
the building back to what it was before falling into disrepair.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Beyond that, a couple examples with my thoughts on how I might approach revisions. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>The Dennis Affordable Housing Bylaw allows increases in density on lots under 2.5 acres as Municipally Sponsored Projects. We set a high bar, modified once already, with 50% affordable to households under 80% of median and (after amendment)
25% affordable to households under 120% of median. The Bylaw could be used to convert an historic sprawling farmhouse into a multi family structure if endorsed by the Select Board. Only two takers, one got dragged out in court and was never built as even in
victory it became too expensive. Same person replaced an abandoned burned out structure with a four unit three bedroom rental project. I would probably push to reduce the affordability components if I had it to do over, probably 15% @ 80% of median and 10%
at 120% of median. This lower requirement would make historic preservation projects more profitable. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>In West Dennis Village Center Zoning we allowed multi family housing. Working, for years, with realtors, developers and our historic preservation community, we accomplished the restoration of the Captain Baker house, better known as The
Dennis Columns. The project created 5 for sale units in the restoration project and will add 11 units in historically appropriate buildings on the site (original developer was going to use federal historic preservation funding and got National Park Service
sign off on the design and location of these buildings).</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Also, under the Affordable Housing Bylaw we have approved several conversions of vacant commercial space to residential, some with expanded building envelopes. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Daniel Fortier, AICP Retired Planner </p>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p>On Tue, Apr 29, 2025, 2:21\u202fPM Ryan, Christopher via MassPlanners <<a href="mailto:massplanners@masscptc.org" target="_blank">massplanners@masscptc.org</a>> wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p>Hi all</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Just following up on this question asked last week. Looking for anyone applying IZ to substantial rehab.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Chris</p>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p><b>From:</b> MassPlanners <<a href="mailto:massplanners-bounces@masscptc.org" target="_blank">massplanners-bounces@masscptc.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ryan, Christopher via MassPlanners<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 24, 2025 2:42 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Mass Planners <<a href="mailto:massplanners@masscptc.org" target="_blank">massplanners@masscptc.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL][Massplanners] Inclusionary Housing Bylaw Question</p>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div style="border:1pt solid rgb(156,101,0);padding:2pt">
<p style="line-height:12pt;background:rgb(255,235,156)"><span style="font-size:10pt;color:rgb(156,101,0)">CAUTION:</span><span style="font-size:10pt;color:black"> This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.</span></p>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<p>Good afternoon planners</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Our Housing Trust is interested in adding provisions for substantial rehabilitations/renovations to comply with the inclusionary housing bylaw. Do you know of any good examples of communities that have done this?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>They also are interested in the preferred definition of \u201csubstantial rehabilitation\u201d</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks in advance.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Chris R.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>==========================================</p>
<p><b><i>Christopher J. Ryan, AICP</i></b></p>
<p>Director of Planning & Building</p>
<p>Town of Belmont, MA</p>
<p><a href="https://www.google.com/maps/search/19+Moore+Street?entry=gmail&source=g" target="_blank">19 Moore Street</a></p>
<p>Belmont, MA 02478-0900</p>
<p>617.993-2650</p>
<p><a href="mailto:cryan@belmont-ma.gov" target="_blank">cryan@belmont-ma.gov</a></p>
<p><a href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.belmont-ma.gov%2f1451%2fPlanning-Board&c=E,1,o8b2XHhMCs0FFeFPD8_B3TFG-aMCOSECZ5O_sHv9-Ya7HHb3TQPEIs27R50SHoKJmA2OcUPLCsvz0WJg4o-YnM61hwPQZZre8ZCQimVYZdGC&typo=1" target="_blank">https://www.belmont-ma.gov/1451/Planning-Board</a></p>
<p>===========================================</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>-- <br>
MassPlanners mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:MassPlanners@masscptc.org" target="_blank">MassPlanners@masscptc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org" target="_blank">http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
-- <br>
MassPlanners mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:MassPlanners@masscptc.org" target="_blank">MassPlanners@masscptc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org</a><br>
</div></blockquote></div>