City of Worcester
Zoning audit
8 things worth a decision in
the Zoning Ordinance: places where it does not agree with something else in it, with
the contents, with the zoning map or with the City's own record of what it has amended, and places where it would be easier to administer written another
way. Each names the evidence, and says whose decision it is.
None of them are corrected in the published text. The
ordinance on this site reads exactly as Worcester prints it, and
changing any of this is an amendment rather than a correction.
Against the text current through 2026
Needs a drafting decision 2
The ordinance contradicts itself or is incomplete here. Only Worcester can settle these, and only by amendment — correcting them here would state as law something Worcester has never adopted.
§ 19 section number(s) appear more than once
[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] Two provisions carry the same number, so a citation to it is ambiguous and the site can publish only one of them at that address. This may be the reader's fault (a running head taken for a heading) rather than the bylaw's; check the source.
- § 1 appears 16 times
- § 2 appears 16 times
- § 3 appears 14 times
- § 4 appears 12 times
Check the PDF at each number; if the duplication is real, renumber at the next amendment.
read from the City's materials
1 cited section number(s) do not exist in the text (1 citations)
[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] The bylaw cites sections by number that the converted text does not contain. Some are references to other bylaws or to a superseded numbering; some will be sections the PDF reader failed to recognise. Either way a reader who follows the citation finds nothing.
- § 60.3 cited 1 time(s); e.g. § 2: “…te, other certifications, or other evidence of compliance required in §60.3 is presumed to be in violation until such time as that documentation…”
For each number, decide whether it is a stale citation to amend or a section the conversion missed to re-read.
read from the City's materials
Against the enabling statute 5
Where the ordinance appears to require, permit or prohibit something the state act it is adopted under does not allow it to. These are readings of two published texts side by side, not legal advice, and each names the provision on both sides so counsel can check it rather than take our word.
§ 14 AA religious or educational use appears to need a special permit or be prohibited
[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] MGL c. 40A, § 3 (the Dover amendment) provides that no bylaw shall prohibit, regulate or restrict the use of land or structures for religious purposes or for educational purposes on land owned or leased by a religious sect, a nonprofit educational corporation or the Commonwealth, beyond reasonable regulation of bulk and height, yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage.
- § 14 A.: “In Residential and Business districts, school buildings as defined in Paragraph B below, may, if not otherwise permitted as of right, be converted to multi-family dwelling use upon the grant of a special permit by the Planning Board under this section notwithstanding any provisions of Table 4.1, to the contrary.”
Read the use table row: a special permit or a prohibition for a Dover-protected use is unenforceable.
read from the City's materials
§ 15 1A special permit lapse period of one year is shorter than the statute allows
[Automated statute and consistency scan, high confidence.] MGL c. 40A, § 9, as amended by the Housing Choice provisions of St. 2021, c. 24, provides that a special permit lapses "within a specified period of time, not more than 3 years" and that the period runs from the grant plus any appeal time; a bylaw may set the period, but not below three years.
- § 15 1.: “A special permit grant under this section shall lapse if not exercised within one year of issuance.”
- MGL c. 40A, § 9: "not more than 3 years"
Amend the lapse period to three years, or confirm the Town is already administering it that way. A provision about a permit lapsing after a period of non-use (abandonment) is a different rule and may be what this is.
read from the City's materials
§ 2 19An accessory dwelling provision appears to require a special permit
[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] MGL c. 40A, § 3 forbids a bylaw to "require a special permit or other discretionary zoning approval for the use of land or structures for a single accessory dwelling unit" in a single-family residential district. This provision mentions a special permit in the same breath as the accessory dwelling.
- § 2 19.: “Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y – Yes; N – No; SP – Special Permit PERMITTED USES BY ZONING DISTRICTS – Table 4.1 GENERAL USE RS RS RL RG BO BO BL BG BG BG BG ML ML ML MG MG MG…”
- MGL c. 40A, § 3: "shall not ... require a special permit or other discretionary zoning approval for the use of land or structures for a single accessory dwelling unit"
Read the provision: a special permit for a second ADU, or for an ADU larger than the statute protects, is allowed; one for the first protected ADU is not.
read from the City's materials
§ 7 1A religious or educational use appears to need a special permit or be prohibited
[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] MGL c. 40A, § 3 (the Dover amendment) provides that no bylaw shall prohibit, regulate or restrict the use of land or structures for religious purposes or for educational purposes on land owned or leased by a religious sect, a nonprofit educational corporation or the Commonwealth, beyond reasonable regulation of bulk and height, yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage.
- § 7 1.: “…ction-13, Wind Energy Conversion Facilities; Article IV, Section 14, Adaptive Re-Use of Public or Non- Profit School Buildings; and Articles VII, VIII, IX, X, XII, and XV. The Planning Board shall also be the Special Permit Granting Authority (SPGA) for all special permits issued in any Priority Development Site designated by the C…”
Read the use table row: a special permit or a prohibition for a Dover-protected use is unenforceable.
read from the City's materials
The 3A multi-family district EOHLC records as adopted is not in this text
[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] The MassGIS MBTA Communities 3A District Atlas lists this municipality as having a compliant multi-family district under MGL c. 40A, § 3A, but the bylaw text converted here does not mention MBTA communities, § 3A, or a multi-family district allowed as of right. The text we hold most likely predates the adoption, or the district was adopted as a separate instrument.
- MassGIS MBTA Communities 3A District Atlas: district geometry on file for this municipality
- Bylaw text: no match for 'MBTA', '3A' or 'multi-family ... as of right'
Obtain the current bylaw from the Town Clerk and reconvert; do not publish this text as current until the § 3A district is in it.
read from the City's materials