By Tim Talun

(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)

Often cited as New England’s densest city, Somerville is set to become significantly denser. The zoning ordinance overhaul now before the Board of Aldermen would guide the changes this increase in density will bring. Whether these changes would make our city more vibrant and livable, or uncomfortably crowded and congested, depends on how well they facilitate the variety, amenities, design quality and mix of property uses necessary to create great neighborhoods.

In many ways the proposed new ordinance would guide development that strengthens our squares and commercial streets as neighborhood commercial centers, while protecting residential neighborhoods’ character. But some of its technical regulations encourage the opposite.

Among its most important changes are those regulating commercial districts and squares, which it defines as “Mixed-Use” (MU) districts.

Dense neighborhoods that work well require a broad mix of uses, including places to live, work, shop and relax. Somerville’s squares and commercial districts were once true neighborhood centers, employing many and providing neighbors with seemingly everything they might need. Older residents fondly remember these thriving community centers, while younger and newer residents wish for their return. Appropriate increases in density are part of accomplishing this.

Zoning can do much to encourage commercial development in commercial districts, allowing people to work in the same neighborhoods in which they live. The draft zoning’s designation of ‘fabrication districts’ is a good start. It would also allow the same number of stories for office and residential buildings, while current zoning effectively limits office buildings to one story less.

But the new zoning would drastically increase allowable residential densities. To promote thriving mixed-use districts, it should instead put limits on residential density and on the conversion of commercial buildings to residential uses.. It should also consider creating zoning districts that do not allow any residential use where office and commercial buildings are clearly more appropriate.

For density to create a better living environment, people must be willing to drive less. In fact, auto use is already declining, particularly among younger adults. So the new zoning reduces parking requirements, bringing Somerville in line with other urban communities served by transit.

To reduce parking requirements without causing congestion and hardship for residents, people must be able to live comfortably without a car. An essential element in this is the extent to which neighbors have everything that they need within walking distance, which in turn, is influenced by mixed-use districts’ zoning.

The draft ordinance includes “arts and creative” spaces requirements. But it must do more to incentivize the broad range of shops and services that comprise complete neighborhoods.

As written, it could actually reduce the range of goods and services offered in mixed-use districts by permitting residential-only apartment buildings that have no street level retail. So the small neighborhood-oriented retail spaces that are essential to the vitality of our dense city would likely be replaced with apartment buildings along thoroughfares such as Washington Street from Union Square through East Somerville.

Variety keeps dense neighborhoods from feeling oppressive. Zoning should encourage it by providing flexibility to create the variation in building size, shape, type and design needed to appropriately respond to unique conditions while discouraging monotony. Zoning should not be so prescriptive that it limits the opportunity for good design.

Increases in allowable building area and allowable residential density would reduce building design flexibility.

The large building areas already allowed in Mixed-Use districts have already produced controversial projects. Yet the draft zoning removes limits on building area, allowing as much as can fit within the permitted number of stories and required setbacks. The number of residential units permitted would be based on building area instead of lot area, incentivizing larger buildings with little variation in unit size. This would encourage developers to build the biggest boxes possible within required setbacks, limiting flexibility in site design and reinforcing a tendency toward large, monolithic buildings with little open space.

Variety in building size and age yields vibrancy and produces higher levels of economic and social activity than exist in districts primarily composed of large new buildings. Somerville’s small-scale urban fabric gives it unique character that should not be compromised by inappropriate increases in density.

The zoning overhaul would increase building heights in all MU districts. Much of Union Square, for example, is zoned 5MU. This would permit 5 story buildings up to 70’ in height, a height increase of 15’. There is nothing wrong with taller buildings, but they should be located so as to minimize view and shadow impacts.

This is particularly important along historic view corridors from Prospect Hill. Views from parks, streets and homes give people a unique sense of place that is important in reducing the feeling of crowding that can come with density. The combined effect of increasing allowable building area, density and height could also encourage developers to replace many smaller historic buildings.

Backyards, lawns and gardens help compensate for Somerville’s parks-and-open-space deficit. Larger new buildings lack these spaces, making it all the more important that new parks, gardens and open space are created to connect people to the natural world and each other. Inadequate park and open-space requirements are among the proposed zoning’s greatest shortcomings.

Our already dense residential neighborhoods are not the place to increase density. Yet the new zoning would permit 3-unit and 4-unit buildings where only 2-family buildings are now allowed. One outcome could be speculators buying up single-family homes and replacing or converting them to multi-family properties, thereby reducing Somerville’s already limited stock of family housing.

As a city, we have made good decisions when we based them on hard evidence. The hard evidence needed to evaluate the proposed zoning ordinance should include creating examples of buildings that would actually be allowed under the existing and proposed zoning, across a range of districts. This would illustrate the changes’ impacts, as well as highlight unintended consequences—all the more important in light of the proposed new permitting process, which reduces citizen participation and negotiated outcomes.

Replacing the entire zoning ordinance is a difficult, ambitious and important project. Mayor Curtatone should be commended for taking it on, and planning staff, commended for all of their good work. But much remains to be done to ensure that our denser future will be a better future.

Tim Talun is an architect with Elkus Manfredi Architects, a member of the SomerVision Steering Committee and current Chairman of Union Square Neighbors.