1
00:00:00,110 --> 00:00:07,150
And I wouldn't guess that we, some of us would have received that, SRA members.

2
00:00:07,910 --> 00:00:12,050
I do want to point out, I think we might have sent this meeting live, so it might be being recorded right now.

3
00:00:12,590 --> 00:00:12,810
Okay.

4
00:01:04,900 --> 00:01:08,580
And let the record show that Councilor Saeed is away on a family event.

5
00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:15,780
Councilor Wilson.

6
00:01:17,580 --> 00:01:18,040
Present.

7
00:01:18,920 --> 00:01:19,380
Thank you.

8
00:01:20,280 --> 00:01:23,900
All right, this is a joint meeting with the Summable Redevelopment Authority.

9
00:01:23,900 --> 00:01:29,040
This committee will stand in a German or in recess so they can conduct their business.

10
00:01:29,280 --> 00:01:29,820
We're in recess.

11
00:01:30,200 --> 00:01:30,700
On

12
00:01:37,930 --> 00:01:38,170
recess.

13
00:01:38,870 --> 00:01:39,430
Councilor Davis.

14
00:01:40,410 --> 00:01:40,910
Yes.

15
00:02:18,160 --> 00:02:18,660
Six.

16
00:02:18,900 --> 00:02:19,940
My name is Phil Ericklain.

17
00:02:20,080 --> 00:02:24,240
I'm chair of the son of a redevelopment authority and I call this meeting to order at.

18
00:02:27,930 --> 00:02:34,410
So with the chapter two of the acts of 2023, this public meeting of the SRE is being conducted by a remote.

19
00:02:35,090 --> 00:02:36,270
Participation as well.

20
00:02:36,270 --> 00:02:39,010
This session will be recorded, will be a public record.

21
00:02:39,470 --> 00:02:44,270
I will now ask the board members to confirm they are in attendance in an alphabetical order.

22
00:02:44,790 --> 00:02:47,550
Courtney Brunson, Ben-Yuan Kampen.

23
00:02:48,090 --> 00:02:48,190
Here.

24
00:02:48,730 --> 00:02:50,610
William Gage is

25
00:02:55,160 --> 00:02:55,780
not here.

26
00:02:56,120 --> 00:02:56,860
Patrick McCormick.

27
00:02:57,580 --> 00:02:57,860
Here.

28
00:04:26,380 --> 00:04:33,440
Mr. Chair, if you can hear me, I can, I don't know if this goes for everybody online, but there's no audio at the moment.

29
00:04:36,170 --> 00:04:37,790
I have the same problem, Patrick.

30
00:05:40,830 --> 00:05:46,070
These are related to 90 Washington Street. After that, we're going to have a presentation

31
00:05:46,070 --> 00:05:50,910
from the city about these items. We'll have questions, public hearing, and then we'll

32
00:05:50,910 --> 00:05:59,070
move on to other items. Any questions or comments? Please read items 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, please.

33
00:06:00,470 --> 00:06:07,310
Item number 5, mayors request ID number 25-1594, requesting approval of the amended 90 Washington

34
00:06:07,310 --> 00:06:09,070
Street Demonstration Project Plan.

35
00:06:09,730 --> 00:06:15,870
Item number six, ID number 25-1595, requesting approval of an amendment to the memorandum

36
00:06:15,870 --> 00:06:20,390
of agreement between the City Council and Redevelopment Authority regarding the redevelopment

37
00:06:20,390 --> 00:06:21,670
of 90 Washington Street.

38
00:06:22,390 --> 00:06:28,650
Item number seven, ID number 25-1596, requesting approval of the development objectives

39
00:06:28,650 --> 00:06:31,030
for the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street.

40
00:06:31,810 --> 00:06:38,270
Item number 8, ID number 25-1607, Executive Director of the Office of Strategic Planning

41
00:06:38,270 --> 00:06:42,950
and Community Development, conveying a summary of the 90 Washington Process Review and Development

42
00:06:42,950 --> 00:06:43,750
Objectives.

43
00:06:44,870 --> 00:06:45,470
All right.

44
00:06:45,550 --> 00:06:45,810
Thank you.

45
00:06:45,890 --> 00:06:49,410
So, I'm going to turn it over to the city for a brief presentation about these items.

46
00:06:50,190 --> 00:06:50,950
Let me make—

47
00:06:50,950 --> 00:06:51,530
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

48
00:06:52,110 --> 00:06:55,990
Just give me one second to share screen, and I just want to reiterate thank you

49
00:06:55,990 --> 00:06:57,830
everyone for the patience this evening with logistics.

50
00:07:47,190 --> 00:07:47,890
I think we're in place.

51
00:07:50,090 --> 00:07:55,190
So, hello, everyone, through you, Mr. Chair, to the committee and to the redevelopment authority.

52
00:07:55,570 --> 00:07:56,310
My name is Ben DeMers.

53
00:07:56,570 --> 00:07:59,950
I'm a senior planner with the Economic Development Team within the Office of Strategic Planning

54
00:07:59,950 --> 00:08:00,770
and Community Development.

55
00:08:01,430 --> 00:08:05,050
And in this capacity, I also serve as the staff support liaison to the Summerville

56
00:08:05,050 --> 00:08:05,710
Redevelopment Authority.

57
00:08:06,510 --> 00:08:09,770
So, we're here this evening to discuss changes we are recommending to the 90 Washington

58
00:08:09,770 --> 00:08:13,890
Street Demonstration Project Plan, mostly to formally remove the public safety building

59
00:08:13,890 --> 00:08:16,950
component of the project and then to do a few other cleanup items.

60
00:08:17,390 --> 00:08:20,610
The change in the project direction has already been stated publicly by the administration

61
00:08:20,610 --> 00:08:21,330
in January.

62
00:08:21,690 --> 00:08:24,190
We want to make sure that the guiding documents also reflect this change.

63
00:08:24,910 --> 00:08:27,490
We also want to make sure that people have a chance to weigh in on these changes.

64
00:08:27,830 --> 00:08:30,830
And given that a public hearing between the City Council and the redevelopment authority

65
00:08:30,830 --> 00:08:34,910
or the SRA, as I'll refer to it this evening, was held when the plan was created, we want

66
00:08:34,910 --> 00:08:36,750
to make sure that this step was mirrored in any amendment.

67
00:08:37,470 --> 00:08:40,030
For anyone tuning in with less context on the project, I also want to mention

68
00:08:40,030 --> 00:08:43,110
so the City Council and the SRA are the two parties that adopted the 90 Washington

69
00:08:43,110 --> 00:08:45,790
Street demonstration project plan back in 2019.

70
00:08:45,790 --> 00:08:48,530
So there are also the parties that would need to agree to any amendment.

71
00:08:53,850 --> 00:09:00,670
So to walk through the agenda quickly, I'm going to start by reviewing some project background for anyone tuning in just to explain what led to this amendment.

72
00:09:01,110 --> 00:09:08,670
And then I'll walk through the actual amendments that we are proposing to the 90 Washington Street demonstration project plan, which would also be reflected in changes to a memorandum of agreement,

73
00:09:09,150 --> 00:09:17,190
which was entered into concurrently with the demonstration project plan back in 2019, again, between the City Council and the Redevelopment Authority.

74
00:09:17,190 --> 00:09:22,250
And then last, I'm going to talk about next steps in this process that these changes are going to tee us up for.

75
00:09:22,310 --> 00:09:24,970
So this is releasing an RFP to select a development partner.

76
00:09:25,210 --> 00:09:32,910
And I'm going to talk about some of the work that we've been doing to really get there around articulating the development priorities more specifically.

77
00:09:33,710 --> 00:09:37,410
The procedural focus of the first part of the presentation that was really on the demonstration project plan.

78
00:09:38,050 --> 00:09:39,090
Are there any questions up top?

79
00:09:41,900 --> 00:09:42,100
Okay.

80
00:09:45,400 --> 00:09:49,900
And I will say also for city councilors who saw this presentation a few weeks ago, this is very similar to what we discussed that evening.

81
00:09:49,900 --> 00:09:52,920
I want to make sure everybody at home has this context.

82
00:09:53,900 --> 00:09:56,720
So to orient us, this is the site that we're talking about, 90 Washington Street.

83
00:09:57,120 --> 00:10:01,760
This is an approximately four-acre site located just east of the East Somerville MBTA station,

84
00:10:02,320 --> 00:10:06,120
really at the intersection of Washington and New Washington streets, which is also

85
00:10:06,120 --> 00:10:09,700
at the intersection of the Interbelt neighborhood East Somerville and Brick Bottom.

86
00:10:10,280 --> 00:10:13,620
As you can see, the parcel has a slightly awkward shape kind of triangular coming

87
00:10:13,620 --> 00:10:20,740
back from the intersection and also has this tail portion that really wraps around the southern

88
00:10:20,740 --> 00:10:27,200
portion of the parcel, which also is close by to the adjacent Cobble Hill apartments,

89
00:10:27,460 --> 00:10:29,340
which is an apartment complex to the east.

90
00:10:34,000 --> 00:10:37,180
The SRA took this property by Eminent Domain back in 2019

91
00:10:37,820 --> 00:10:41,020
with the intention to have it serve as the site of a new public safety building.

92
00:10:41,020 --> 00:10:48,240
So this was going to be the combined new fire headquarters, police headquarters and 911 dispatcher center.

93
00:10:48,840 --> 00:10:51,160
And this was meant to be paired with transformative private development

94
00:10:51,160 --> 00:10:54,580
and to remove the existing Cobble Hill Plaza that was vacant at the time on the site.

95
00:10:56,240 --> 00:10:59,780
So the SRA and the city have paid a total of $39 million for this site.

96
00:11:00,180 --> 00:11:03,580
The SRA initially took the site for just under $9 million in 2019,

97
00:11:04,140 --> 00:11:07,240
but then was successfully sued by the former owner for the value of the taking

98
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:11,920
and was required to pay about $30 million more between the land value and the interest.

99
00:11:12,580 --> 00:11:18,380
So the SRI and the city have paid this judgment, but this unexpected expense obviously impacts the city's ability to offer key services

100
00:11:18,380 --> 00:11:20,040
and pursue other vital capital projects.

101
00:11:20,740 --> 00:11:25,500
Because of this, we shifted course and we released a statement in January of this year stating that the city was removing

102
00:11:25,500 --> 00:11:30,360
the public safety building component of the project and focusing on sale of the full parcel for private redevelopment

103
00:11:30,360 --> 00:11:33,180
with an added goal being to recoup funds paid towards the judgment.

104
00:11:33,440 --> 00:11:35,880
So the hearing tonight is about really moving us in that direction.

105
00:11:37,640 --> 00:11:44,920
So this change needs to be reflected in the planning documents which lay out the high-level objectives and the process for 90 Washington Street.

106
00:11:45,320 --> 00:11:48,180
So these are the 90 Washington Street demonstration project plan.

107
00:11:48,600 --> 00:11:51,960
As I said, this was adopted by the Council and the Redevelopment Authority in 2019.

108
00:11:52,300 --> 00:11:54,900
This is really the more substantive of the two documents that I'll describe.

109
00:11:55,400 --> 00:12:02,180
And then the second is the Memorandum of Agreement, or the MOA that I referenced, which the City Council and the Redevelopment Authority entered around the same time.

110
00:12:02,180 --> 00:12:05,840
It just lays out some additional expectations for the bodies, but largely more of the detail

111
00:12:05,840 --> 00:12:07,020
is in the demonstration project plan.

112
00:12:10,180 --> 00:12:13,560
So I'm going to talk through the high-level objectives and the process that these documents

113
00:12:13,560 --> 00:12:18,020
lay out, and then we'll look through the amendments that we have proposed.

114
00:12:18,560 --> 00:12:21,580
So looking at the objectives, the first objective was to eliminate blight.

115
00:12:22,220 --> 00:12:25,540
So this is a common objective with the use of urban renewal as a reminder at the

116
00:12:25,540 --> 00:12:29,900
time that the site was taken, the Cobble Hill Plaza, which was a vacant commercial

117
00:12:29,900 --> 00:12:31,220
shopping center, was on the site.

118
00:12:31,220 --> 00:12:36,500
At that point, it had been vacant for several years when the redevelopment plan had stalled.

119
00:12:37,000 --> 00:12:39,160
So that was kind of core to the definition of blight at the time.

120
00:12:40,760 --> 00:12:44,720
The second goal in the plan is the creation of a new public safety complex, as I described earlier.

121
00:12:44,820 --> 00:12:47,840
So this was meant to be a new Fire and Police Headquarters, a 9-1-1 dispatcher center.

122
00:12:48,480 --> 00:12:51,520
And then given that the public safety complex would only need a portion of the parcel,

123
00:12:52,060 --> 00:12:54,760
it was also meant to be paired with transformative development,

124
00:12:54,760 --> 00:12:57,000
and especially given how close this site is

125
00:12:57,000 --> 00:12:59,620
to the East Somerville MBTA station

126
00:12:59,620 --> 00:13:01,600
that at the time had been planned, but had not yet opened.

127
00:13:02,480 --> 00:13:04,220
So in terms of amendments to the document,

128
00:13:04,780 --> 00:13:05,840
the first and third goals here,

129
00:13:05,920 --> 00:13:06,820
so the elimination of blight

130
00:13:06,820 --> 00:13:08,380
and the transformative development opportunity

131
00:13:08,380 --> 00:13:10,640
are still remaining a part of the document.

132
00:13:10,640 --> 00:13:12,500
These are still main goals in the process.

133
00:13:17,680 --> 00:13:19,060
However, as I referenced at the beginning,

134
00:13:19,200 --> 00:13:20,220
we're looking to amend the plan

135
00:13:20,220 --> 00:13:22,380
to remove the second objective

136
00:13:22,380 --> 00:13:23,760
of creating a public safety complex.

137
00:13:24,220 --> 00:13:25,700
So we understand that there's still a need

138
00:13:25,700 --> 00:13:27,580
for improved conditions for the city employees,

139
00:13:27,580 --> 00:13:31,220
But that project has really been separated off from the disposition of this property

140
00:13:31,220 --> 00:13:32,140
and is on its own track.

141
00:13:33,420 --> 00:13:37,780
We would also like to add an explicit objective to recoup funds used to satisfy the judgment

142
00:13:37,780 --> 00:13:39,620
for the taking of 90 Washington Street.

143
00:13:40,000 --> 00:13:42,740
And we just want to make sure that we are explicit about this in the document given

144
00:13:42,740 --> 00:13:45,180
that the SRA has committed to helping to recoup these funds.

145
00:13:45,640 --> 00:13:48,840
So these two changes are what we're recommending for high-level objectives in the Demonstration

146
00:13:48,840 --> 00:13:49,440
Project Plan.

147
00:13:52,090 --> 00:13:55,030
For the other part of the Demonstration Project Plan, the process, the document

148
00:13:55,030 --> 00:13:56,230
lays out five phases.

149
00:13:57,850 --> 00:14:02,050
So, the first two of these, which are the approval of the demonstration project plan

150
00:14:02,050 --> 00:14:05,810
and then the actual acquisition of 90 Washington Street, these were both completed in 2019.

151
00:14:07,170 --> 00:14:10,770
The third phase of the project is project delineation and design, and this has been

152
00:14:10,770 --> 00:14:11,210
ongoing.

153
00:14:11,550 --> 00:14:15,270
So, this includes forming the public safety building committee to really focus on the

154
00:14:15,270 --> 00:14:18,670
design elements of the public safety component of the project when that was intended

155
00:14:18,670 --> 00:14:19,390
to be a part of it.

156
00:14:19,670 --> 00:14:22,910
And then also a public engagement process to learn more of what people wanted to

157
00:14:22,910 --> 00:14:27,090
from the transformative development element of the project, which would ultimately need to be

158
00:14:27,090 --> 00:14:30,930
approved by the City Council. The Public Safety Building Committee is no longer meeting since

159
00:14:30,930 --> 00:14:35,050
this portion of the project hasn't advanced, but otherwise these three phases are largely completed

160
00:15:08,520 --> 00:15:13,990
The fourth phase is developer selection. This involves drafting an RFP or a similar

161
00:15:13,990 --> 00:15:20,270
solicitation process for proposals. After we get responses back, what is called a technical

162
00:15:20,270 --> 00:15:24,290
advisory committee would narrow proposals down to two. The city council could vote to either

163
00:15:24,290 --> 00:15:29,410
move those two forward or shift one of them out. Two recommendations would be made by

164
00:15:29,410 --> 00:15:33,670
the council to the redevelopment authority who will select a final proposal as a development

165
00:15:33,670 --> 00:15:34,050
partner.

166
00:15:34,650 --> 00:15:38,510
And from that point, the SRA will then negotiate a land development agreement, which again

167
00:15:38,510 --> 00:15:40,830
will need to be approved by the city council.

168
00:15:42,690 --> 00:15:44,470
And then the last step is project implementation.

169
00:15:44,970 --> 00:15:46,050
So this is really a future phase.

170
00:15:46,450 --> 00:15:48,150
There's a little less detail about this in the plan.

171
00:15:48,290 --> 00:15:51,410
This is really ongoing staff and redevelopment authority work with the development team.

172
00:15:53,170 --> 00:15:56,390
What they do mention is that the project needs to break ground within three years

173
00:15:56,390 --> 00:15:57,910
of the date of a transfer.

174
00:15:57,910 --> 00:16:02,030
So that's just one of the few details that it does call out.

175
00:16:03,410 --> 00:16:06,850
So on these upcoming two phases on phase four and phase five,

176
00:16:07,470 --> 00:16:10,350
we are recommending a few changes to the document.

177
00:16:10,790 --> 00:16:16,010
The first of these is substituting the technical advisory committee with the 90 Washington Street Civic Advisory Committee.

178
00:16:16,490 --> 00:16:23,610
So the 90 Washington Street Civic Advisory Committee or the CAC is a group of neighborhood stakeholders that have been meeting since 2023 to discuss project implementation.

179
00:16:24,130 --> 00:16:32,110
The CSE format is the current standard that the City Council has set for SRA projects, which was established in 2021 under the Winterhill Urban Anual Plan project.

180
00:16:32,530 --> 00:16:40,590
So this is really just making sure that the document reflects the process that we have already been using for ongoing engagement and which is the standard for SRA Council projects.

181
00:16:43,470 --> 00:16:50,830
And then the second change that we have recommended is that rather than requiring a selected developer to break ground within three years from the date of transfer,

182
00:16:51,190 --> 00:16:54,950
we would like to change this to requiring a selected developer to apply for permits within that timeframe.

183
00:16:54,950 --> 00:17:01,990
The intention here is really that it gives the SRA more flexibility in the negotiation process, which can help them secure a higher value for the land or other benefits.

184
00:17:02,430 --> 00:17:04,590
So really just looking for a bit of flexibility in the process.

185
00:17:06,150 --> 00:17:17,230
So to summarize, the main changes that we're recommending to the demonstration project plan and the MOA are removing the objective of developing a public safety building and then adding an objective or recouping funds spent on the taking.

186
00:17:17,230 --> 00:17:29,870
And then updating the process to replace the technical advisory committee with the civic advisory committee to match current SRA and city council standards and lengthen the time in which a developer can break around on a project to allow for flexibility in developer negotiations.

187
00:17:30,970 --> 00:17:37,570
For next steps, the amendments would then need to be approved by both the city council and the redevelopment authority who are the two parties that approved the documents initially.

188
00:17:40,450 --> 00:17:46,610
So, I have a second part of this which is discussing the more specific development goals for the RFP process.

189
00:17:47,290 --> 00:17:50,090
But given this first part's focus on the demonstration project plan,

190
00:17:50,110 --> 00:17:55,870
I wanted to pause here and see if there are any questions specifically on these updates to the plan, if that's okay.

191
00:17:56,490 --> 00:18:00,150
Yes, do we have any questions from the council or the redevelopment authority?

192
00:18:02,860 --> 00:18:04,760
Seeing none, please proceed.

193
00:18:08,520 --> 00:18:09,200
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

194
00:18:11,880 --> 00:18:15,440
Okay, so I'm also going to talk for a moment about what the next step will be if the Council

195
00:18:15,440 --> 00:18:18,980
and the SRA do approve these changes, which is preparing an RFP for development.

196
00:18:19,640 --> 00:18:22,280
The item in the hearing are really focused, like I said, on the amendments to the plan,

197
00:18:22,380 --> 00:18:26,160
but we do want people to understand where we're headed and kind of broaden the discussions

198
00:18:26,160 --> 00:18:27,680
we've been having at the Civic Advisory Committee.

199
00:18:28,340 --> 00:18:33,260
So staff conducted engagement primarily from 2022 to 2023 to learn what people wanted

200
00:18:33,260 --> 00:18:36,380
to see from the transformative development element of the project, so really the

201
00:18:36,380 --> 00:18:37,480
private portion of the project.

202
00:18:37,480 --> 00:18:41,640
We then worked with the Civic Advisory Committee to shape these into priorities for an RFP.

203
00:18:42,240 --> 00:18:46,280
And given that most of the work was done before the judgment, we then also discussed with the Civic Advisory Committee

204
00:18:46,280 --> 00:18:51,900
adding goals that prioritize recouping funds to help preserve the city's overall financial health, which you'll see in a moment.

205
00:18:52,680 --> 00:18:54,720
So let me walk through the current set of priorities.

206
00:18:55,100 --> 00:18:58,560
We're still considering various strategies for how the RFP can be structured to help meet these priorities.

207
00:18:58,960 --> 00:19:01,580
And we're discussing these with the city's on-call real estate advisor.

208
00:19:02,200 --> 00:19:05,100
But the idea is that the priorities themselves could be included in that RFP.

209
00:19:06,280 --> 00:19:11,360
So, the first priority, as mentioned, is recouping a significant portion of funds paid for the taking of 90 Washington Street.

210
00:19:12,180 --> 00:19:14,640
So, we want to be explicit about this.

211
00:19:14,720 --> 00:19:18,300
Again, the SRA has committed to repaying at least a portion of the funds paid for the taking.

212
00:19:18,660 --> 00:19:26,000
So, we want to be explicit in this ask that they will be considering heavily how the financial portion of any offer made for the project.

213
00:19:27,920 --> 00:19:31,840
Second, staff have heard various land uses that stakeholders would like to see included in the project.

214
00:19:31,840 --> 00:19:39,640
These include new housing available to a range of incomes and sizes, new commercial space, and the CAC has really talked a lot about a desire for more ground floor retail.

215
00:19:40,360 --> 00:19:44,860
So the neighbors have also been interested in something that replaces the Cobble Hill Plaza that was there previously.

216
00:19:45,680 --> 00:19:50,520
So this is standard, which we often hear in engagement processes for redeveloping land in Somerville.

217
00:19:51,180 --> 00:19:57,720
Then also looking at new civic space, and in this case civic space kind of meaning broader space for nonprofit organizations, for community groups, et cetera.

218
00:19:57,720 --> 00:20:01,040
and then also new green space, which we know is especially important to

219
00:20:01,040 --> 00:20:05,020
Cobble Hill residents who live next door, given the green space that

220
00:20:05,020 --> 00:20:06,100
exists currently on the site.

221
00:20:07,680 --> 00:20:10,500
And then third, we have listed development principles that give a better

222
00:20:10,500 --> 00:20:12,680
sense of the type of project that people want to see here.

223
00:20:13,100 --> 00:20:14,600
So this is really getting into more detail.

224
00:20:15,060 --> 00:20:17,300
They want to see mixed use building formats, which again this reflects

225
00:20:17,300 --> 00:20:20,360
what I described in terms of ground floor retail with significant housing

226
00:20:20,360 --> 00:20:20,640
above.

227
00:20:22,040 --> 00:20:24,760
They also want to see a desire for dense development on the site that

228
00:20:24,760 --> 00:20:26,180
introduces significant new housing.

229
00:20:26,180 --> 00:20:30,480
So we've given the guidance that the density on the site should match the density within

230
00:20:30,480 --> 00:20:32,500
our densest zoning districts, mid-rise and high-rise.

231
00:20:33,120 --> 00:20:36,440
And then we've also noted that if possible, a respondent should orient that density towards

232
00:20:36,440 --> 00:20:41,420
the western portion of the site closest to the MBTA station, considering the adjacent

233
00:20:41,420 --> 00:20:42,200
call to the Hill Apartments.

234
00:20:44,380 --> 00:20:47,260
Relatedly, we also want to allow for flexibility in form or massing.

235
00:20:47,480 --> 00:20:50,800
And this is really to encourage respondents to think uniquely about how they can achieve

236
00:20:50,800 --> 00:20:55,460
that density while respecting the existing neighbors and, again, taking into account

237
00:20:55,460 --> 00:21:00,580
the unique shape of the parcel. We then also heard a strong desire for leadership in sustainability

238
00:21:00,580 --> 00:21:04,880
and compliance with the city's stretch energy code, so want to see how somebody can show that

239
00:21:04,880 --> 00:21:11,280
leadership. We heard a desire for no surface parking, giving the proximity to the green line

240
00:21:11,280 --> 00:21:15,920
station just to the west. We want to achieve a robust urban canopy in natural landscape,

241
00:21:16,000 --> 00:21:18,540
so we've heard a desire to create an appropriate buffer to Cobble Hill apartments

242
00:21:18,540 --> 00:21:21,300
and to also preserve viable existing trees where possible.

243
00:21:22,960 --> 00:21:28,540
And then lastly, we also heard a desire to incorporate diversity, equity and inclusion into various stages of the development process.

244
00:21:28,720 --> 00:21:35,980
And so this is really talking about women and minority-owned business enterprises being involved within financing, design, and various parts of the process.

245
00:21:38,840 --> 00:21:47,380
So again, we'll be discussing these priorities again with the City Council at the time that they take up the amendments to the demonstration project plan and the memorandum of agreement.

246
00:21:47,380 --> 00:21:51,300
but I also want to open up if there are any questions specifically about these development

247
00:21:51,300 --> 00:21:52,220
priorities at this time.

248
00:21:53,900 --> 00:21:54,460
All right.

249
00:21:54,560 --> 00:21:54,800
Thank you.

250
00:21:54,880 --> 00:21:57,600
I'm going to open it up to questions and also keep in mind we're going to have a public

251
00:21:57,600 --> 00:21:57,980
hearing.

252
00:21:58,420 --> 00:22:02,160
I do not intend on having any votes tonight, so there will be more time for questions

253
00:22:02,160 --> 00:22:03,720
later as well.

254
00:22:04,140 --> 00:22:07,400
Any questions from the land use committee or the redevelopment authority?

255
00:22:12,480 --> 00:22:13,640
No one's gone twice.

256
00:22:15,020 --> 00:22:17,160
Seeing no comments, thank you very much.

257
00:22:18,300 --> 00:22:24,840
I will now open up public hearing. If anyone in the audience wishes to speak, please come

258
00:22:24,840 --> 00:22:28,740
forward and testify. We also have a sign-in sheet right in front. If anybody wants to line

259
00:22:28,740 --> 00:22:33,500
up to speak, I'm going to recognize people in the audience first, and then I'm going

260
00:22:33,500 --> 00:22:38,020
to go to people remotely. So I now declare this publicly here and open. Is anyone in

261
00:22:38,020 --> 00:22:39,460
the audience who wishes to testify?

262
00:22:43,430 --> 00:22:47,110
Once, or twice? How about remote? If anyone

263
00:22:47,110 --> 00:22:51,550
If anyone is remote, please use a little hand emoji icon and I will call upon you to speak.

264
00:22:52,930 --> 00:22:55,430
I'll give that one a second for technical difficulties.

265
00:22:57,860 --> 00:23:01,040
When I'll comment in on the 90 Washington Street presentation,

266
00:23:04,280 --> 00:23:06,540
please use a little hand icon.

267
00:23:09,000 --> 00:23:09,940
Anyone, Madam Clerk?

268
00:23:13,300 --> 00:23:15,080
I now declare this public hearing closed.

269
00:23:15,400 --> 00:23:17,840
Please keep in mind, you can always email the city.

270
00:23:18,120 --> 00:23:19,160
You don't want to comment, Bill?

271
00:23:19,880 --> 00:23:21,160
You can talk if you like.

272
00:23:21,160 --> 00:23:27,940
like, the only one. All right. I doubt it, Claire, this public hearing closed. You can

273
00:23:27,940 --> 00:23:32,580
still send comments to, can you please say the email again, Madam Clerk, that I always

274
00:23:32,580 --> 00:23:33,140
mess up on?

275
00:23:36,130 --> 00:23:38,470
I'm going to ask for some help here, Maddie, if I could.

276
00:23:39,430 --> 00:23:40,210
Public comments.

277
00:23:40,450 --> 00:23:40,670
Public comments.

278
00:23:41,250 --> 00:23:46,110
That email is public comments at SummableMA.gov. Counselor, you and Cameron, you had a comment.

279
00:23:47,150 --> 00:23:51,950
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a question through you. Can someone just lay out the anticipated

280
00:23:51,950 --> 00:24:00,890
a timeline here for, like, when we're being asked to approve these changes when the RFP

281
00:24:00,890 --> 00:24:05,030
is expected to be wrapped up, to the extent that you can tell us tonight.

282
00:24:14,750 --> 00:24:16,790
Yes, through you, Mr. Charada, Councilor Ewing-Kampen.

283
00:24:17,750 --> 00:24:22,630
So our intention would be to have these come back to the City Council for a vote as soon

284
00:24:22,630 --> 00:24:23,130
as possible.

285
00:24:23,490 --> 00:24:27,130
So from my understanding, I know there will be at least one more discussion within

286
00:24:27,130 --> 00:24:32,750
the land use committee. And then, depending on how that moves forward, the hope would be that

287
00:24:32,750 --> 00:24:36,690
they would come back to the City Council in November, December for a vote of approval. So that

288
00:24:36,690 --> 00:24:42,210
would be looking for a vote for the updates to the demonstration project plan, the updates to

289
00:24:42,210 --> 00:24:46,170
the memorandum of agreement, and then also for the development objectives and program of uses

290
00:24:47,250 --> 00:24:51,290
so that those could then be included in an RFP. We would then be looking to release an

291
00:24:51,290 --> 00:24:54,810
RFP early next year. There's not kind of an exact pin-down timeline, but early next

292
00:24:54,810 --> 00:24:59,130
year is currently our goal. We want to make sure that we're moving expeditiously on this,

293
00:24:59,770 --> 00:25:03,590
just kind of considering the city's financial health and the impact of this project.

294
00:25:06,140 --> 00:25:10,700
Thank you. And I do intend on Council, well, I do intend on having another land use committee

295
00:25:10,700 --> 00:25:15,420
meeting probably this month, two weeks from now, so we'll be able to get to it then.

296
00:25:15,980 --> 00:25:16,500
Councilor Wilson.

297
00:25:17,300 --> 00:25:20,500
Yeah, thanks, Mr. Chair. I just want to take the opportunity to, you know,

298
00:25:20,520 --> 00:25:23,400
first of all, thank you for the presentation. It's good to see that a lot of that looks

299
00:25:23,400 --> 00:25:29,860
familiar. Something we have heard a lot about, Councilor McLaughlin, I have heard a lot about

300
00:25:29,860 --> 00:25:35,800
is from the residents of Cobble Hill, the real desire to – I know the presentation mentioned

301
00:25:36,340 --> 00:25:40,420
doing the massing on the western side closer to the tea station away from Cobble Hill Apartments,

302
00:25:40,900 --> 00:25:45,660
the other side of that being we'd love to see – I'll speak for myself – I would love to

303
00:25:45,660 --> 00:25:52,500
see the required green space, open space in this concentrated around Cobble Hill, ideally

304
00:25:52,500 --> 00:25:55,440
really making excellent use of that space right there.

305
00:25:57,260 --> 00:25:57,840
Thank you.

306
00:25:58,240 --> 00:25:58,500
Thank you.

307
00:25:59,240 --> 00:25:59,760
All right.

308
00:25:59,920 --> 00:26:04,280
And also, I'm going to weigh the readings of item 2.4 and mark that work complete.

309
00:26:04,460 --> 00:26:06,040
That was the notice for the public hearing.

310
00:26:06,600 --> 00:26:08,000
So this public hearing is closed.

311
00:26:08,200 --> 00:26:08,880
Thank you very much.

312
00:26:09,500 --> 00:26:11,600
Let's get back to the regular order of business.

313
00:26:12,160 --> 00:26:13,980
Madam Clerk, please read the next item.

314
00:26:22,230 --> 00:26:25,370
We're going to stand in recess so the redevelopment authority can adjourn.

315
00:26:25,510 --> 00:26:25,930
We're in recess.

316
00:26:26,870 --> 00:26:27,910
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

317
00:26:28,710 --> 00:26:35,710
Seeing that there are no other items on the agenda, I'll entertain a motion that we close our portion of the public hearing.

318
00:26:38,090 --> 00:26:42,830
Second. Okay, I will roll call vote. Courtney Brunson, Venu and Kampen.

319
00:26:43,910 --> 00:26:44,130
Yes.

320
00:26:44,370 --> 00:26:53,790
William Gage is not here. Patrick McCormick, Christine Stone. Yes, and Philore Kalene. Yes, we have a quorum and we have approved the motion to adjourn.

321
00:26:54,350 --> 00:26:54,770
Thank you.

322
00:26:54,770 --> 00:26:56,390
All right, and we are back to recess.

323
00:26:56,650 --> 00:26:59,250
All council is present, so no need to call the roll.

324
00:26:59,690 --> 00:27:01,010
Please read the next item.

325
00:27:02,630 --> 00:27:06,250
Agenda item three, ID number 25-0085

326
00:27:06,730 --> 00:27:07,750
by Councillor McLaughlin,

327
00:27:07,810 --> 00:27:09,070
Councillor Davis and Councillor Wilson,

328
00:27:09,350 --> 00:27:11,550
but the director of planning, preservation and zoning,

329
00:27:11,950 --> 00:27:13,910
draft an amendment to the zoning ordinances

330
00:27:13,910 --> 00:27:16,910
for transit-oriented height and density bonuses

331
00:27:16,910 --> 00:27:18,570
for additional affordable housing

332
00:27:18,570 --> 00:27:20,910
and other enumerated community benefits.

333
00:27:21,250 --> 00:27:22,650
Let's lay that on the table, actually.

334
00:27:22,650 --> 00:27:24,730
So I'd like to skip to the public hearings.

335
00:27:37,070 --> 00:27:41,470
I think we're going to do 2.1.

336
00:27:42,070 --> 00:27:42,590
2.1.

337
00:27:45,240 --> 00:27:48,080
2.3, got it, we're going to go ahead.

338
00:27:50,960 --> 00:27:51,820
All right, ready?

339
00:27:52,060 --> 00:27:53,420
Please read item 2.1.

340
00:27:53,860 --> 00:27:56,780
Item 2.1, ID number 25-1554,

341
00:27:57,400 --> 00:27:59,500
requesting ordainment of an amendment to sections

342
00:27:59,500 --> 00:28:07,620
10.10.3, 15.1.2, 15.1.6, 15.1.8, 15.2.1,

343
00:28:07,620 --> 00:28:20,720
15.2.2, 15.2.3, 15.2.4, 15.3.1, 15.3.2, and 15.5.2 of the zoning ordinance to make pre-submittal

344
00:28:20,720 --> 00:28:24,280
meetings optional for most permits and to improve clarity and consistency.

345
00:28:24,700 --> 00:28:25,260
All right.

346
00:28:25,340 --> 00:28:26,700
This is a request from the mayor.

347
00:28:26,900 --> 00:28:27,140
Hi.

348
00:28:27,400 --> 00:28:28,260
I see Mr. Bartman here.

349
00:28:28,960 --> 00:28:30,040
Hello, Mr. Chair.

350
00:28:30,680 --> 00:28:35,340
That legal notice pretty much sums up what this amendment is about, so I do have

351
00:28:35,340 --> 00:28:40,000
short presentation that we provided, if somebody's pulling that up,

352
00:28:42,420 --> 00:28:44,320
that is only two slides.

353
00:28:46,060 --> 00:28:54,700
And the proposal would make pre-submitted meetings optional for special permits, site

354
00:28:54,700 --> 00:28:59,760
plan approvals, variances, landplating, and wireless communications.

355
00:29:00,780 --> 00:29:06,080
It would maintain that a required pre-submitted meetings still was on the books for subdivision

356
00:29:06,080 --> 00:29:10,940
plan approvals and master plan special permits, which are probably our two most intense type

357
00:29:10,940 --> 00:29:11,400
of permit.

358
00:29:13,160 --> 00:29:15,460
A couple of quick statistics.

359
00:29:17,320 --> 00:29:23,260
We've tracked every pre-submitted meeting we've held since 2024 over the full year and

360
00:29:23,260 --> 00:29:25,880
then also this year in 2025 up to the current date.

361
00:29:26,640 --> 00:29:33,540
42% of pre-submitted meetings in 2024 involved people who were already familiar with the

362
00:29:33,540 --> 00:29:39,960
zoning ordinance, such as engineering firms, architecture offices, legal offices, designers,

363
00:29:40,440 --> 00:29:43,580
and contracting and construction firms that we regularly see.

364
00:29:44,360 --> 00:29:51,640
In 2025, that number increased to 64 percent and 17 percent of all pre-submitted meetings

365
00:29:51,640 --> 00:29:53,520
were involved, Adam Dash and associates.

366
00:29:54,720 --> 00:29:59,820
So one of the things that we've learned over five years is that required pre-submitted

367
00:29:59,820 --> 00:29:59,980
me

368
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:04,340
We already know what they're doing and don't need to come and sit down and talk to the city

369
00:30:04,340 --> 00:30:04,720
staff.

370
00:30:05,340 --> 00:30:10,180
Sometimes those recent middle meetings involve 12 other departments and a lot of coordination

371
00:30:10,180 --> 00:30:14,620
to get them all in the room together at the same time, only to have a person who already

372
00:30:14,620 --> 00:30:17,640
knows what they're doing sit down and say, I don't know why we have to be here.

373
00:30:17,740 --> 00:30:20,360
So that's really the inspiration for this amendment.

374
00:30:20,560 --> 00:30:25,920
There's also some cleanup that goes on in the articles while we had them open.

375
00:30:25,920 --> 00:30:33,360
So we clarify the language of 1516, application review and staff report and public hearing.

376
00:30:33,820 --> 00:30:40,500
Remove language referencing a manual submittal or inferring a manual submittal of a permit

377
00:30:40,500 --> 00:30:42,060
extension request to the city clerk.

378
00:30:42,220 --> 00:30:43,880
That just happens at CitizenServe now.

379
00:30:45,600 --> 00:30:51,380
We use the same language for a permit duration and extension for all of the permits.

380
00:30:51,380 --> 00:30:58,400
So, 1523, 1531, and 1532 had their language brought to similarity with other permits.

381
00:30:58,860 --> 00:31:03,200
And then we corrected language for administrative appeals so that it's consistent with state

382
00:31:03,200 --> 00:31:03,420
law.

383
00:31:03,520 --> 00:31:05,240
That should have said 30 days, and it said 20.

384
00:31:05,880 --> 00:31:07,340
And that's this amendment, Mr. Chair.

385
00:31:07,960 --> 00:31:08,480
All right.

386
00:31:08,580 --> 00:31:10,320
Any questions from the land use committee?

387
00:31:13,400 --> 00:31:14,660
Seeing comes to you and Kevin.

388
00:31:15,600 --> 00:31:20,180
Through you, Mr. President, doesn't Mr. Dash charge by the hour, so just give him.

389
00:31:21,200 --> 00:31:25,060
Well, that last hearing went very quickly, so he's not going to pay much tonight.

390
00:31:26,360 --> 00:31:27,660
No actual questions?

391
00:31:29,140 --> 00:31:32,200
Seeing none, I now declare this public hearing open.

392
00:31:32,340 --> 00:31:33,760
We need this public hearing correct.

393
00:31:34,320 --> 00:31:35,760
I now declare this public hearing open.

394
00:31:35,920 --> 00:31:38,680
Anyone in the audience who wishes to testify, please step forward.

395
00:31:38,860 --> 00:31:42,920
Anyone who would testify remotely, please use the little hand icon and I'll call up

396
00:31:42,920 --> 00:31:43,200
on you.

397
00:31:47,120 --> 00:31:48,180
I see no one in person.

398
00:31:48,320 --> 00:31:48,920
Anyone remote?

399
00:31:50,020 --> 00:31:51,660
Adam Dash, please step forward.

400
00:31:56,000 --> 00:31:59,140
Attorney Adam Dash, 48 Grove Street, Somerville, since you called me out.

401
00:31:59,280 --> 00:32:02,040
Yeah, I was a little surprised by those statistics.

402
00:32:02,300 --> 00:32:04,420
I think I'm a glutton for punishment or something.

403
00:32:04,620 --> 00:32:09,660
But I do know that sometimes at pre-sum middle meetings I would probably want one,

404
00:32:09,720 --> 00:32:12,440
but certainly most of the time we don't because I can read the code

405
00:32:12,440 --> 00:32:16,000
and I know what I need and it takes a month or so to get through that process,

406
00:32:16,000 --> 00:32:18,640
which adds extra time and expense for the clients.

407
00:32:19,220 --> 00:32:21,280
So even though I may bill for the hour for the pre-sum middle meeting,

408
00:32:21,280 --> 00:32:26,020
I think it drags the project out and some people already feel like the process is long

409
00:32:26,020 --> 00:32:31,120
enough and for us to do this sort of spur where we don't really need to have the meeting

410
00:32:31,120 --> 00:32:35,620
on a project where I know any of the special permit for X, Y, Z makes some sense, so I would

411
00:32:35,620 --> 00:32:36,740
be in favor of this change.

412
00:32:37,880 --> 00:32:38,480
Thank you.

413
00:32:38,940 --> 00:32:40,180
Anyone else in the audience?

414
00:32:41,420 --> 00:32:42,260
No one remote?

415
00:32:43,200 --> 00:32:43,660
All right.

416
00:32:43,800 --> 00:32:45,720
Seeing none, I declare this public hearing closed.

417
00:32:46,000 --> 00:32:49,460
We'll keep the public comment period open until November 21st.

418
00:32:49,460 --> 00:32:52,540
That's the day after our next land use committee meeting.

419
00:32:53,060 --> 00:32:54,460
And this item will remain in committee.

420
00:32:54,780 --> 00:32:55,460
Next item, please.

421
00:33:02,270 --> 00:33:05,190
Item number 2.2, requesting ordainment of an amendment

422
00:33:05,190 --> 00:33:18,030
to tables 4.1.13, 4.2.13, 4.3.13, 4.4.13, 5.1.14, 7.2.7, 7.4.8,

423
00:33:18,490 --> 00:33:22,950
8.4.16c, and 9.1.1 of the zoning ordinance

424
00:33:22,950 --> 00:33:25,010
permit home-based child daycare

425
00:33:25,010 --> 00:33:26,790
accessor uses and make corrections.

426
00:33:27,510 --> 00:33:28,450
Mr. Barman.

427
00:33:29,070 --> 00:33:30,090
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

428
00:33:30,890 --> 00:33:32,610
We also have a presentation for this

429
00:33:32,610 --> 00:33:34,850
item that is just as short, just

430
00:33:34,850 --> 00:33:35,290
two slides.

431
00:33:36,450 --> 00:33:38,170
So, the State of Massachusetts

432
00:33:38,990 --> 00:33:40,790
amended MGL 40A,

433
00:33:40,810 --> 00:33:42,510
section 3, which is the

434
00:33:43,210 --> 00:33:45,030
chapter of the Zoning Act

435
00:33:45,030 --> 00:33:46,330
that tells us what we have to

436
00:33:46,330 --> 00:33:48,770
permit is the same chapter

437
00:33:48,770 --> 00:33:50,310
that has the MBTA communities

438
00:33:50,310 --> 00:33:55,770
communities portion included in it, and they added family child care homes and large

439
00:33:55,770 --> 00:34:00,730
family child care homes to the required uses that we have to permit in Somerville.

440
00:34:00,830 --> 00:34:02,210
Every community has to permit these.

441
00:34:02,830 --> 00:34:08,670
In Somerville, we have both of those under the definition of a home-based child day

442
00:34:08,670 --> 00:34:09,710
care accessory use.

443
00:34:09,870 --> 00:34:13,350
So that covers both of the uses as they're named in state law.

444
00:34:13,350 --> 00:34:29,250
And so the amendment changes the home-based child daycare accessory use to permitted in every district that has residential housing as a permitted use because this is an accessory use to residential housing.

445
00:34:29,950 --> 00:34:33,330
So that makes a number of changes to the MR districts in high-rise.

446
00:34:34,710 --> 00:34:49,190
And while we were editing the summary use table in article 9, we noticed some discrepancies that were caused by amendments that we made to individual districts without a corresponding change to the main use table in article 9.

447
00:34:49,690 --> 00:34:59,030
And so while we were making the home-based daycare change, we looked over that table to find any other discrepancies and included those corrections in this while we were doing that.

448
00:34:59,590 --> 00:35:02,950
So, primarily home-based child daycares, but also some corrections.

449
00:35:03,730 --> 00:35:04,370
Thank you.

450
00:35:05,650 --> 00:35:06,270
Thank you.

451
00:35:06,410 --> 00:35:08,210
Any questions or comments from the council?

452
00:35:09,550 --> 00:35:12,030
Seeing none, I now declare this public hearing open.

453
00:35:12,190 --> 00:35:14,570
Anybody who wishes to testify, please step forward.

454
00:35:14,810 --> 00:35:17,290
If you are remote, please use a little hand icon.

455
00:35:22,200 --> 00:35:24,580
Seeing no comment, I declare this public hearing closed.

456
00:35:24,900 --> 00:35:28,420
The public comment period will be kept open until November 21st.

457
00:35:28,420 --> 00:35:32,440
You're going to email us at public comments at SummableMA.gov.

458
00:35:33,080 --> 00:35:33,960
Next item, please.

459
00:35:38,170 --> 00:35:46,150
Item 2.3, ID 25-1539, 12 registered voters requesting a zoning map amendment to change

460
00:35:46,150 --> 00:35:53,650
the zoning district of 363 Highland Avenue from mid-rise 4 MR4 to mid-rise 5 MR5 and

461
00:35:53,650 --> 00:36:00,350
from MR4 to mid-rise 6 MR6 and 110 Willow Avenue MR4 to MR6.

462
00:36:00,350 --> 00:36:00,490
Yes.

463
00:36:00,810 --> 00:36:01,270
Council Davis.

464
00:36:01,890 --> 00:36:04,690
Mr. Chair, I'm going to recuse myself for this item as I live across the street.

465
00:36:05,130 --> 00:36:05,570
Very good.

466
00:36:06,130 --> 00:36:06,530
All right.

467
00:36:06,650 --> 00:36:09,770
This is a public communication from 12 registered voters.

468
00:36:09,950 --> 00:36:12,410
I see Mr. Dash in the audience who must be representing them.

469
00:36:12,730 --> 00:36:13,610
Please proceed.

470
00:36:14,310 --> 00:36:18,850
Attorney Adam Dash representing Altitude Properties LLC, the owner of the property

471
00:36:18,850 --> 00:36:22,890
363 Highland Avenue, which is currently at least a recorded future.

472
00:36:23,370 --> 00:36:26,690
If you're familiar with that, going into Davis Square on Highland Avenue between

473
00:36:26,690 --> 00:36:27,750
West and Whipple.

474
00:36:29,510 --> 00:36:35,290
So with me are Gorka Bravo and Lorenzi Bravo, who are the principles of altitude properties.

475
00:36:35,590 --> 00:36:38,790
And with me is the architect Peter Quinn, also in Davis Square.

476
00:36:38,970 --> 00:36:41,050
So we have the whole Davis Square crew here.

477
00:36:41,770 --> 00:36:46,310
We're here tonight to talk about a proposal to change the zoning map for 363 Highland Avenue,

478
00:36:46,350 --> 00:36:51,590
along with the NSTAR facility, which is adjacent to it, which faces Willow,

479
00:36:51,930 --> 00:36:53,750
but actually also faces Whipple.

480
00:36:54,210 --> 00:36:58,570
And this is, and that's 110 Willow, which is across the street from us.

481
00:36:58,770 --> 00:37:05,550
So if we can have the slides pulled up for the application that we filed and start on page 6,

482
00:37:05,990 --> 00:37:07,890
we can show you what we're thinking of.

483
00:37:08,230 --> 00:37:11,530
And then I can explain to you why we're doing that.

484
00:37:13,050 --> 00:37:16,790
While we're doing that, I would note that we have had several meetings with the Davis Gray Neighborhood Council.

485
00:37:17,370 --> 00:37:18,690
The most recent one, perfect.

486
00:37:18,690 --> 00:37:23,370
And the most recent one, they voted overwhelmingly to support the application, and we're going

487
00:37:23,370 --> 00:37:24,550
to be sending something in writing.

488
00:37:24,730 --> 00:37:28,610
I don't know if you've received it or not, but you probably will at some point.

489
00:37:29,250 --> 00:37:30,410
So that is the property.

490
00:37:30,590 --> 00:37:34,270
You can see there the big, well, per minute ago you could see there.

491
00:37:34,630 --> 00:37:41,010
The big dark building there to the left that's outlined in red is the 363 property.

492
00:37:41,370 --> 00:37:44,450
Whipple sort of goes vertically down the middle of the screen and to the right in

493
00:37:44,450 --> 00:37:44,750
the back.

494
00:37:44,750 --> 00:37:49,850
you can see the, well, it was to the right, now it's to the left. Yeah, now it's to the

495
00:37:49,850 --> 00:37:54,730
right. That's the old end star facility. So, Peter, do you want to walk through? Sure.

496
00:37:56,270 --> 00:37:59,130
For the record, Peter Coyne, Peter Coyne Architects, Davis Square.

497
00:38:00,630 --> 00:38:05,870
Yeah, so we are just looking at this as a massing model, if you will, to see what the

498
00:38:05,870 --> 00:38:11,850
impact would be for a combination of five and six stories on the site, the Whipple Street,

499
00:38:11,850 --> 00:38:17,930
not the Willow Street site, but the one where altitude is now or was.

500
00:38:19,710 --> 00:38:26,230
Just to orange you further, the community path is the green bar along the top of that image

501
00:38:26,850 --> 00:38:29,050
and Highland Ave is near the bottom.

502
00:38:30,850 --> 00:38:31,650
Next slide.

503
00:38:34,520 --> 00:38:34,620
Yep.

504
00:38:34,820 --> 00:38:40,620
So, this is showing you the two districts that are currently present.

505
00:38:40,620 --> 00:38:51,280
And right now, the site that we're talking about primarily is zone MR4, and the Boston

506
00:38:51,280 --> 00:38:54,240
Edison slash Eversource site is zone Civic.

507
00:38:55,020 --> 00:39:04,420
So we're proposing to make most of this MR6 toward the community path with a smaller

508
00:39:04,420 --> 00:39:08,200
building out at Highland Ave at an MR5.

509
00:39:08,200 --> 00:39:16,180
So that small rectangle that is kind of at the bottom of our zone is an MR5 building.

510
00:39:17,020 --> 00:39:18,740
So next slide.

511
00:39:22,690 --> 00:39:29,110
This is a little hard to read, I understand, but the idea is to show you that following

512
00:39:29,110 --> 00:39:36,970
the MR6 rules and the MR5 rules for lot size and maximum building footprint and so forth,

513
00:39:36,970 --> 00:39:47,890
Because we are able to develop two buildings, could be three, that would be, the MR-5 would

514
00:39:47,890 --> 00:39:53,210
have a commercial on the ground floor and then some amenity space for the units.

515
00:39:53,710 --> 00:40:00,130
And then the building behind would be 100% residential, that would be a likely scenario.

516
00:40:01,220 --> 00:40:03,510
Although there could be some commercial in it as well.

517
00:40:03,510 --> 00:40:11,810
And then we imagine that somewhere in here we would have a direct link to the community path for bikes and people.

518
00:40:12,910 --> 00:40:22,630
Interestingly, if you just pull up the screen just slightly higher, you'll see that there's a small area that is a kind of a small triangle,

519
00:40:22,850 --> 00:40:33,350
which is a direct connection that the owners hope to offer the city to gain access to the community path right off the extension of Whipple.

520
00:40:33,350 --> 00:40:39,150
So, those are some things in play, but there, you know, it has a tremendous potential to

521
00:40:39,150 --> 00:40:46,950
create a relatively low-impact, high-volume project that's really keyed in and linked

522
00:40:46,950 --> 00:40:53,490
to a lot of the main features of Davis Square, namely Highland Ave., which of course is

523
00:40:53,490 --> 00:40:58,050
a main thoroughfare, and the community path as well, which takes you right to the

524
00:40:58,050 --> 00:41:05,270
and then on for the whole experience of the community path and in the other direction as well.

525
00:41:05,710 --> 00:41:06,810
So next slide, please.

526
00:41:11,540 --> 00:41:12,780
Yeah, this is a section.

527
00:41:14,240 --> 00:41:21,480
So what this is actually showing you is that even though the building in the front on Highland Ave,

528
00:41:21,540 --> 00:41:29,180
which is to the left here, is five stories and the other building is, we're proposing six stories.

529
00:41:29,180 --> 00:41:31,160
they come out to about the same height.

530
00:41:31,900 --> 00:41:36,700
And the reason for this is that the length of Whipple Street

531
00:41:36,700 --> 00:41:39,060
descends almost a whole story.

532
00:41:40,060 --> 00:41:41,600
I think it's at least eight feet.

533
00:41:42,440 --> 00:41:46,380
And the yellow area that you see here is what is allowed

534
00:41:46,380 --> 00:41:47,260
under the current zoning.

535
00:41:47,880 --> 00:41:51,480
So this amount of additional area that you get

536
00:41:51,480 --> 00:41:54,100
makes a huge difference in the development pro forma.

537
00:41:54,480 --> 00:41:57,880
But also the impact of this, as you'll see when I show you

538
00:41:57,880 --> 00:41:59,740
of the shadow studies is not that different

539
00:42:00,340 --> 00:42:02,240
from what's allowed already.

540
00:42:03,180 --> 00:42:03,640
Next slide.

541
00:42:06,760 --> 00:42:08,320
So these are just some massing models,

542
00:42:09,060 --> 00:42:10,360
the first, the aerial views.

543
00:42:11,760 --> 00:42:14,840
Looking at this, the upper right hand side

544
00:42:15,320 --> 00:42:18,520
is a view across the Boston Edison property

545
00:42:19,480 --> 00:42:20,980
where you can see the two,

546
00:42:21,200 --> 00:42:23,260
five, the five and six story buildings

547
00:42:23,760 --> 00:42:27,080
just as a massing block, side by side.

548
00:42:27,500 --> 00:42:29,560
And they appear approximately the same size,

549
00:42:29,560 --> 00:42:34,840
but in fact the one on the right is a one-story higher. Next slide.

550
00:42:37,280 --> 00:42:38,240
Then, yeah, these don't

551
00:42:38,240 --> 00:42:43,680
really show very well on screen, but these are just simply street views. I'm not sure they're

552
00:42:44,140 --> 00:42:49,800
illustrating much at the scale, because of course we did not develop these as a design,

553
00:42:49,820 --> 00:42:53,180
you know, with windows and doors and all the things they give at scale.

554
00:42:55,000 --> 00:42:59,960
Next slide, please. Yeah, so these are shadow studies, and if you can look carefully,

555
00:43:01,000 --> 00:43:03,080
There's two shadow lines on here.

556
00:43:03,820 --> 00:43:08,320
One is the, what is allowed under MR4?

557
00:43:08,940 --> 00:43:15,980
And then the second is what would be additional under either the MR5 or the MR6,

558
00:43:16,140 --> 00:43:18,040
depending on which building you're talking about.

559
00:43:18,780 --> 00:43:21,640
So there's, yeah, there definitely is an increase,

560
00:43:21,900 --> 00:43:26,240
but it's really quite minor compared to what is allowed there now.

561
00:43:27,160 --> 00:43:35,940
this is a, I believe it's the equinox there in the next slide. I think you could go to that.

562
00:43:36,860 --> 00:43:45,080
This is a believable summer or winter. I think that's summer. Yeah, thanks. Can't read it. So

563
00:43:45,080 --> 00:43:52,380
there's a very minor difference between the four and six story and then going on to the next

564
00:43:52,380 --> 00:44:00,080
slide. That's winter. There is some increase at the far edges of the site in the neighborhood.

565
00:44:00,980 --> 00:44:06,400
But again, you know, this is a time of year where everybody's shadowing everybody else anyways.

566
00:44:07,460 --> 00:44:13,900
But, you know, given how much this building could produce in terms of housing,

567
00:44:13,900 --> 00:44:21,180
including affordable units, I know I should mention that this impact is relatively minor.

568
00:44:22,400 --> 00:44:27,280
We think that based on the studies that I've done, if we can use the net-zero ratios,

569
00:44:28,200 --> 00:44:32,460
the two buildings together would produce over 250 units.

570
00:44:33,460 --> 00:44:38,100
There's probably a practical limit of a little less than that, so it's in the low 200s,

571
00:44:38,100 --> 00:44:44,420
but it would be, you know, producing, you know, almost 50 affordable units,

572
00:44:44,540 --> 00:44:45,800
which is really significant.

573
00:44:45,800 --> 00:44:59,980
And I think there's an opportunity here, especially under the net zero ratios, that we could offer smaller units that are, you know, somewhat more of better price.

574
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:04,320
It's a great way of developing the site that's different from a lot of other developments

575
00:45:04,320 --> 00:45:12,740
that we've seen or participated in. So, I'll leave it at that. Yeah, back to Adam.

576
00:45:14,220 --> 00:45:14,460
Sorry.

577
00:45:16,120 --> 00:45:16,920
Councilman Campan?

578
00:45:18,500 --> 00:45:20,980
Mr. Chair, I'm happy to wait until the end of the presentation. I just have a couple

579
00:45:20,980 --> 00:45:21,240
of questions.

580
00:45:22,120 --> 00:45:22,500
Mr. Dash?

581
00:45:23,000 --> 00:45:27,440
Thank you. Thank you. Adam Dash again. So, we found that the project is not viable

582
00:45:27,440 --> 00:45:29,920
at the current four-story MR4 zoning.

583
00:45:30,680 --> 00:45:32,680
We feel this zoning map change would allow

584
00:45:32,680 --> 00:45:34,300
for more housing in the Davis Square,

585
00:45:34,520 --> 00:45:36,800
which is badly needed and will provide an ability

586
00:45:36,800 --> 00:45:41,300
for NSTAR to redevelop its site or some of it,

587
00:45:41,640 --> 00:45:43,000
if it wanted to shave some of it off

588
00:45:43,000 --> 00:45:44,340
because there's a part of it with a building

589
00:45:44,340 --> 00:45:46,460
and part that just seems like a wasteland over there.

590
00:45:47,040 --> 00:45:49,100
It does not require them to do anything

591
00:45:49,100 --> 00:45:50,660
by changing the zoning for them,

592
00:45:50,680 --> 00:45:52,020
but it does give them an incentive

593
00:45:52,480 --> 00:45:54,080
to hopefully someday do something

594
00:45:54,080 --> 00:45:55,980
should they choose to do so.

595
00:45:55,980 --> 00:45:59,700
So, keep in mind that even if the city council were to approve the zoning map change,

596
00:45:59,860 --> 00:46:04,880
the project still needs site plan approval and a special permit from the planning board to be built

597
00:46:04,880 --> 00:46:07,420
and there's a whole public process and neighborhood meetings and all of that.

598
00:46:07,620 --> 00:46:10,420
So, we're just – this doesn't approve a project.

599
00:46:10,580 --> 00:46:15,100
I should note that what Peter had said, what we're showing you is sort of the most that could be built

600
00:46:15,500 --> 00:46:16,960
if the zoning change were happening.

601
00:46:17,100 --> 00:46:18,980
That's obviously not the project we're proposing.

602
00:46:19,180 --> 00:46:23,580
We're going to be proposing a building that looks different and it's not just a white box that maxes everything out.

603
00:46:23,580 --> 00:46:27,920
But we felt, to be honest, just to show you what that would look like if something were

604
00:46:27,920 --> 00:46:30,180
to happen that was a max of that box.

605
00:46:31,640 --> 00:46:38,260
So at this point, we feel like we've been talking to the very centrist of parties.

606
00:46:38,380 --> 00:46:43,220
We feel we've had a pretty good response to it, and the property is currently certainly

607
00:46:43,220 --> 00:46:47,580
underutilized, having that basically one-story concrete block building that's there.

608
00:46:47,580 --> 00:46:53,380
right recorded future is leaving so that there's an opportunity now to do this

609
00:46:53,380 --> 00:46:57,180
which is why we're proposing it now before we go looking for another tenant.

610
00:46:58,440 --> 00:47:02,280
And as Peter had said the Bravo the altitude properties does own that

611
00:47:02,280 --> 00:47:05,740
little weird triangle the connects Whipple to the bike path so that's an

612
00:47:05,740 --> 00:47:12,040
opportunity to bring that into connection into play. So therefore we

613
00:47:12,040 --> 00:47:15,320
would ask you that you favorably recommend the map change for 363

614
00:47:15,320 --> 00:47:21,380
Highland Avenue and 110 Willow to the MR5 and MR6 combo that we described and happy to

615
00:47:21,380 --> 00:47:21,800
take questions.

616
00:47:22,440 --> 00:47:22,720
Thank you.

617
00:47:22,940 --> 00:47:24,480
Any questions or comments from the council?

618
00:47:24,700 --> 00:47:25,480
Councilor Young-Hebbin.

619
00:47:26,200 --> 00:47:26,780
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

620
00:47:27,320 --> 00:47:30,400
Through you, two quick questions before we get to the public hearing.

621
00:47:31,500 --> 00:47:38,400
So the proposed amendment includes this other property that's currently civic that I,

622
00:47:38,900 --> 00:47:40,920
if I'm understanding, is not part of your proposal.

623
00:47:42,160 --> 00:47:46,060
Through you, can you just explain why the proposal includes other properties?

624
00:47:46,420 --> 00:47:51,920
Yeah, it seemed like this was an opportunity because there's been a lot of having lived over on Highland Road for many years.

625
00:47:52,060 --> 00:47:59,420
I can tell you that site, the end star site is a bit of blighted. They do use it, but not all of it in a major way.

626
00:47:59,520 --> 00:48:03,820
And the part that faces Whipple facing our property actually is the part they don't really use.

627
00:48:04,180 --> 00:48:09,300
It seemed like this would benefit everybody, especially if Whipple becomes a connection point up to the bike path

628
00:48:09,300 --> 00:48:11,700
to give them the ability to do something.

629
00:48:11,880 --> 00:48:13,280
Of course, they don't have to do anything.

630
00:48:13,460 --> 00:48:15,720
They're not going to probably get rid of the building

631
00:48:15,720 --> 00:48:16,540
and the other stuff.

632
00:48:16,620 --> 00:48:18,460
They store telephone poles or whatever they do there.

633
00:48:18,620 --> 00:48:20,520
But we thought it was an opportunity

634
00:48:20,520 --> 00:48:21,800
since we're coming in anyway.

635
00:48:22,320 --> 00:48:23,460
And we have multiple parcels.

636
00:48:23,620 --> 00:48:25,440
So it's not like some kind of spot zoning issue

637
00:48:25,440 --> 00:48:26,660
because we do have two parcels.

638
00:48:27,220 --> 00:48:30,140
But to bring this in as an opportunity,

639
00:48:30,580 --> 00:48:32,760
should they ever want to do something, they could.

640
00:48:33,400 --> 00:48:35,420
And maybe it would incentivize them to do so

641
00:48:35,420 --> 00:48:36,940
if they were in the MR6

642
00:48:36,940 --> 00:48:41,940
maybe the MR4 is not enticing enough. That was the thought behind it, nothing more.

643
00:48:42,520 --> 00:48:45,720
Got it, Mr. Chair. Through you, thank you, and I'm not expressing an opinion here,

644
00:48:45,780 --> 00:48:50,600
I'm just curious if that were to remain civic, does that affect your project in

645
00:48:50,600 --> 00:48:52,960
terms of setbacks or anything? No, it's across the street.

646
00:48:54,020 --> 00:48:58,040
Okay, thank you. And then through you, the other question, I thought I heard Mr. Quinn

647
00:48:58,040 --> 00:49:03,660
say that the proposal would allow for 50 affordable units. Did I get that right? That's

648
00:49:03,660 --> 00:49:10,480
20%? 20% of 250 is 50. If it is 250, the number of units depends on how big the units

649
00:49:10,480 --> 00:49:14,220
are. The three-bedroom versus studio, you get fewer or more, so we don't have that

650
00:49:14,220 --> 00:49:22,420
number yet in that range-ish. Okay. And the document before us has a little

651
00:49:22,420 --> 00:49:28,940
study of the existing zoning, which estimates the total number of dwelling units is something

652
00:49:28,940 --> 00:49:38,840
on the order of like 120 it looks like. So going from MR4 to MR6 and 5 more than doubles the number

653
00:49:38,840 --> 00:49:46,900
of units. That could be done. There are, did you want to, that's maybe only one building,

654
00:49:47,980 --> 00:49:54,800
that's 119. That's the MR4. Right, that's what's there now, right? Yeah, that's,

655
00:49:54,800 --> 00:49:56,220
If you didn't change the zoning,

656
00:49:56,360 --> 00:49:58,080
what could be done is 119.

657
00:49:59,000 --> 00:50:02,960
Okay, so the extra two stories and one story

658
00:50:03,800 --> 00:50:05,000
doubles the number of units.

659
00:50:05,320 --> 00:50:05,680
We're saying?

660
00:50:06,400 --> 00:50:07,940
Yeah, Peter Quinn here.

661
00:50:08,660 --> 00:50:11,840
Just to be clear, I think there might be a little higher

662
00:50:11,840 --> 00:50:17,420
if we are able to use the net zero density bonus as well.

663
00:50:17,960 --> 00:50:19,600
So if we're comparing apples to apples,

664
00:50:19,800 --> 00:50:22,980
it's probably like 160 to 250.

665
00:50:22,980 --> 00:50:31,920
So, okay, box me a hundred more. Thank you. Also, Mr. Chair. Thank you. That's so awesome. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair

666
00:50:32,500 --> 00:50:33,360
through you

667
00:50:34,020 --> 00:50:40,200
Obviously up to 50 new affordable units and you know the overall number possibly production 250 sounds great

668
00:50:41,080 --> 00:50:44,340
My question is have you had any discussions with the city about?

669
00:50:44,820 --> 00:50:52,380
Any potential subsidization like we've done with other projects that might see that affordable percentage go significantly higher than that

670
00:50:53,860 --> 00:50:59,980
We have spoken with a lot of people before we have filed this application, so we have

671
00:50:59,980 --> 00:51:02,240
talked to them about it, not that specific point.

672
00:51:04,160 --> 00:51:10,640
Obviously the building would have to pencil out financially to do it, but I think we're

673
00:51:10,640 --> 00:51:13,980
open for discussions if the city were to want to have them.

674
00:51:14,720 --> 00:51:17,740
I can't promise anything because we haven't designed the building yet.

675
00:51:18,300 --> 00:51:23,180
Mr. Chair, we've seen another project set to break ground here where the city got very

676
00:51:23,180 --> 00:51:27,100
aggressive with subsidizing that to make some really good affordable numbers happen for that.

677
00:51:27,220 --> 00:51:30,800
So I would just urge people to have that discussion and see if that makes sense in

678
00:51:30,800 --> 00:51:31,140
this case.

679
00:51:32,540 --> 00:51:37,140
Through the chair, second question, you talked about how what you showed us sort of was

680
00:51:37,140 --> 00:51:41,520
like a, we won't say worst case scenario, but what you could do, say too soon there

681
00:51:41,520 --> 00:51:45,700
would be some step backs at the higher levels in the eventual design?

682
00:51:45,700 --> 00:51:53,360
Absolutely. I mean, we're just showing a white box to the max, which is not obviously going to fly with the planning board and we're not proposing it.

683
00:51:53,560 --> 00:52:02,960
So, because again, we just felt like you should, and we've had this with other map applications where I think members of the council have asked for this, what's the worst case scenario, absolute worst worst.

684
00:52:03,120 --> 00:52:05,920
So we're just bringing it to you. That's not what we're proposing.

685
00:52:07,260 --> 00:52:08,020
Thanks, Mr. Chair.

686
00:52:08,580 --> 00:52:08,960
Thank you.

687
00:52:08,960 --> 00:52:14,640
Seeing no further questions, I now declare that, well, before that, planning department,

688
00:52:14,800 --> 00:52:17,000
is there any recommendation issued on this?

689
00:52:17,120 --> 00:52:20,160
Seeing none, I now declare this public hearing open.

690
00:52:20,400 --> 00:52:24,200
Anyone in the audience who wishes to testify, please step forward, give you a full name

691
00:52:24,200 --> 00:52:24,640
and address.

692
00:52:28,700 --> 00:52:30,680
Hello, Planning Board and Planning Use Committee.

693
00:52:31,160 --> 00:52:34,020
My name is Peter Kim Santos, and I live at 64 Andy Coddav.

694
00:52:34,420 --> 00:52:38,360
I'm the Treasurer of the Davis Square Neighborhood Council, and at our October 27th meeting,

695
00:52:38,360 --> 00:52:42,600
the membership of the DSNC voted to provide a statement in support of the

696
00:52:42,600 --> 00:52:48,000
zoning change at 363 Pile and Dev and 110 Willa. Despite the DSNC still being in

697
00:52:48,000 --> 00:52:51,240
the process of formation, the property owner has attended several of our

698
00:52:51,240 --> 00:52:54,320
meetings and has presented their plans for the property to a generally very

699
00:52:54,320 --> 00:52:58,820
positive reception. A common discussion topic among the DSNC is the

700
00:52:58,820 --> 00:53:01,640
need for more housing and so this proposal for transit accessible

701
00:53:01,640 --> 00:53:06,020
housing is welcome especially with its 40 to 15 inclusionary units. This is

702
00:53:06,020 --> 00:53:09,340
not in my pre-written and improved statement, but I really liked Jake's idea about having

703
00:53:09,340 --> 00:53:12,280
the city fund more, and would encourage you guys to look at that in the future.

704
00:53:13,880 --> 00:53:17,880
Moreover, the property owner and the architect have engaged with us in good faith, dialogue

705
00:53:17,880 --> 00:53:20,800
regarding how the buildings could interface with the community path, and we look forward

706
00:53:20,800 --> 00:53:24,880
to continuing that conversation and working with the team about what the building will

707
00:53:24,880 --> 00:53:25,280
look like.

708
00:53:25,940 --> 00:53:29,980
The DSNC is also supportive of the upzoning of the blighted 110 Willow property as

709
00:53:29,980 --> 00:53:32,860
one of the many blighted properties in Davis Square, and we hope that we'll

710
00:53:32,860 --> 00:53:35,180
see a more desirable development there as well.

711
00:53:35,180 --> 00:53:36,420
Thank you guys very much.

712
00:53:37,140 --> 00:53:37,840
Thank you.

713
00:53:38,060 --> 00:53:41,680
Any further questions or further comments in the public?

714
00:53:42,320 --> 00:53:43,360
Anyone remote?

715
00:53:43,580 --> 00:53:45,120
Please use the little hand icon.

716
00:53:48,200 --> 00:53:49,740
We have one comment.

717
00:53:52,950 --> 00:53:53,310
What's the name?

718
00:53:55,190 --> 00:53:59,190
Scott, please give your full name and address and unmute yourself.

719
00:54:00,070 --> 00:54:00,310
Okay.

720
00:54:00,410 --> 00:54:00,830
Can you hear me?

721
00:54:01,470 --> 00:54:02,410
We can hear you.

722
00:54:02,870 --> 00:54:06,810
Scott Nolkowski, 49 Morrison Ave.

723
00:54:07,950 --> 00:54:16,230
Yeah, I just want to speak in support of this. I think both aspects of the of the zoning change, I think are good.

724
00:54:17,850 --> 00:54:24,050
Definitely the density is needed, especially close to Davis Square Station.

725
00:54:25,210 --> 00:54:34,350
I especially like the idea of even though this is not their property, incentivizing every source to do something with is really an eyesore of a property.

726
00:54:34,350 --> 00:54:36,710
so I would support that part as well.

727
00:54:37,530 --> 00:54:38,070
That's it.

728
00:54:40,150 --> 00:54:40,950
All right, thank you.

729
00:54:41,010 --> 00:54:41,830
Anyone else for remote?

730
00:54:42,050 --> 00:54:43,190
Please use the little hand icon.

731
00:54:47,110 --> 00:54:48,330
Seeing no further comment,

732
00:54:48,450 --> 00:54:49,810
I declare this public hearing closed.

733
00:54:50,110 --> 00:54:53,470
Public comment period will be kept open until November 21st.

734
00:54:53,570 --> 00:55:00,870
You can email us at publiccommentspluralatsomeoflma.gov.

735
00:55:01,930 --> 00:55:04,130
And I believe we're going to go to item number four.

736
00:55:05,970 --> 00:55:07,010
Please read that one.

737
00:55:07,010 --> 00:55:15,220
Item number 4, ID number 24-0328, 10 individuals including five residents

738
00:55:15,220 --> 00:55:21,720
submitting comments regarding item 24-0059, a zoning map amendment to change the

739
00:55:21,720 --> 00:55:27,500
zoning district of 321 Washington Street from fabrication, FAB, to commercial

740
00:55:27,500 --> 00:55:32,060
industry, CI. All right, it's with the Worker Show Council Davis's return. Any

741
00:55:32,060 --> 00:55:36,700
questions or comments on this? This item will be placed on file,

742
00:55:39,180 --> 00:55:39,700
but it's on

743
00:55:39,700 --> 00:55:43,260
file. We'll work complete it. Thank you.

744
00:55:45,870 --> 00:55:49,310
And next item, I think that brings us to our item.

745
00:55:51,010 --> 00:55:57,150
Is that everything besides the one? Well, we got the Gilman Square, we got the up zoning,

746
00:55:58,050 --> 00:55:59,390
the one I laid on the table.

747
00:56:02,380 --> 00:56:06,240
Item number three. I'm going to take item number three off the table

748
00:56:06,240 --> 00:56:11,820
and we have Samantha Carr, land use analyst here to make a little presentation. Glad we

749
00:56:11,820 --> 00:56:15,100
had enough time to do it, and let us know if you have to catch your train.

750
00:56:18,540 --> 00:56:23,020
Before we even comment on all this, I had a few questions already. I want to let the

751
00:56:23,020 --> 00:56:28,680
public know that this is a presentation on ideas. It is not a plan. It's just for discussion

752
00:56:28,680 --> 00:56:33,600
for the hope that one day we do have a future plan, so nobody gets nervous, plenty of time

753
00:56:33,600 --> 00:56:36,840
to talk and have a public comment and input. Ms. Cobb.

754
00:56:37,740 --> 00:56:44,400
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And just to reiterate on that point, I have four maps to share with

755
00:56:44,400 --> 00:56:49,440
the council. The hope is that these can spur conversation and act as a catalyst for dialogue

756
00:56:49,440 --> 00:56:54,160
around what's possible. And these I just wanted to reiterate are not a formal proposal.

757
00:56:57,310 --> 00:57:01,750
So we've just provided a slide here around the existing conditions of the site. This

758
00:57:01,750 --> 00:57:05,750
can be used as a point of reference to compare the four scenario maps before us.

759
00:57:05,750 --> 00:57:07,170
Next slide, please.

760
00:57:11,200 --> 00:57:16,860
So in scenario one, we have got a rationale slide for each of the scenarios included.

761
00:57:17,120 --> 00:57:20,380
I'll just walk through those while the map's on the screen for context.

762
00:57:21,120 --> 00:57:25,440
So this first scenario is looking at mid-rise upzoning and the neighborhood core.

763
00:57:26,200 --> 00:57:30,140
The rationale behind this proposal, it's most closely aligned with the Gilman Square

764
00:57:30,140 --> 00:57:36,160
Neighborhood Council's feedback and draft proposal that was circulated earlier this fall.

765
00:57:36,160 --> 00:57:52,600
There's also strong alignment with long-term strategic planning documents in terms of alignment with summer visions, enhanced framework for Medford and Pearl Streets, as well as the Gilman Square station area plan to fill in the gaps on Medford and Pearl Street and enhance the core of the square.

766
00:57:53,440 --> 00:57:59,940
A summary of the proposal here, we're looking at a concentrated up-zoning unlocking mid-rise

767
00:57:59,940 --> 00:58:04,680
six mixed use development along the core streets in Gilman Square and direct proximity

768
00:58:04,680 --> 00:58:05,660
to the teastop.

769
00:58:06,160 --> 00:58:10,000
So we're looking at expansion along Medford and Pearl Street of the mid-rise six zone.

770
00:58:10,320 --> 00:58:15,500
In addition, this is expanding the pedestrian street designation to promote walkability

771
00:58:15,500 --> 00:58:17,460
further along Medford and Pearl Street.

772
00:58:17,460 --> 00:58:23,080
And you'll note that the small business district overlay is preserved as existing conditions

773
00:58:23,080 --> 00:58:25,940
for local businesses on the west side of Medford Street.

774
00:58:29,870 --> 00:58:34,370
We'd like to advance to the second scenario, so two slides down.

775
00:58:39,340 --> 00:58:44,200
So the second scenario before us, each of these scenarios builds upon each other.

776
00:58:44,460 --> 00:58:49,000
So this scenario is mid-rise plus urban residential corridor expansion.

777
00:58:49,000 --> 00:59:02,100
This rationale, the proposal is in response to council feedback to explore unlocking additional housing production via incremental upzoning within the quarter-mile transit walkshed buffer in Gilman Square.

778
00:59:03,020 --> 00:59:11,760
The mechanism we were exploring for that is upzoning neighborhood residential to urban residential parcels within the walkshed.

779
00:59:12,520 --> 00:59:20,380
Similarly to scenario one, there's strong alignment in this map proposal with summer vision and the Gilman square station area plans goals.

780
00:59:20,880 --> 00:59:36,940
In addition to the concentration of mid-right six up zoning on Medford and Pearl Street, this will also propose urban residential up zoning along Medford Street to the west, as well as school and Marshall Street corridors within the quarter mile walk shed.

781
00:59:38,580 --> 00:59:44,700
You'll note that between Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, on the west side of Medford Street, these

782
00:59:44,700 --> 00:59:50,460
parcels are proposed for UR upzoning rather than mid-rise 4, and this is specifically

783
00:59:50,460 --> 00:59:54,680
to provide some more flexibility for small businesses that are existing within the

784
00:59:54,680 --> 00:59:59,840
space compared to mid-rise for upzoning, your upzoning will

785
01:00:00,000 --> 01:00:04,460
Permit three stories by right, and due to the small business district overlay, commercial

786
01:00:04,460 --> 01:00:09,560
ground floor will also be permitted on site versus three to four stories by right in the

787
01:00:09,560 --> 01:00:14,740
mid-rise four district. So this is just a potential permutation option for those western parcels.

788
01:00:15,920 --> 01:00:20,520
The pedestrian street designation remains the same as in scenario one and has been expanded

789
01:00:20,520 --> 01:00:25,060
from the existing conditions a bit further along Medford and Pearl Street, and the small

790
01:00:25,060 --> 01:00:29,200
business district overly is preserved as within the existing conditions in the neighborhood.

791
01:00:32,220 --> 01:00:35,300
We'd like to go two slides ahead please to scenario three.

792
01:00:38,500 --> 01:00:43,180
So scenario three is continuing in this trend on building upon each other.

793
01:00:43,860 --> 01:00:49,660
We're looking at mid-rise six expansion as well as an urban residential extended scenario.

794
01:00:50,620 --> 01:00:55,900
The rationale behind this was looking at a higher impact version of a proposal responsive

795
01:00:55,900 --> 01:01:01,340
to council feedback to unlock increased housing production via exploring incremental upzoning.

796
01:01:02,080 --> 01:01:05,920
Similar to previous proposals, we're seeing alignment with goals of

797
01:01:05,920 --> 01:01:09,720
strategic goals within summer vision and the Gilman square station area plan.

798
01:01:10,700 --> 01:01:15,900
In summary, this proposal is looking at mid-rise six upzoning in the core along Medford and Pearl

799
01:01:15,900 --> 01:01:22,860
streets as well as an increased urban residential upzoning on the west side of Medford street

800
01:01:22,860 --> 01:01:28,100
street as well as on the school and Marshall Street corridors up to Broadway corridor.

801
01:01:28,720 --> 01:01:31,880
So we're extending slightly beyond the quarter mile walk shed.

802
01:01:32,800 --> 01:01:37,060
We're starting to bridge into the half mile walk shed for a couple of those parcels that

803
01:01:37,060 --> 01:01:39,020
are abutting the Broadway corridor.

804
01:01:40,300 --> 01:01:45,620
We were also looking at matching like for like uses on adjacent parcels when thinking

805
01:01:45,620 --> 01:01:50,740
about the school and Marshall Street corridors to define where the urban residential extension

806
01:01:50,740 --> 01:01:51,700
would taper off.

807
01:01:52,460 --> 01:02:02,300
Similarly to scenario 2, parcels on the west side of Medford Street are looking at an urban residential expansion rather than mid-rise 4 as seen in scenario 1.

808
01:02:03,220 --> 01:02:07,940
The pedestrian street designation remains the same, expanded throughout these proposals.

809
01:02:07,940 --> 01:02:24,300
And one other feature to note, the small business district overlay is preserved for existing conditions and has also been expanded to several new parcels on Medford and Pearl Street to protect existing small businesses that may be impacted by the UR up zoning.

810
01:02:26,310 --> 01:02:28,630
And if we'd like to go two slides ahead.

811
01:02:30,470 --> 01:02:37,410
This is the final scenario for conversation, scenario four. This is looking at mid-rise

812
01:02:37,410 --> 01:02:43,870
extended. This is the highest impact proposal in terms of being responsive to the council

813
01:02:43,870 --> 01:02:49,510
feedback of unlocking increased housing production via incremental upzoning. We're

814
01:02:49,510 --> 01:02:54,810
seeing alignment with strategic planning documents in this proposal. And really the

815
01:02:54,810 --> 01:02:59,770
The key difference here between scenario 3 and scenario 4 is looking at increasing some

816
01:02:59,770 --> 01:03:01,070
of the mid-rise expansion.

817
01:03:02,330 --> 01:03:07,570
This proposal moves forward with mid-rise 6 upzoning along Medford Street.

818
01:03:08,030 --> 01:03:14,290
You will also see Stickney Avenue has been proposed for mid-rise 6 designation to unlock

819
01:03:14,290 --> 01:03:17,030
potential for lot consolidation on that block.

820
01:03:17,970 --> 01:03:21,910
And mid-rise 4 upzoning is proposed on the west side of Medford Street in this

821
01:03:21,910 --> 01:03:22,450
proposal.

822
01:03:23,290 --> 01:03:29,330
Otherwise, conditions remain the same to scenario three in terms of a UR upzoning along the school

823
01:03:29,330 --> 01:03:32,050
and Marshall Street corridors up to the Broadway corridor.

824
01:03:34,070 --> 01:03:37,730
And pedestrian street designation remains the same as the previous proposals.

825
01:03:38,350 --> 01:03:44,470
And similarly to scenario three, the small business district overlay has been expanded to a few parcels

826
01:03:44,470 --> 01:03:48,370
that may be impacted where there's existing small businesses in the neighborhood.

827
01:03:51,650 --> 01:03:53,110
So these are the four.

828
01:03:53,410 --> 01:03:56,510
We wanted to share for conversational purposes with the council,

829
01:03:57,030 --> 01:04:01,950
and there was one other piece of analysis that I wanted to share for context

830
01:04:01,950 --> 01:04:05,850
that helped to shape some of these maps in terms of a fiscal impact analysis.

831
01:04:06,690 --> 01:04:10,270
Perhaps I'll pause there to see if there's any initial feedback to the maps.

832
01:04:11,910 --> 01:04:12,490
Alison Wilson.

833
01:04:13,670 --> 01:04:14,370
Yeah, thanks, Mr. President.

834
01:04:14,750 --> 01:04:17,630
Through you to our land use analysts, thank you for this.

835
01:04:17,630 --> 01:04:29,530
We talked at one of the meetings a while back about the interactions between some of the mid-rise districts and NR in terms of stepbacks, sorry, stepbacks.

836
01:04:32,170 --> 01:04:37,130
Any thought that this one, some of these show more you are bordering the MR.

837
01:04:38,670 --> 01:04:46,610
Is there any reason why we wouldn't want to just pursue a general strategy of, you know, a ring of UR next to MR in general?

838
01:04:48,510 --> 01:04:56,870
Yes, so I would say, you know, from a contextual standpoint in terms of transitioning between typologies,

839
01:04:56,870 --> 01:05:04,250
that would be fairly considered a best practice to move between mid-rise and then transition to urban residential towards neighborhood residential

840
01:05:04,250 --> 01:05:06,730
to provide kind of that contextual

841
01:05:06,730 --> 01:05:09,350
decrease in density between the

842
01:05:09,350 --> 01:05:09,630
blocks.

843
01:05:10,950 --> 01:05:12,390
I think what we were looking

844
01:05:12,390 --> 01:05:14,330
towards in the scenarios between

845
01:05:14,330 --> 01:05:16,480
the U.R. was really thinking

846
01:05:16,930 --> 01:05:18,570
about what could be done within

847
01:05:18,570 --> 01:05:20,280
the quarter mile lock shed and

848
01:05:20,830 --> 01:05:22,610
where there's existing corridors

849
01:05:22,610 --> 01:05:24,130
with higher foot traffic. That

850
01:05:24,130 --> 01:05:25,490
might make sense for that urban

851
01:05:25,490 --> 01:05:28,270
residential up zoning. So the

852
01:05:28,270 --> 01:05:30,130
difference between scenario 3 and

853
01:05:30,130 --> 01:05:32,380
4 in regards to that, or I

854
01:05:32,380 --> 01:05:39,120
say scenario two and scenarios three and four is that we're expanding further up Marshall

855
01:05:39,120 --> 01:05:41,560
and School Street all the way up to the Broadway corridor.

856
01:05:41,960 --> 01:05:47,900
So the key contextual question there is really around whether we're comfortable moving beyond

857
01:05:47,900 --> 01:05:49,280
the quarter mile walk shed.

858
01:05:49,620 --> 01:05:54,000
We have a couple of parcels that go, I would say, one to two blocks outside of that

859
01:05:54,000 --> 01:05:57,620
if we want to extend the streetscape fully up to the Broadway corridor.

860
01:05:57,620 --> 01:06:03,740
So that was really the key consideration there, and there is data to speak to folks

861
01:06:03,740 --> 01:06:07,920
being willing to walk within a half-mile buffer to a major transit corridor.

862
01:06:08,160 --> 01:06:10,640
So there would be some data rationale behind that.

863
01:06:11,080 --> 01:06:16,920
The first proposal does not include the UR component simply because that was kind of

864
01:06:16,920 --> 01:06:20,720
outside the scope of the initial conversations that we were having with the Gilman Square

865
01:06:20,720 --> 01:06:24,880
Neighborhood Council, who was primarily focused on an upzoning along Medford and

866
01:06:24,880 --> 01:06:25,460
Pearl Street.

867
01:06:25,460 --> 01:06:30,760
And I think we were then responding to the council's interest with some of these UR proposals.

868
01:06:33,920 --> 01:06:46,860
Mr. Chair, I like the idea of at least some band of UR next to those MR just because I think it's going to, for everything we've heard is it allows for more flexibility, better use of that land in those mid-rise districts.

869
01:06:47,840 --> 01:06:57,080
I guess I'm looking at some of them off of Medford Street, some of them off of Pearl Street where you see the deep purple of MR there with the NR next to it.

870
01:06:57,080 --> 01:06:59,300
So just flagging that as something I'd be curious to see.

871
01:07:01,100 --> 01:07:01,700
Thank you.

872
01:07:01,760 --> 01:07:02,300
So you're on camera.

873
01:07:03,760 --> 01:07:04,720
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

874
01:07:05,260 --> 01:07:06,260
Through you, thank you so much.

875
01:07:07,360 --> 01:07:09,300
So a couple hours before the meeting,

876
01:07:09,600 --> 01:07:12,600
this committee got a memo from the mayor's office,

877
01:07:14,080 --> 01:07:16,460
raising concerns, basically writ large

878
01:07:16,460 --> 01:07:18,860
with the upzoning proposals in Gilman Square.

879
01:07:19,140 --> 01:07:20,160
And there are two issues.

880
01:07:20,280 --> 01:07:21,580
One of them has to do with public engagement,

881
01:07:21,580 --> 01:07:31,000
engagement, that, you know, neighborhood scale zoning changes kind of benefit from robust

882
01:07:31,000 --> 01:07:31,920
public engagement.

883
01:07:32,400 --> 01:07:33,260
That I agree with.

884
01:07:33,700 --> 01:07:35,680
I think that's absolutely before we move forward.

885
01:07:35,860 --> 01:07:39,200
I think it's important that we have public engagement around what we're considering.

886
01:07:39,640 --> 01:07:42,380
The other one has to do with displacement and it says the Office of Housing Stability

887
01:07:42,380 --> 01:07:46,380
has serious concerns that upzoning may lead to increase development pressure on these

888
01:07:46,380 --> 01:07:46,740
parcels.

889
01:07:46,740 --> 01:07:49,080
So, I just have a question on

890
01:07:49,080 --> 01:07:49,480
that point.

891
01:07:50,640 --> 01:07:52,960
That could be argued for any

892
01:07:52,960 --> 01:07:53,860
parcels in the city, right?

893
01:07:53,980 --> 01:07:56,720
We talk about up zoning in a

894
01:07:56,720 --> 01:07:57,820
lot of different contexts.

895
01:07:58,340 --> 01:08:00,760
And as a general concept, you

896
01:08:00,760 --> 01:08:01,400
could make this argument.

897
01:08:01,600 --> 01:08:03,520
I want to understand this.

898
01:08:03,660 --> 01:08:04,640
Is there something particular

899
01:08:04,640 --> 01:08:08,560
about this area that the

900
01:08:08,560 --> 01:08:09,820
office of housing stability has

901
01:08:09,820 --> 01:08:11,880
identified as an area of

902
01:08:11,880 --> 01:08:13,620
concern, or is this more

903
01:08:13,620 --> 01:08:17,360
general that upzoning can increase displacement.

904
01:08:18,720 --> 01:08:21,840
That sounds like a question for the city, for the mayor's office.

905
01:08:22,460 --> 01:08:25,760
I don't think housing stability is here, but the IJA's office is here.

906
01:08:26,480 --> 01:08:30,300
Through the chair for the record, my name is Yasmin Radassian, legislative liaison with

907
01:08:30,300 --> 01:08:32,100
Intergovernmental Affairs in the mayor's office.

908
01:08:33,000 --> 01:08:36,800
My understanding is that the Office of Housing Stabilities concerns are not

909
01:08:36,800 --> 01:08:38,700
specifically targeted towards Gilman Square.

910
01:08:38,880 --> 01:08:42,180
It's more of a high level concern for upzoning generally in the city.

911
01:08:43,060 --> 01:08:47,020
I also did want to say, I know that Councilor Uren Campan already highlighted some of these,

912
01:08:47,060 --> 01:08:53,800
but did really want to emphasize the deep concerns about displacement and public engagement.

913
01:08:55,060 --> 01:09:02,680
Just want to share that engaging in a neighborhood council is great, but we want to make sure

914
01:09:02,680 --> 01:09:06,200
that we're engaging with all folks that would be impacted, especially our renders

915
01:09:06,200 --> 01:09:09,400
that would be displaced by, potentially be displaced by upzoning.

916
01:09:09,400 --> 01:09:14,600
And I just wanted to highlight that the council has consistently prioritized preservation of

917
01:09:14,600 --> 01:09:18,460
our communities and fought against displacement with the goal of keeping Somerville families

918
01:09:18,460 --> 01:09:19,540
in Somerville.

919
01:09:20,020 --> 01:09:24,320
And the administration believes that more comprehensive engagement is required to ensure

920
01:09:24,320 --> 01:09:27,760
that displacement impacts can be minimized and that all residents in the neighbourhood

921
01:09:27,760 --> 01:09:29,500
are aware of any proposed changes.

922
01:09:30,040 --> 01:09:30,360
Thank you.

923
01:09:32,000 --> 01:09:33,980
Mr. Chair, through you, thank you very much.

924
01:09:33,980 --> 01:09:40,580
I think this is absolutely and kind of straightforwardly a conversation that we are always having and should always be having.

925
01:09:42,020 --> 01:09:49,120
You know, my view, I don't think, for me, that doesn't, like, end the conversation on upzoning, right, the idea that it could cause displacement.

926
01:09:49,260 --> 01:09:55,880
Because the, as I see it, say we have a parcel right next to a train station that is zoned for neighborhood residents.

927
01:09:57,640 --> 01:09:59,860
We don't want to displace the current tenants, obviously.

928
01:10:00,960 --> 01:10:04,020
In many cases, we just see this all over the city, all over every city.

929
01:10:04,740 --> 01:10:08,640
In many cases, the property owner will still displace those tenants, and then the thing

930
01:10:08,640 --> 01:10:15,080
they build is a large mansion or a two-unit double mansion instead of an apartment building

931
01:10:15,080 --> 01:10:17,480
so that you get kind of the worst of both worlds.

932
01:10:17,560 --> 01:10:22,420
You get the displacement, and you also get the creation of a property type that's

933
01:10:22,420 --> 01:10:24,420
not really ideal for right next to a train station.

934
01:10:24,600 --> 01:10:27,360
So that's how I'm viewing this is kind of we're trying to balance those two things.

935
01:10:27,360 --> 01:10:33,900
we certainly do not want to pour fire on the displacement crisis by any means. We also want

936
01:10:33,900 --> 01:10:38,640
the zoning to be appropriate for if and when property owners decide to redevelop something,

937
01:10:38,920 --> 01:10:43,460
they're building something that's appropriate for that context. So I appreciate this memo.

938
01:10:43,620 --> 01:10:47,820
I take it seriously. I think this is obviously a conversation we need to always be having in

939
01:10:47,820 --> 01:10:53,160
our head. But to me, it's not like a, therefore, we don't look at this.

940
01:10:54,480 --> 01:10:55,060
Thank you.

941
01:10:55,120 --> 01:10:56,860
If I could just comment on that real quickly.

942
01:10:57,280 --> 01:11:02,640
I think we're in a new territory thanks to our own land use analysts.

943
01:11:02,900 --> 01:11:07,340
We have a position within the City Council to actually move forward with some ideas.

944
01:11:08,000 --> 01:11:11,960
And I've consistently said that these are ideas until it's a plan.

945
01:11:12,220 --> 01:11:15,860
And when there is a plan, there will of course be a thorough community process,

946
01:11:16,040 --> 01:11:18,580
public hearing notification, all of that.

947
01:11:19,100 --> 01:11:21,660
So I can understand why some people will see a map

948
01:11:21,660 --> 01:11:25,940
up and think that we're going to decide something next week. That's not going to be the case.

949
01:11:26,620 --> 01:11:31,060
But this is the committee where we have these conversations. It's important for us to have

950
01:11:31,060 --> 01:11:36,540
these conversations in public so people know what we're thinking. I just want to put that

951
01:11:36,540 --> 01:11:40,760
out there. And I was hoping I definitely want to move forward as fast as possible,

952
01:11:40,760 --> 01:11:45,720
but just in case people are concerned. I don't see any decisions like this coming

953
01:11:45,720 --> 01:11:50,880
this year. It will be under the new administration and hopefully it will be more communication

954
01:11:50,880 --> 01:11:54,140
in coordination with the Office of Housing Stability

955
01:11:54,140 --> 01:11:56,600
and the Planning Department and the IGAs

956
01:11:56,600 --> 01:11:58,560
so that we won't have this confusion.

957
01:11:59,220 --> 01:12:00,000
Councillor Davis.

958
01:12:00,980 --> 01:12:01,900
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

959
01:12:02,280 --> 01:12:04,240
Would it were that we could do anything in a week?

960
01:12:07,440 --> 01:12:10,880
So I completely sign on to all of this conversation.

961
01:12:11,080 --> 01:12:12,080
I won't repeat much of it

962
01:12:12,080 --> 01:12:14,460
because what I was going to say

963
01:12:14,460 --> 01:12:16,880
in response to this memo has largely been said.

964
01:12:17,740 --> 01:12:18,580
I completely agree.

965
01:12:18,580 --> 01:12:24,220
obviously there is a need and absolutely will be public engagement.

966
01:12:24,880 --> 01:12:31,000
I will just note, I mean, yes, upzoning leads to increased development pressure.

967
01:12:31,180 --> 01:12:34,500
That's the point. That's what we're trying to do.

968
01:12:34,680 --> 01:12:41,140
That's why we're looking at these zoning changes because where we move forward with these,

969
01:12:41,620 --> 01:12:46,660
it would be, if and where we would move forward is because we feel like more development

970
01:12:46,660 --> 01:12:47,920
is the right answer there.

971
01:12:48,660 --> 01:12:53,140
So I guess I just want to put a specific point on that.

972
01:12:54,640 --> 01:12:55,500
That's not a bug.

973
01:12:56,020 --> 01:12:57,240
That's the actual intent.

974
01:12:59,180 --> 01:13:02,460
And just to put a real-world example,

975
01:13:04,560 --> 01:13:07,200
I can't remember when it was that we first issued a site,

976
01:13:07,320 --> 01:13:10,900
and it was at least a year ago, I think, longer than that.

977
01:13:11,900 --> 01:13:14,580
And we've been talking about the concepts of getting

978
01:13:14,580 --> 01:13:20,840
upzoning in and around our transit nodes for quite some time. We still don't have it.

979
01:13:21,360 --> 01:13:26,780
And in the meantime, I've got two pretty small developments going in pretty much right in the

980
01:13:26,780 --> 01:13:34,660
heart of Davis Square, kind of on the immediate edge that are three units, four units, exactly

981
01:13:34,660 --> 01:13:38,680
sort of the hypothetical that the good counselor from Ward 3 noted. I would love for

982
01:13:38,680 --> 01:13:44,200
there to have been an opportunity for more density in those spots. I'm happy that

983
01:13:44,200 --> 01:13:47,700
that they're going forward, it is going to increase our housing in those two scenarios

984
01:13:47,700 --> 01:13:49,900
and the community has been generally in favor of them.

985
01:13:50,380 --> 01:13:56,820
But it's a perfect example of what the council from word three noted and why I do appreciate

986
01:13:56,820 --> 01:14:02,580
the chairs continuing to push this discussion and I do look forward to moving this into

987
01:14:02,580 --> 01:14:06,260
that robust public conversation and getting some real changes on paper.

988
01:14:06,740 --> 01:14:11,920
I want to make one other note and I guess I'll put this out there for discussion

989
01:14:11,920 --> 01:14:21,780
and specifically our request to Ms. Carr to, as we're looking at this, and I look to Director

990
01:14:21,780 --> 01:14:25,400
Bartman to make sure that I'm not misremembering this, and just chuck something at me if I'm

991
01:14:25,960 --> 01:14:31,840
getting this completely wrong, but my recollection is, I think contrary to how I first drafted

992
01:14:31,840 --> 01:14:40,280
it, I think that the way that we accomplished a zoning mechanism to ensure that when development

993
01:14:40,280 --> 01:14:46,820
project happen in our squares. They don't include a massive commercial space right in the middle of

994
01:14:46,820 --> 01:14:51,320
our pedestrian street where one might put, I don't know, hypothetically, for example,

995
01:14:52,660 --> 01:14:58,740
a bank building with nothing else in it or a city target or that sort of thing.

996
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:04,960
It was to use the small business overlay. That's where we ended up, yeah. So, right now

997
01:15:04,960 --> 01:15:11,780
that tool has only been used and it's only been rolled out in Davis Square. It's my view

998
01:15:11,780 --> 01:15:15,940
that we ought to have that in all of our squares. And so, as we look at certainly this hypothetical

999
01:15:15,940 --> 01:15:21,160
in Gilman and any of the other squares, I would really like to see that put in place.

1000
01:15:21,900 --> 01:15:29,040
The small business overlay was originally to ensure that sort of home-based businesses

1001
01:15:29,040 --> 01:15:33,620
businesses could be among some of our major corridors. Director Bartmann's recommendation

1002
01:15:33,620 --> 01:15:38,740
and ultimately was the correct one was to also use that tool to ensure that in our squares

1003
01:15:38,740 --> 01:15:46,940
we have multiple varied sizes of commercial spaces that are more conducive to a robust

1004
01:15:48,480 --> 01:15:53,580
infrastructure of small and independent businesses and having a variety of those types of spaces.

1005
01:15:53,580 --> 01:15:59,280
So my intent when we created that thing a few years ago was to have it go everywhere.

1006
01:15:59,800 --> 01:16:03,120
And I haven't sort of pushed it onto my other colleagues and other wards,

1007
01:16:03,200 --> 01:16:07,600
but I'm going to start doing that now because it's now back to top of mind.

1008
01:16:08,120 --> 01:16:11,800
So as we move forward with these conversations, that's one tool that I would like to just call out and flag,

1009
01:16:11,980 --> 01:16:18,580
that I think that's a really important tool to help protect some of the aspects of our squares

1010
01:16:18,580 --> 01:16:21,880
and that sort of intimate pedestrian experience and that community experience

1011
01:16:21,880 --> 01:16:24,880
is having lots of small, not just small,

1012
01:16:24,960 --> 01:16:27,400
but a variety of sizes, not one big giant space.

1013
01:16:28,200 --> 01:16:29,980
Smaller spaces bring lower rents

1014
01:16:29,980 --> 01:16:31,860
and more opportunity for business

1015
01:16:31,860 --> 01:16:33,760
at different points in the life cycle.

1016
01:16:33,980 --> 01:16:36,740
So let's use that tool where we can.

1017
01:16:37,120 --> 01:16:37,380
Thank you.

1018
01:16:38,500 --> 01:16:39,000
Thank you.

1019
01:16:39,200 --> 01:16:40,340
Any other questions or comments?

1020
01:16:40,780 --> 01:16:41,300
Council Wilson.

1021
01:16:41,920 --> 01:16:43,900
Yeah, Mr. President, I'll thank the administration

1022
01:16:43,900 --> 01:16:46,240
for putting that memo out.

1023
01:16:46,320 --> 01:16:50,020
Obviously we should talk about always displacement risks

1024
01:16:50,020 --> 01:16:52,360
and the need for public engagement on these things.

1025
01:16:53,340 --> 01:16:55,500
Lord knows this committee's been having a discussion

1026
01:16:56,020 --> 01:17:00,500
for months now about upzoning, different strategies for it.

1027
01:17:02,080 --> 01:17:04,900
I think the reason why it's worth pursuing this,

1028
01:17:04,940 --> 01:17:07,440
especially at these transit areas like this,

1029
01:17:07,680 --> 01:17:11,480
is because one, I think there's a lower risk

1030
01:17:11,480 --> 01:17:13,700
of displacing naturally current affordable housing there

1031
01:17:13,700 --> 01:17:14,560
because it's by transit.

1032
01:17:14,700 --> 01:17:17,020
There's gonna be less naturally current affordable housing

1033
01:17:17,020 --> 01:17:18,280
just because of what we know about

1034
01:17:18,280 --> 01:17:23,900
what the green line come to central has done to rents around those stations. The other thing

1035
01:17:23,900 --> 01:17:29,160
then is the payoff that you're looking at for doing this with genuinely affordable units that

1036
01:17:29,160 --> 01:17:36,520
might be coming in because of inclusionary zoning, you know, and density bonuses. And that's why I

1037
01:17:36,520 --> 01:17:41,740
think the juice is worth the squeeze on this. And that's why I support the idea of up zoning

1038
01:17:41,740 --> 01:17:46,200
around transit. It just makes sense. It's the most bang for the buck with the least risk of

1039
01:17:46,200 --> 01:17:46,880
displacement.

1040
01:17:48,970 --> 01:17:52,930
The water planners would agree with you. Any further questions or

1041
01:17:52,930 --> 01:17:53,290
comments?

1042
01:17:57,660 --> 01:18:01,080
Seeing none, this item will be remaining committee. Thank you, Ms. Carr,

1043
01:18:01,180 --> 01:18:04,800
for the presentation. And I look forward to talking to the community and the

1044
01:18:04,800 --> 01:18:10,480
council about it more in the future. Do we have any more? I did just want to

1045
01:18:10,480 --> 01:18:14,580
quickly flag. There's a couple of slides at the end of the presentation here

1046
01:18:14,580 --> 01:18:19,540
around a fiscal impact analysis. If we do have time, I'm happy to go

1047
01:18:19,540 --> 01:18:22,120
through those or just keep them as a point of reference for folks.

1048
01:18:25,880 --> 01:18:32,000
Okay, great. So just wanted to provide a quick snapshot and thank you all for the feedback

1049
01:18:32,000 --> 01:18:36,960
and commentary on the proposals. We're looking forward to continuing to move these forward

1050
01:18:36,960 --> 01:18:41,260
to think about moving from ideation to creation of something more formal here.

1051
01:18:42,100 --> 01:18:47,520
I wanted to provide a little window into some of the back-end analysis that's been done to

1052
01:18:47,520 --> 01:18:51,820
inform the maps here. One piece of that that we've chatted about previously in the workflow

1053
01:18:51,820 --> 01:18:56,800
is a fiscal impact analysis. So just wanted to provide a snapshot of what that looks like

1054
01:18:56,800 --> 01:19:02,760
for folks to see. One snapshot scenario we looked at was comparing the fiscal impacts

1055
01:19:02,760 --> 01:19:08,420
of existing conditions for three neighborhood residential lots compared to consolidating

1056
01:19:08,420 --> 01:19:14,880
those lots and up zoning to urban residential to facilitate the development of a new 30-unit

1057
01:19:14,880 --> 01:19:20,320
apartment building. This scenario was chosen due to average unit and floor

1058
01:19:20,320 --> 01:19:24,820
pet assumptions that we were able to surmise based on our scraping of

1059
01:19:24,820 --> 01:19:29,420
historical permitting data since 2019. For urban residential building types on

1060
01:19:29,420 --> 01:19:34,260
average we're seeing about a 7,000 square foot floor plate with 30 units on

1061
01:19:34,260 --> 01:19:39,320
average per building. In terms of the methodology there's two scenarios that

1062
01:19:39,320 --> 01:19:44,060
have been put forward with three parcels being selected. These were all

1063
01:19:44,060 --> 01:19:48,760
selected within the up-zoning area that's being considered, so primarily within the quarter-mile

1064
01:19:48,760 --> 01:19:53,100
walkshed, although there is one parcel that falls in the half-mile walkshed.

1065
01:19:53,840 --> 01:19:58,940
And also was thinking thoughtfully about where urban residential development is likely to occur,

1066
01:19:59,320 --> 01:20:02,660
making it contextual comparison to existing adjacent properties.

1067
01:20:03,460 --> 01:20:07,640
One of the assumptions that goes into the fiscal impact model is a land valuation.

1068
01:20:07,640 --> 01:20:14,440
So a custom square put valuation was calculated based on assessment data for existing urban

1069
01:20:14,440 --> 01:20:19,040
residential properties in Gilman Square to try and provide a calibrated neighborhood

1070
01:20:19,040 --> 01:20:21,660
example of what that cost would be per square foot.

1071
01:20:23,380 --> 01:20:29,220
If we want to go to the next slide, I have a quick snapshot of the scenario one results.

1072
01:20:29,900 --> 01:20:35,020
So the first scenario was looking at three neighborhood residential lots, two are existing

1073
01:20:35,020 --> 01:20:36,280
single family structures.

1074
01:20:36,280 --> 01:20:42,940
is one is a duplex with a total of five units between the three parcels compared to redeveloping,

1075
01:20:43,080 --> 01:20:48,240
consolidating the lots, and facilitating the development of a 30-unit urban residential

1076
01:20:48,240 --> 01:20:54,840
apartment building. In terms of net municipal revenue impacts, we're seeing a gain of $28,000

1077
01:20:55,400 --> 01:21:01,640
annually. And responsive to council's concerns or questions around what would impact speed

1078
01:21:01,640 --> 01:21:07,280
to local schools we've included that as a point of contact here. So for school

1079
01:21:07,280 --> 01:21:11,800
impact we're seeing a marginal increase of one student and we've also listed the

1080
01:21:11,800 --> 01:21:18,640
evaluation assumption here as a point of reference. In the last slide here we've

1081
01:21:18,640 --> 01:21:22,280
got the second scenario that's similarly looking at the three neighborhood

1082
01:21:22,280 --> 01:21:26,880
residential lots but was looking at a different typology so two triple

1083
01:21:26,880 --> 01:21:32,400
deck or structures and one single family home. In other scenarios, triple deckers might have

1084
01:21:32,400 --> 01:21:37,940
additional units. In this particular context, there's two units per structure, so we're still

1085
01:21:37,940 --> 01:21:43,760
looking at a five-unit versus 30-unit apartment building comparison. You'll see there's a smaller

1086
01:21:43,760 --> 01:21:50,840
net municipal revenue gain, incrementally smaller for 25,000 annually, and a slightly

1087
01:21:50,840 --> 01:21:55,420
smaller school impact of anticipated additional two students in the neighborhood.

1088
01:21:55,420 --> 01:21:59,100
So, just wanted to provide this as a little bit of background.

1089
01:21:59,740 --> 01:22:04,180
If there's an interest in looking, say, at the mid-rise portion of the corridor to see

1090
01:22:04,180 --> 01:22:08,600
the fiscal impacts, that's something I'd be happy to take a look into further to provide

1091
01:22:08,600 --> 01:22:12,620
some insights of what the revenue impacts and school impacts would be to the community.

1092
01:22:13,220 --> 01:22:13,580
Thank you.

1093
01:22:14,340 --> 01:22:15,200
Constable Yann-Campan.

1094
01:22:15,660 --> 01:22:16,480
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1095
01:22:16,660 --> 01:22:16,960
Through you.

1096
01:22:17,100 --> 01:22:17,640
Thank you very much.

1097
01:22:18,880 --> 01:22:24,540
So, my recollection, the question that had been raised originally from maybe historic

1098
01:22:24,540 --> 01:22:30,360
planning was about the effect on tax bills for current residents. So, at a future meeting,

1099
01:22:30,540 --> 01:22:34,040
I would be very interested to see that. In addition to the revenue gained to the city,

1100
01:22:34,580 --> 01:22:39,560
if there is no development on those parcels and they just sit there in an up-zoned district,

1101
01:22:40,180 --> 01:22:43,980
did their tax bills go through the roof? That's, I think, what I'd like to understand.

1102
01:22:44,360 --> 01:22:48,320
So, if that be possible at a future meeting, I don't know how to calculate that,

1103
01:22:48,340 --> 01:22:49,700
but if there's a way to do it, I'd love to see it.

1104
01:22:50,460 --> 01:22:51,060
Mr. Wilson.

1105
01:22:51,520 --> 01:22:54,240
Mr. Chair, I want to thank our colleague from Word 3 for clarifying that.

1106
01:22:54,340 --> 01:23:03,460
That was my question from watching this as I recall it being about, you know, just an upzoning and the impact on someone there, you know, before any development happens.

1107
01:23:05,860 --> 01:23:12,780
I'll point out, you know, with Prop 2.5, right, that is an overall limit, that's a limit on the overall growth of the city's tax levy.

1108
01:23:14,620 --> 01:23:18,220
And it might be something where, you know, I'd be curious to hear from the chief assessor

1109
01:23:18,220 --> 01:23:22,640
how that works in terms of DOR, you know, forcing, valuating.

1110
01:23:22,840 --> 01:23:26,700
You know, you don't want to see if a handful of properties basically absorb all of that

1111
01:23:26,700 --> 01:23:28,720
if they're forced to jack those valuations.

1112
01:23:30,180 --> 01:23:35,260
Possibly an argument for doing a bunch of this at once, so it's not a handful of properties.

1113
01:23:35,900 --> 01:23:39,120
It all depends on the answers we get from the chief assessor, but I'd be really curious

1114
01:23:39,120 --> 01:23:42,700
to hear more about this, you know, given the clarification we got from our colleague,

1115
01:23:45,660 --> 01:23:45,860
Ms.

1116
01:23:45,940 --> 01:23:52,840
Coe. Thank you. I don't want to speak on behalf of the administration, so feel free to jump in if

1117
01:23:52,840 --> 01:23:57,520
you'd like to clarify, but my understanding is that the Assessor's Office is hoping to be available

1118
01:23:57,520 --> 01:23:59,800
for the next session to answer some of those questions.

1119
01:24:05,010 --> 01:24:07,650
Through the chair, the Assessor's

1120
01:24:07,650 --> 01:24:11,550
Office, as everyone knows, is currently in the process of doing the tax-free assessment,

1121
01:24:12,250 --> 01:24:16,890
which is hopefully going to be presented at the November 25th Council meeting.

1122
01:24:17,850 --> 01:24:21,870
We are waiting for a final confirmation from the Department of Revenue, I believe it is,

1123
01:24:22,470 --> 01:24:28,430
before the Assessor's Office would feel comfortable coming to speak on this item before the committee.

1124
01:24:28,990 --> 01:24:35,450
I have been in contact with them just making sure that we haven't had that final confirmation from Development of Revenue,

1125
01:24:35,550 --> 01:24:40,390
so I have not forgotten that there was a request for Assessor's Office to be here.

1126
01:24:40,390 --> 01:24:46,270
I am still working on it. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions or comments?

1127
01:24:49,130 --> 01:24:53,730
Okay. This item will remain in committee. All other items will remain in committee as well,

1128
01:24:53,830 --> 01:25:00,370
except for the work of the work complete we did. Item four, what's that?

1129
01:25:01,390 --> 01:25:07,250
Adam Clark in the back. Yep. Thank you. All right. Seeing no further business,

1130
01:25:07,250 --> 01:25:11,830
We are adjourned everyone's here, so no need for a roll call. Good night everyone