Selected Comments
Letters in the Belmont Voice
Letter
February 2026
The overlay is a clarion call for increased commercial tax revenue and housing. We need both!
However, I question the estimated net revenues and worry about nebulous responses regarding infrastructure costs, parking and traffic/congestion solutions, and funding to enhance the town staff to handle such a complex development.
Many have challenged planners on school costs, or the very low car/unit or /work-site ratios. In addition, low build-out means permitting fees (not detailed in public forums) trickle in, so who pays (and when) up-front costs of new/incremental sewer and water systems, electrical, and transformer upgrades, or significant investments in new streets and pedestrian safety (the latter in which Belmont already lags badly). How does our stressed operating budget front-load hiring planning, engineering and permitting personnel required (and on what timing) to support this plan?
Another concern: Property owners lose lease income for at least two or three years, then borrow heavily to raze and build.
They have to recruit new businesses to the new properties and sell the housing. That’s a major undertaking and fraught with huge financial risk. To encourage them, has the town modeled lost or “forgiven” tax revenue as old properties come off-line? Does the developer/owner ask the town for additional tax abatements to help fund their portion of sewer, water, utility and streets/scapes work, until lease income builds? Once online, does the property owner apply for further reduction of taxes over the initial years of operation? Any of these costs further reduces the return on investment overlay proponents’ project.
Bottom line, the overlay plan does not seem fully baked yet. Residents need more concrete explanations and numbers. A more modest proposal would reduce the concerns of many about serious degrading of the “town center” environment — looking like a checkerboard where one or two projects proceed at full height but other one-story buildings remain, or a canyon of too-tall edifices if somehow fully developed. As is, do a majority of residents have the full confidence “we” have a successful and detailed plan, and are we ready to pull the trigger?
- Larry Link, Orchard Street
Letter: No Support for Overlay in Current Form
February 4, 2026
While I support improving Belmont zoning to encourage commercial and residential uses, I do not support the proposed Belmont Center Overlay District zoning in its current form. It needs work. I submitted amendments to delay the zoning so it could be fixed and resubmitted to a later Town Meeting.
The proposed zoning has errors and is incomplete: The proposed zoning refers to and relies on non-existent provisions that are yet to be drafted. The 60 pages of zoning in Warrant Articles 2 and 3 are confusing and are daunting to read.
Belmont deserves a well-drafted, understandable, enforceable, and unambiguous zoning by- law. More clarifying definitions are needed. Defined terms should be used consistently.
Clarification is needed as to how the proposed Belmont Center overlay district will interact with the various MBTA multi-family housing overlay districts in Belmont Center. Provisions with undefined, unenforceable, aspirational concepts—such as encouraging a “vibrant, walkable environment,” “ensuring harmonious relationship between different land use intensities” — need to be grouped with the aspirational “purposes” instead of being seeded among the legalistic zoning specifics. Excessive architectural details need to be reconsidered, e.g., requiring two-inch “expression lines” on multi-story buildings.
I also submitted amendments addressing parking and overnight on-street parking.
The overlay zoning for housing ignores the parking reality: It requires only 0.3 parking spaces per dwelling unit. So, doing the math, if there were 10 dwelling units built in Belmont Center, only three parking spaces would be required. BUT, typically, there would be at least one car owner in each dwelling unit. Even if the residents walk, bike, bus to work, where will they park overnight if there aren’t enough parking spaces provided for them? Will housing in Belmont Center be attractive if dwellers have no place to park overnight? Current zoning elsewhere in Belmont requires two parking spaces per dwelling unit (but only one parking space if the unit has fewer than two bedrooms), and that standard should apply in Belmont Center. Overnight on-street parking should not be allowed.
- Robert E. McGaw, Louise Road
Letter: Hit Pause on Rezoning
January 30, 2026
I am writing to urge residents to study the Belmont Center Zoning Overlay Proposal very carefully. On March 4, Town Meeting members will vote on whether to support or oppose the proposal.
Unfortunately, the Select Board has failed to reach a consensus among residents regarding the proposal. Supporters are in lockstep with the Select Board yet unwilling to engage in a forum or debate on the merits of the plan. They point to the vacancies in the Center as “not a good sign.” Yet they fail to acknowledge that the town has absolutely no control over the rents charged.
They claim that the changes to the center will be “modest” and “will strengthen our strained local budget.” Parents are being told that support of the overlay will bring additional property tax relief and more funding for schools.
While our Warrant Committee is developing a fiscal analysis of the zoning overlay, such promises have yet to be shown.
Business owners and abutters alike continue to express their fears of the outcome of the zoning changes, should they be approved. Many business owners believe they would have to shut down. To date, the Select Board’s only response to the parking and traffic obstacles inherent in this plan is to say, “It is a transit-oriented plan.” The potential for 500 new rental units and 1,200 new employees in this one-block area should be reconsidered. Traffic and parking study reports are vague and require additional analysis.
The Overlay zoning proposal appears to be rushed. It is not too late for the Select Board to take a step back and dismiss the zoning articles to a fall Town Meeting. By delaying a vote in March, we can come together as a community in support of a more reasonable, scaled-down zoning plan. Change is coming. Change can be welcomed but only when residents understand the full impact of the significant changes proposed.
- Peg Callanan, Sargent Road
Letter: No Bully Pulpit
January 27, 2026
In six weeks, Town Meeting will grapple with the largest single zoning change we’ve ever faced - to be handled in the same way a revision to the parking ordinance would. Those who have concerns about the proposed Belmont Center Overlay district will speak those concerns, standing at a microphone. One by one, members will get their two or three minutes, seeking to understand the validity or veracity of the town’s formidable perspectives and positions. They’ll likely be responded to by a fully unified body of town representatives, and summarily be told their concerns have already been addressed or are unfounded…Next!
Kind of an uneven matchup, no?
Yes, the town has had many information sessions, following just this format. Based on those, they see no need to have a sit-down discussion with qualified, informed, and knowledgeable members of the community in a moderated and expansive panel-based forum.
This overlay is nothing short of eliminating a perfectly enjoyable, warm, and vibrant Belmont Center, with potentially permanent and massive impacts to residents, merchants, and the community.
But we are being told, “It will be worth it, trust us.” Vibrancy, equity, and sustainability are in the revised mantra. Unlimited large franchises and densification are now on the table.
“Generic” should be added to the list. Good-bye Nick’s Place, hello Jersey Mikes et. al. So far, we’re seeing scant evidence of “worth it” in the financial models.
The town should not hide behind one-sided “information sessions.” A forum would provide a meaningful discussion of the possibility of inherent, substantive flaws and risks, rather than focusing only on well-crafted rewards. A select group would present findings, raise concerns, and ask considered and well-founded questions. In other words, a level playing field. Residents should hear directly from knowledgeable, qualified voices who see things other than through the rose-colored-glasses-only perspective of the Planning and Select Boards.
- William Trabilcy, Marlboro Street
Letter: The Town Needs Revenue
January 9, 2026
Will someone please define “vibrancy” for me? Explain why we need more “experiences” in Belmont Center. Vibrancy and experiences are offered as reasons for the proposed zoning overlay. What the town desperately needs is revenue, not experiences.
I walk to Belmont Center three times a week. It always feels full of vitality and activity. The Center hosts Town Day, the Holiday Tree and Menorah Lighting, Midnight Shopping and Holiday Happenings, the Farmers’ Market, Touch-a-Truck, pumpkin painting and Halloween window decorating, the LGBTQ celebration, author talks, and outdoor dining. The Center is beautifully decorated for the December holidays and replete with flowers in warmer months.
Belmont Center is home to 10 food establishments, from pizza to pastry, wine to chocolate, and five restaurants. There are toys, books, jewelry and eyeglasses along with seven clothing stores, two gift stores, two realtors, five banks, and nine hair, nails and fitness salons. Don’t forget the cleaners, law offices, and a newspaper office.
I hear some want more medical office space in Belmont Center. We already have 12 dental practices. There are numerous dental, medical, and wellness practices along Concord Avenue and Trapelo Road. Residents can access the medical office buildings just over the border in Cambridge and Waltham.
The proposed zoning will likely replace the diverse local flavor we treasure about Belmont Center with national chains, but no additional parking. First, malls scooped local shoppers; now online shopping dominates. Yet Belmont Center endures with a special mix of retail and service establishments and community gathering spaces.
I don’t see any tax relief from destroying Belmont Center for intangibles. I do see developers forcing out the local businesses we enjoy. If the overlay passes, I won’t be the empty-nester living in the Center, I’ll be driving to Lexington or Concord for their right-sized centers.
- Anne Marie Mahoney, Goden Street
Letter: Traffic in the Center is Bad
October 4, 2025
In the article, “Overlay Discussion Pushed to Winter Town Meeting,” published Sept. 25, referring to a new traffic study that will be undertaken as part of the Belmont Center rezoning project, Select Board member Elizabeth Dionne is quoted as saying, “I don’t think traffic is as bad as people are claiming it is or will be.”
I have lived a block from Belmont Center for four decades and traverse it almost daily. What I have experienced and continue to experience is very heavy traffic that travels entirely too fast, both through the center, on Pleasant Street, and up Concord Avenue. Crossing Leonard Street at a crosswalk requires being on high alert at all times, waving at drivers to stop or at least slow down, and short-leashing my dogs to make sure they are safe until we reach the other side.
Traffic in and around the center is and has been bad for years. I find Ms. Dionne’s comment utterly puzzling. Anyone who has ever walked or driven near or through the center knows this quite well.
- Evanthia K. Mallris, Pleasant Street