Tax financing zone and homeless shelter zoning approved

Items Recommended for Full Council

Urban Center Housing Tax Increment Financing (UCH-TIF) Zone for Assembly Square and East Somerville – Recommended 5-0

The committee recommended approval of a new UCH-TIF zone covering parts of Assembly Square and East Somerville. This state-authorized tool allows the city to negotiate tax increment financing deals with housing developers—relieving some future property tax obligations to make projects financially viable—while preserving Somerville's 20% inclusionary affordable housing requirement, the highest rate in the state.

Key points from the discussion:

• Economic Development Planner Katherine Wiese emphasized that creating the zone does not obligate the city to approve any deals; each individual project would still require a public hearing and Finance Committee deliberation.
• Staff noted the tool was used effectively at 299 Broadway, and the zone approval is a required state step before any project-specific agreement.
• Councilor McLaughlin (Ward 1, where the entire zone is located) strongly supported the item, framing it as a compromise between eliminating affordable housing requirements and doing nothing while zoned sites sit vacant. He fought to include East Somerville, citing long-abandoned businesses on Broadway.
• McLaughlin also stated on the record that he expects the city to negotiate clawback or renegotiation provisions so developers don't get a windfall if the market rebounds after a tax deal is signed.
• Chair Ewen-Campen framed the goal as encouraging development during a severe downturn in housing starts without abandoning the 20% inclusionary requirement.

Zoning Amendment on Homeless Shelters (Section 2.1.1) – Recommended as Amended, 5-0

The committee recommended approval of a zoning amendment, sponsored by Councilor Davis and co-sponsored by six colleagues, clarifying and expanding where homeless shelters are permitted. The proposal arose from confusion in the current zoning surfaced during the process of opening a shelter in Ward 6.

As amended by the committee, homeless shelters would be:

• Allowed by special permit (rather than by right, as originally drafted) in the Neighborhood Residence (NR) district
• Allowed by right in Urban Residence, Mid-Rise 3–6, High Rise, and two special districts (Powder House School District and Assembly Square Mixed-Use), with a required neighborhood meeting
• Not allowed as ground-floor uses on pedestrian-designated streets, and not extended to commercial districts beyond Dover Amendment protections

The amendment (changing "permitted" to "special permit" for NR in tables 3.1.16 and 9.1.1) passed 5-0 before the final recommendation, also 5-0. The change aligns with the Planning Board's positive recommendation, which suggested requiring a special permit in residential districts.

Committee Discussion

Staff Research on Peer Communities and Shelter Types

Land Use Analyst Samantha Carr presented follow-up research requested at the June session:

• Scale of the NR district: 74% of all zoned parcels and 60% of all dwelling units (roughly 23,000 units) are in Neighborhood Residence, making its inclusion or exclusion highly consequential for shelter siting options.
• Related uses: Domestic violence/sexual assault shelters typically proceed through the Dover Amendment process (protecting survivor confidentiality) and fall outside this item's scope. Sober living houses, transitional housing, veteran group housing, and supportive housing for aging adults with disabilities are federally protected and already permitted under the existing "community or group residence" use.
• Possible future refinements: Family housing stabilization shelters and runaway/homeless youth shelters could be added as distinct use categories if the council wants to treat them differently from shelters writ large.
• Peer comparison: Somerville's current rules most closely resemble Medford's. Cambridge, Boston, and Malden variously permit comparable uses more broadly—often in commercial districts—and Somerville is generally less permissive of supportive housing than its peers.

By-Right vs. Special Permit Debate

• Chair Ewen-Campen weighed both sides: shelters are rare, hard-to-fund projects the city shouldn't obstruct, but his experience with the Ward 3 warming center—which has worked well in many respects but also posed real challenges in a largely NR neighborhood—convinced him a legitimate public process via special permit is appropriate. He expressed confidence the permitting boards would treat applications seriously rather than as automatic approvals or denials.
• Councilor Davis, the sponsor, said he included NR by right specifically to prompt this discussion. He cited past examples—a friend unable to donate a house for use as a family shelter, and a church-owned house in Ward 6 used as recovery housing without complaint—but concluded the special permit approach, combined with possible future amendments for family and youth shelter categories, was a reasonable landing point.
• Councilor Clingan sought clarification on how drop-in shelters differ from group homes and family shelters, and supported a more robust process than just a community meeting to vet operators' track records and responsiveness. He suggested a term like "emergency housing" might help differentiate uses in the future.
• Councilor Sait supported shelters in NR but preferred the special permit route and suggested further work defining the different shelter types.
• Planning Deputy Director Fiona DiMartino confirmed the special permit process would follow the standard procedure, with findings and possible conditions set by the granting authority.

Timing Pressure

Analyst Carr noted the item's 90-day window for final action expires September 16; missing it would require resubmission and a new public hearing. This shaped the committee's decision to amend and vote tonight rather than continue deliberating.

What's Next

• Both items head to the full City Council, expected at the next council meeting (Thursday, September 11, based on discussion). The homeless shelter amendment must receive final action by September 16.
• Analyst Carr will prepare the clean amended text of the shelter ordinance for the council meeting.
• Councilor Davis flagged a potential future amendment to create nuanced use categories (family housing stabilization shelters, runaway/homeless youth shelters) that could be permitted more broadly in Neighborhood Residence—this would require a new submission and public hearing.
• Chair Ewen-Campen noted the administration will submit six zoning amendments at the next council meeting, so the committee plans a regular meeting cadence through the fall.