Interesting issue arose in the last Zoning and Planning meeting. Apparently, the folks who run The Street in Chestnut Hill want to add a vet’s office to the mix. But, the property is in a BU4 district, and a vet’s office is not listed as an allowed use, either by right or by special permit. It may just be a drafting oversight. In any case, they’ll need a change to the BU4 allowed uses to make it possible.
There will be a public hearing on the issue, probably next year. Councilor Lisle Baker seemed pretty adamant that it should require a special permit.
What do you think? Should it be possible just to add a pet doctor’s office to the Street, Chestnut Hill Square, and the Riverside Center (the only BU4 properties in the city)? Should it require City Council review and approval? Or, should vet’s not be allowed in BU4?
Last week at a Newton Economic Development Commission meeting one of commissioners asked if Newton’s reputation for making it hard for businesses to open here was based on fact, or just a perception.
I hope she’s reading this.
To add a little more texture to this discussion…here is the Planning Department memo on this docket item, which recommends that veterinary hospital be added as a permitted use in the BU4 district and that a public hearing on the matter be held next month: https://www.newtonma.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/77449/637723272186970000
The Planning Department’s recommendation is a completely reasonable and loogical quick fix for the issue at hand, but really sidesteps the bigger issue this discussion raises–namely, the outdated and inconsistent nature of the use table in the Newton zoning code. This is a topic that zoning redesign should make a top priority. The trend in modern codes is to define broad categories of uses, giving specific examples, but not limit uses to those specific examples. This means that, instead of trying to list every conceivable individual use (clearly an exercise in futility), uses are collapsed into overarching categories and specific guidelines are created for the interpretation of those categories by the relevant municipal authority. (A small number of uses may be carved out and prohibited or subject to special permit.) There are plenty of examples of modernized use tables out there on the interwebs, if people are interested.
One virtue of this approach is that it fosters nimbleness and flexibility in approvals and minimizes regulatory impediments to economic development (a real issue here in Newton, as Greg and Jerry note above). Additionally, it can be used to resolve inconsistencies in the zoning code. For instance, while a vet is not currently a permitted use in a BU4 district, an office (including a medical office) is. It’s hard to reconcile the different treatment of those uses. Finally, this would be a real step toward implementing positive structural change in our zoning code, rather than continuing to tweak the code in ways that do nothing to streamline the way we do business here in the City.
It’s a fact, Jack. I used to think it was about process, that if you had a good process, it would create a better product, a better law, a better development. But I find that to be untrue. The process in Newton is built to delay. Delay marijuana facility. Delay development and improvements on tired parking lots. Delay mixed use for the village centers. Delay the use of the comprehensive plan for the City of Newton, even though it was adopted 23-0. I have used Newton’s, that would be Isaac Newton, law of conservation to describe City of Newton to others. A body at rest stays at rest, until acted upon by an Outside force. In our case, that force is 40B.
I’d rather see a gun store.
If you are going to post an asinine comment like that, please use your real name.
Pretty sure Elmo was being ironic, likely referring to the fact that the Street is zoned to allow a gun store (although it needs a special permit) but but not apparently something as threatening as a vet.
I think I must be missing something …
Here’s what I found when I looked up the allowed BU4 uses in the zoning code.
“B-4 general business districts. The B-4 districts are intended to provide for a mixture of retail, service, transportation, storage and related activities which do not require a central location.”
Yes, the zoning code doesn’t specifically include vets, the same way it doesn’t include ice cream shops, nail salons, comic book stores, Roomba repair shops, or tomorrow’s businesses that don’t exist today.
I am at a complete loss as to how any of the Councilors could make a case that a vet in the business zoning district somehow requires a special permit or a change in zoning.
… and yes, its indeed this kind of thing that contributes to Newton’s “reputation for making it hard for businesses to open here”
Yes, I was indeed missing something …
The zoning code does contain a laundry list of VERY specific uses (see Chapter 6 in this document) for the different business districts.
As Meryl Kessler said above, the larger issue is that the underlying approach to how our zoning laws are written seems deeply flawed. Moving to a more generalized style of defining business uses seems like common sense, rather than endlessly tweaking.
I think part of the problem is that many folks in City Government have an abiding love for Special Permits. If a use is allowed by right, the property owner can re-purpose their premise, recruit a tenant, and open their doors. If the change requires a Special Permit than everybody (the Council, the public, etc) gets to weigh in on the property owner’s plans. More significantly, various accommodations” can then be mandated from the property owner as part of the Special Permit.
In truly special cases, where a property owner is trying to get an exemption from existing zoning rules , i.e. special treatment, that makes perfect sense.
The problems come when Special Permits are required for normal minor changes in use. For example in this case, the property owner can go ahead and change a property use to a pet store – no problem. If you want to change use to a vet, the whistle blows, and the lengthy Special Permit process begins, with everyone weighing in and no guaranteed outcome.
@ Jerry and Greg said. This is so unnecessary.
Pooches need to pee and poop outdoors. The Street abuts Hammond Pond. It also has some high end restaurants. So I’m surprised that Street management would even consider a vet. It seems like a poor fit with their other tenants.
Because of environmental concerns, I don’t like allowing dog walking in Hammond Woods, and I’d be very opposed to a vet at The Street. But I might be swayed by a Special Permit that required all dogs at The Street to be diapered.
Mike, do you ever visit the Street? Own a dog? There is already a pet food store at the Street focusing on dogs. Polkadog bakery. It gets tons of pet traffic. I’m there regularly. At no point have I seen any pet waste.
Those of us who do don’t typically walk the dog to or from the Vet. The vast majority would be driven. I’d use this vet potentially, and the idea that I’m suddenly going to let my dog go poop in the woods prior to the vet visit is laughable.
You are bringing your own pet poop to the pooch party with this pathetic post, peeing on the pet parade. Pffft. Phooey. Pshaw. Phew!
@fig–
I have no dog. I am a regular at The Street though.
Never noticed the Polkadog before. But I would bet dollars to doggie treats that the Polkadog has indoor toilet facilities for its employees. Where do the canine customers go to the bathroom? Do they just hold it until they get home? Doubt that would pass the sniff test!
I see customers and staff walking dogs all the time around other vet offices and dog groomers in the city. Why would it be different at The Street? Hammond Pond already faces serious environmental challenges including runoff from the shopping center, and run amuck dogs in Hammond Woods.
It’s just my opinion, but I think a veterinary clinic on the shore of Hammond Pond is a really sh!tty idea.
The vet we go to, commonwealth vet, has a designated area with a “fire hydrant” and bags available. Dogs are sometimes there for a while, depending on their reason for being there, and need a space. As for Hammond pond, I imagine the run off from the parking lot, large dirty snow piles, and an over population of geese might do more harm than responsible dog owners…