Watertown Given Protection from 40B Projects by Using Little Used Method

Print

The Town of Watertown has some protection from having dense residential projects allowed under the Chapter 40B law after being certified by the state that the Town meets a rarely used qualification.

Under Chapter 40B, communities in Massachusetts have to meet certain level of affordable housing or else they must allow the construction of housing projects with 25 percent affordable housing. Watertown currently requires 15 percent of units to be affordable new apartment complexes.

To qualify to avoid a Chapter 40B project, communities can get “Safe Harbor” by having 10 percent or more of its housing units sold or rented at affordable rates. Some communities have met that criteria, but Watertown does not (it has just over 7 percent). However, Town officials used another method, looking at the percentage of land devoted to affordable housing.

Assistant Town Manager Steve Magoon confirmed that the state met the requirement, certifying that Watertown has more than 1.7 percent of developable land devoted to affordable housing. That exceeds the 1.5 percent requirement.

“I think it is significant in a couple of ways,” Magoon said. “It is a result of a significant amount of hard work by staff — (senior planners) Gideon Schreiber and Laurel Schwab.” Secondly, I think we are one of the only, if not the only, municipality in the state that meets that criteria.”

Chapter 40B, which is meant to prevent anti-snob zoning that stops multi-unit housing developments to be built, has helped increase affordable housing, Magoon said. Watertown has 1,105 affordable units, but would need 447 more to reach 10 percent.

The 40B affordable housing requirement is either 25 percent of units rented at 80 percent of the median family income for the area, or 20 percent rented at 50 percent of the median family income.

To qualify for 80 percent the maximum income for one person is $63,448, two people is $72,512 and a family of four is $90,640 according to numbers from the Community Preservation Coalition. See more information by clicking here.

The safe harbor does not mean Watertown can deny any project, Magoon said.

“It does not mean we can stop housing from happening,” Magoon said. “But it means the work will have to be consistent with the (Town’s) Zoning rules and regulations.”

The calculation done after a 40B project was proposed on Coolidge Hill Road. Town’s calculation came in at 2.29 percent, and state officials did their own calculation, which was 1.74. They added some land that had not been part of the Town’s calculation, including Mt. Auburn Cemetery.

Magoon said the town has added a significant amount of affordable housing through recent developments and more will be added soon. Some, however, did not count toward the calculation. If a project is not complete, such as Arsenal Yards, then those affordable units could not be counted in the calculation, Magoon said.

Watertown is more secure in keeping its safe harbor than those communities who met the 10 percent criteria. Those communities count the total number of affordable units and compare it to a number based on the 2010 Census, but Magoon notes that after the 2020 Census, the number of housing units will increase for most communities.

“If the denominator jumps up above 10 percent they won’t qualify anymore. That doesn’t happen with the 1.5 percent rule,” Magoon said.

The recent calculation from the State only covers the Coolidge Hill Road project, Magoon said. Any future Chapter 40B Projects, including the one proposed for the former Sterritt Lumber site at 148 Waltham St., will have to be recalculated. Magoon said, however, he is confident the Town’s safe harbor will be reconfirmed.

4 thoughts on “Watertown Given Protection from 40B Projects by Using Little Used Method

  1. This type of housing dramatically affects the look and feel of our historic neighborhoods. Watertown should first and foremost protect the long established neighborhoods in this town.

  2. It is one thing to establish affordable living in new buildings but is it fair for some to pay 30 to 50% of the actual rent while others who have gone to college or worked long and hard to make a good income pay 100% of the rent? Should we file this under “it’s not your fault, it’s societies” so the government will take care of you and right the wrongs.

  3. Mr.Magnoon, by now, Watertown should have met this criteria for affordable housing. You told us, residents, before Repton place was built, that we would meet our affordable housing ??? Watertown has,Repton place, Mews,Arsenal st.lots of housing on pleasant st. So what’s this baloney, only 7percent, we should be way over 7 percent ????? I want some.answers ?????

  4. Watertown should also immediately do the “Local Preference” calculation for the 15% inclusionary zoning units (10% at .80 of area median income (AMI) and 5% at .65 of AMI) at the apartment developments coming on line. This calculation determines the number of units that can be set aside for the first lottery round of these affordable apartment units. Example: Arsenal Yards is set to have a total of 300 apartments; 15% or 45 units (30 units at .80 AMI; 15 units at .65 AMI) will be set aside as inclusionary zoning units. The local preference set aside can be no higher than 70% of the available units (or in this case 45 x .70= 31.5 = 32 units if Watertown qualifies for a 70% set aside) and this set aside only applies to the first rental round. Note: there are also calculations for any condo units being built.

    The current allowable local preference categories under the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) guidelines include:
    – Current residents: A household in which one or more members is living in the city or town at the time of application
    – Municipal Employees: Employees of the municipality, such as teachers, janitors, firefighters, police officers, librarians, or town hall employees.
    – Employees of Local Businesses: Employees of businesses located in the municipality.
    – Households with children attending the local schools, such as METCO students.

    If a community wishes to implement a local selection preference for the allowable categories it must:
    – Demonstrate in the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan prepared for a specific project the need for the local preference (e.g., the community may have a disproportionately low rental or ownership affordable housing stock relative to need in comparison to the regional area); and
    – Demonstrate that the proposed local preference will not have a disparate impact on protected classes.

    As often seen in ads for local communities in the Boston Globe – units are advertised by size, number of bedrooms, number of occupants allowed, location, and income parameters, application, and lottery details.

    So why hasn’t Watertown done the “Local Preference” calculation given community housing supply and demand needs? I have asked this question of multiple people in town and I am still waiting for an answer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *