Amid residents’ concerns about Newton moving toward having no houses with character or even backyards, the pace of home demolitions has decreased significantly recently, and the City’s regulation of home construction is facing on-going changes.
The Zoning and Planning Committee has spent months trying to address community distress about teardowns and how to best create policy that incentivizes homeowners to build around what already exists in a manner that respects each neighborhood, its residents, and property owners.
The state of Newton’s demolitions
While Newton had regularly seen about 100 home demolitions annually, the total amount of demolitions has decreased by 42% in recent years, according to data from the City’s Inspectional Services Department (see table).
Houses most likely to be demolished in Newton are those that were built in the postwar era of the 1950s and 1960s.
Property taxes represent 83% of the City’s revenue. Single and two-unit properties make up more than 75% of Newton’s property tax base, and approximately 10% of Newton’s yearly housing sales result in demolitions, according to data from the City Planning Department.
Virtually all demolitions result in increased property value, and the aggregate of these increases is an important part of the City’s revenue growth. The City generally plans for an additional 1% annual increase in tax revenue from “new growth” above the limit of 2.5% tax-base increase set by Proposition 2½. The need for increased City revenue for City services thus represents an incentive favoring demolitions for upgraded development.
Measures to control demolitions
The City has a few measures in place that slow or prevent demolitions.
Demolition delays: Currently, the City’s Demolition Review Ordinance requires that “demolition or partial demolition of any building or structure that is 50 years old or older requires the approval of the Preservation Planner and/or the Newton Historical Commission (NHC). If the building or structure is determined to be historically significant and preferably preserved, a delay of demolition can be imposed.” A delay of 12 months can be imposed on properties that meet these requirements and “a delay of 18 months can be imposed for properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.” During the delay period, the building process becomes more expensive and more burdensome for homeowners to take on new construction.
Historic districts: Demolitions or alterations to buildings can also be prevented if they are in a local historic district. The City of Newton’s Historic District Ordinance aims to “preserve buildings and areas with a high level of historical, cultural, or architectural importance.” Newton currently has four historic districts, in parts of Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Newtonville, and Upper Falls. Residents of some other neighborhoods, such as Newton Highlands and West Newton, have not been successful in their attempts to create historic districts.
Landmark status: Newton’s highest level of protection that can be placed on a property is designation under Newton’s Local Landmark Ordinance. Designations are authorized by the Newton Historical Commission, which determines which structures are the most architecturally or historically significant in the city.
Zoning regulations: In January 2025, Newton saw updates to its zoning regulations intended to address recent code changes, including the electrification of new homes, changes in how the height of new homes are measured, and what homeowners can do with regard to retaining walls. These code changes make it more expensive to build, according to Jennifer Caira, Newton’s Planning and Development department director, which can contribute to a lower demolition rate.
Outside of the City’s scope, another factor limiting demolitions is inflation. Building materials, such as wood, have become more expensive due to tariffs. According to the National Association of Home Builders, Canadian lumber tariffs could run even higher than 34.5% later this year, which is significant as “Canada accounts for roughly 85% of all U.S. softwood lumber imports and represents almost one-quarter of the supply in the U.S.”
Community concerns
Community members have expressed concerns about demolitions in the city, citing negative environmental impacts, loss of neighborhood character, and loss of housing affordability. Laura Foote, who in 2018 co-led the West Newton Preservation Initiative to make West Newton Hill a local historic district, said she is concerned about the destruction of historic buildings: “Each house has a story in terms of how it was built, why it was designed in a certain way, and also who the first owners of the house were. That tells you about how Newton was settled and how the city grew,” she said.
Foote said she is worried about the impact that demolitions and construction have on the environment, especially regarding the embodied carbon and embodied energy of existing structures: Destroying buildings wastes the energy and materials used to construct them. The greenhouse gasses associated with construction and building materials such as asphalt, concrete, glass, and steel must be generated again for replacement construction. According to The United States Environment and Protection Agency (EPA), “15% of global greenhouse gas emissions are associated with the production of construction materials.”
The EPA estimated in 2018 that 600 million tons of construction and demolition debris was generated that year alone and that demolitions represented 90% of that debris.
Environmental considerations were also raised during the Zoning and Planning Committee’s May 12 meeting. Councilor Allison Leary said the committee should consider how the implementation of new regulations will impact or cause the removal of trees.
The committee also discussed property owners’ rights to construct on their land without overbearing regulation.
Councilor Vicki Danberg said, “I think we have to be careful about making it more burdensome for the majority of people in this city to try and put an addition on their home,” in regard to newly proposed housing construction rules from the Planning and Development department. “That might help to avoid teardown, because […] you can do more to an existing house than a brand new house,” she said.
Recent developments in housing regulation
In the most recent Zoning and Planning Committee meeting, Councilors discussed proposed regulations on the construction of new and existing homes, especially regarding the size of new homes.
The committee plans to explore implementing a 60 percent facade ratio, which would limit the width of a new house to no wider than 60 percent of the width of the lot. This would apply only to new construction, not existing homes, which may only be putting on an addition.
“The intent would be to limit the ability of new homes to build a very wide house that is close to the property lines on the side, but to give flexibility to existing homes that are putting on additions,” said Caira.
The Committee voted unanimously to postpone decisions on any new policies before doing further research to consider how implementing a limit on the construction width of new homes would impact various factors, including Floor Area Ratio (FAR). In June, the Committee will host a public hearing and attempt to decide on regulations based on their findings.
According to the City’s Planning Department, homes that have been demolished in recent years had, on average, a FAR that was 0.10 less than homes sold and not demolished. That difference is significant, given that FAR limits are typically in the range of, for instance, 0.26 to 0.40. On a 10,000 sq ft lot, that 0.10 difference in FAR equates to a difference of 1,000 sq ft of living space. In short, smaller homes are being replaced with larger ones, likely reducing affordability and likely changing neighborhood character to some extent.
Ultimately the Zoning and Planning Committee is aiming to create regulations that curtail and manage demolitions, but allow owners to renovate without limitations that may be too expensive or time consuming. “We want to incentivize keeping the housing versus tearing it down,” Councilor Pam Wright said.
