Mayor Wu’s overhaul of Boston’s development process advanced last Thursday (March 14) with a key vote on her “Squares + Streets” planning and zoning initiative – the unanimous approval by the Boston Planning and Development Agency (BPDA) Board of Directors that sets the stage for a final vote by the Boston Zoning Commission.

Designed for mixed-use areas along main streets and near transit stops, the initiative would replace parts of the current zoning code, which is based primarily on size, with new guidelines more defined by function. Under the working code in these areas, many projects are approved individually through a public process for zoning exemptions.

The framework approved by the BPDA board could be applied to as many as 18 neighborhood centers identified by the city, with six tiers of density and activity to be mapped later through a planning process. The zoning would also advance citywide goals, such as responses to climate change, or preserving affordable housing, retail, and cultural spaces.

In January, the BPDA announced four locations for the initiative, starting with Roslindale Square and Cleary Square in Hyde Park. The next locations would be in Dorchester’s Fields Corner and Codman Square. Another Squares + Streets zoning plan has already been drafted, as an outgrowth of Plan Mattapan. Though scheduled for a vote at the March 14 meeting, the Mattapan guidelines were removed from the agenda. A spokesperson for the BPDA says it plans to have those guidelines taken up at the board meeting next month.

BPDA Deputy Director of Zoning Kathleen Onufer said the districts would be zoned for uses that typically make an area feel “vibrant and welcoming,” with alignment of form and use, and more predictability about what can be developed. “Underpinning much of this reform,” she told board members, “is a shift to a more form-based approach to zoning regulations across the code, rather than relying, as is currently the case, on the ‘belt and suspenders,’ if you will, of not only dimensional constraints, but also things like floor-to-area ratio.”

Wu’s initiative has support from Abundant Housing Massachusetts, a group that favors more density of development in all Boston neighborhoods. In a statement last December, the group said, “Modernizing our zoning code with reforms that reduce the need for variances while enhancing simplicity and predictability are long overdue and should be implemented without delay.”

Through a prepared statement and direct testimony, District 7 City Councillor Tania Fernandes Anderson and Councillor At-Large Julia Mejia called for putting off a decision on the zoning framework to allow for more review. But there were comments in favor of the measure from District 8 (Beacon Hill, Back Bay, Fenway, Mission Hill) Councillor Sharon Durkan and District 5 (Hyde Park/Roslindale) Councillor Enrique Pepén.

Pepén hailed the initiative as an “opportunity of bringing more diverse businesses and spaces to our neighborhoods” and as a way “to bring more families to our district.”

Durkan told the board that growth in Boston’s population depended on growth in its built environment and relief from the cost of a tight housing market. “Not only does the targeted approach of squares and streets respect the current fabric of what makes our neighborhoods so special,” she said, “but it prioritizes community input on what changes to this fabric will benefit the neighborhood.”

The BPDA’s director of planning, Aimee Chambers, said the mapping of districts would come after discussion with residents and stakeholders.

“So, we’ve not come into this process with any specific plan as to how these districts should be mapped in any location,” she explained. “What we are doing is looking to really work in concert with residents and stakeholders, both to develop recommendations on the planning side” and possibly combine those with city resources or programs.

Board member Dr. Theodore C. Landsmark called the “Squares + Streets” framework an “important step” that would not preclude addressing issues raised by councillors who favored putting off the vote.

“I think BPDA is exponentially better at that than perhaps it has been in prior decades,” he added. “And I think, with this process in particular, that is just really critical to continue, to make it worthwhile for people to engage in these planning processes.”