Framingham Apartment Moratorium: Council Says Yes

FRAMINGHAM, MA — The Framingham City Council on Tuesday approved a nine-month moratorium — with a possible extension for an additional three months — on new apartment developments. The final vote on the matter comes after months of discussions, and after opposition from the business community.

The moratorium will allow Framingham to study whether new apartment developments are having a negative impact on the city. The city has since 2016 approved about 1,400 apartments across multiple developments. The moratorium will not stop those units from getting built, but would stop any new development proposals.

Framingham Mayor Yvonne Spicer opposed the moratorium, but her voice was largely absent from the debate until last Tuesday, when she issued a statement about it.

"The advocates for this moratorium have used traffic and school impacts as an argument that has been dispelled several times," her statement said. "The increased cost of student enrollment has been negligible. Increased traffic is often cited as a concern as well. If we had the housing for people who work in Framingham, it would curtail the need for people to commute to the City for employment, alleviating additional stress of traffic from commuters."

But the moratorium has been in front of the City Council for months — and was a main topic in the 2019 City Council elections.

In late March, District 1 Councilor Christine Long formally asked for public hearings on the matter. That was buoyed by a citizen petition signed by about 365 people. Long said Tuesday that she had reached out to the Spicer administration about the moratorium but "never got much of a response."

"There was no meaningful dialogue from the mayor ... until after the work was pretty much done," District 4 Councilor Michael Cannon said during the discussion Tuesday night.

It's possible the mayor could still weigh in by vetoing the moratorium, which could be reversed by a two-thirds vote of the Council. She has 10 days to either sign or veto the legislation.

Leaders in Framingham's business community, including the MetroWest Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Framingham Inc., spoke out against the idea. The Framingham Economic Development Industrial Corporation opposed the idea, and the Planning Board voted 4-1 not to support it.

Planning Board Chair Kristina Johnson spoke during Tuesday's discussion, saying that the city doesn't necessarily need to enact a moratorium to study traffic or school crowding related to apartments. She asked the Council consider exempting the downtown transit-oriented district from the moratorium. Johnson also asked for a larger study that would look at multimodal transportation, the real estate market, school enrollment demographics, and a sewer and water infrastructure capacity. The Council did not make those changes to the final moratorium.

Jack's Abby owner Sam Hendler spoke during public comment against the moratorium for at least the second time. He said talks of a moratorium last year convinced him to halt an expansion at his downtown building.

"In order to have businesses choose, when they'll have any option available to them, we need to set ourselves up to make decisions that the business community understands," he said.

District 8 Councilor John Stefanini proposed a two-week postponement of the moratorium so the Spicer administration could propose a plan for economic development in Framingham.

"I would rather see forced collaboration where the administration has to put up or shut up, or move forward with the moratorium," Stefanini said. "But I think it's worth having discussion."

Framingham Chief Operating Officer Thatcher Kezer III said the administration would be open to the two-week delay, but the vote failed.

The Council had previously voted 10-1 on the first reading of the moratorium on July 21, with Chair George King Jr. the sole no vote. The final vote was the same on Tuesday.