For the second time this decade, the Planning Board finds itself immersed in a project on Central Avenue that does not conform with town zoning and is of concern to abutters, who feel its mass will negatively impact their own home.
The board is likely to approve it, though, because of its protected use status under a 1950 state law born out of historic discrimination.
As was true in the case of the Needham Children’s Center childcare facility that opened in the summer of 2025 at 1688 Central Ave., the fate of the Chabad Lubavitch Jewish Center’s plan for 1195 Central Ave. will rest on how the Planning Board adheres to the standards of the state’s Dover Amendment that applies to the project.
The lot is zoned residential, and the dimensions of the planned complex are nearly double what town bylaws permit. The Dover Amendment allows the religious use “by right” in the otherwise single-family zone. The amendment can also provide relief from “unreasonable” regulation that would impinge on that religious use — the nub undoubtedly being the definition of unreasonable.
Just as occurred with the Needham Children’s Center project that spent nearly two years before the board starting in 2021, the review is proceeding slowly. The project first went before the Design Review Board last September and has since spent nine months in the Planning Board’s public hearing process. It has been on its posted agenda six times, with continuances allowed to process comments made during the comprehensive review by the Planning Board and town departments and which led to subsequent project adjustments.
The Planning Board voted to close the hearing after taking final testimony at its Sept. 15 meeting. The five-member board is expected to begin its deliberations at its Oct. 6 meeting.
It has a lot to unpack in determining the fate of the Chabad Center’s ambitious plans to relocate from its longstanding 472 High Rock St. location in a 2,700 square foot single-family home to a two-building complex nearly ten times larger on a one-acre parcel just up the street from Newman Elementary School.
The 1195 Central Ave. property is now home to a 1,500 square foot 1908 farmhouse and detached barn that the Chabad purchased in 2023 and will be cleared to make way for the two structures. Originally designed to be more than 34,000 square feet, the review process has reduced that to a 18,300 square foot Chabad Center and a 8,500 square foot residence.
The planned center includes a sanctuary that extends through the lower portion of the three-level building, two classrooms, a library, cafeteria, three offices, social halls, two kitchens and Mikvah facilities — a specially designed pool of natural “living water” used for ritual immersion and spiritual purification.
The abutters at 1177 Central Ave., Robert and Gina Bradley, have been advocating for modifications and reductions they believe to be reasonable. They have repeatedly said they would not oppose a smaller facility and have engaged an attorney and civil engineer to make their case for a scaled-down project that would not “cause damage to the value and quiet enjoyment of our property,” as they wrote in a Sept. 10 letter to the Planning Board.
The project team and attorneys for the center counter that the scale of the project is necessary to provide all the functions required for its actual use. In a six-page brief, attorney Kayla Sepulvada argued that Chabad Needham has reduced the scale of the project that was first presented but can’t make further reductions without compromising the religious use.
“Chabad Needham has made many concessions in an attempt to be a good resident and neighbor, but at this time cannot further reduce the project without limitations being imposed upon its programming and overall religious use,” Sepulvada wrote.
She argued that requiring further reductions would violate Dover principles.
“The requirement must also be reasonable as applied to the particular religious project and site. There is a balancing test that must be done as to whether the requirement effectively prevents the protected use or substantially diminishes the usefulness of the property for that use, without appreciably advancing a legitimate municipal interest,” she argued.
“A board therefore should not require an applicant to prove that Shabbat meals, holiday gatherings, classrooms, or pastoral functions are indispensable according to a governmental understanding of Judaism. The inquiry is bona fide religious significance and dominant religious purpose, not theological minimum necessity.”
Kevin Freytag, attorney for the Bradleys, focused on the project’s massing and lack of parking before mentioning Dover.
“Obviously Dover is sort of the elephant in the room here,“ he said.
“The Dover amendment doesn’t prohibit this board from imposing reasonable regulations on things like bulk and building size and parking. And that’s really all that we’re asking the board to do here.”
“The applicant hasn’t challenged the reasonableness of the town zoning bylaws regarding parking,” Freytag argued. “Hasn’t said that the FAR (floor area ratio, which is a zoning dimension) and the lot coverage regulations are unreasonable either. Nevertheless, the applicant is asking to have this board approve a project that is 183% of the FAR in Needham and it is 173% of the lot coverage. So, we’re talking about nearly twice in both instances.”
“Given those circumstances, we think that it would be entirely reasonable for the board to say you’ve got to come closer to our bylaws.”
The specter of a lawsuit
The project is also awaiting a decision from the Conservation Commission, which has the project on its agenda for this evening (Sept. 24). It is expected to impose conditions on the project related to wetlands restrictions and stormwater management. That process is separate from the Planning Board’s and not affected by the Dover considerations.
Planning Board Chair Justin McCullen has requested and received guidance for his board from Town Counsel Chris Heep on the ramifications of the Dover Amendment. The substance of that guidance is a privileged communication but will no doubt inform the board’s deliberation, expected to begin at its next meeting.
The Planning Board’s decision in the analogous Needham Children’s Center project, which also proceeded under Dover, was to approve the project but with a long list of conditions. The project was appealed in Land Court with the Planning Board members as defendants.
That decision ended up being nullified, with the judge ruling the Planning Board’s volume of conditions had exceeded its authority. The town declined to appeal the decision, clearing the way for the project to proceed.
Save as PDF