##VIDEO ID:nLHUEKBEem8## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e H call a meeting to order and the first order of business as usual is approval of the minutes from our meeting on November 19th which were previously distributed to us if there are no additions or Corrections I'll entertain a motion to approve move without reading I'll make the motion thank you I'll second thank you all in favor [Music] I all right this is a public meeting uh where we will be reviewing and recommending to the city council uh two petitions I'm sorry zoning amendments which are petitions of themselves I guess and William is going to um lead us through them yes so as tuck said we have some zoning amendments on the agenda for today some proposed amendments so the first one has to deal with seafood processing currently our zoning does not allow enclosed seafood processing Seafood packing and packaging Seafood loading and seafood distribution in the industrial district and this amendment is relatively simple it is allowing this use by special permit in the industrial district so you might be asking why uh and so this is an industrial use that does have the potential to bring jobs to the city of Chelsea uh as well as improve the tax base for the city uh these jobs are can be generally strong jobs and useful for current residents um and it's also important to have a mix of commercial industrial and residential uses in a city to provide a strong tax base um in addition the industrial district which you'll see uh if you look at the map here the industrial district is that kind of purple magenta color uh the industrial district has very close proximity to the water uh and actually many of the industrial uses often have access to the water as well uh so kind of makes sense to have a seafood processing um facility in these areas and also a similar use does exist on Eastern a and was kind of grandfathered in when this use was prohibited um and I think another thing just to mention here is that this use would be we are proposing to allow this use by special permits so it still gives the boards and commissions an opportunity to discuss um any potential case that comes you know before them uh and you know be able to provide any sort of conditions to mitigate any you know potential impacts that come from this kind of use so uh there still is that opportunity um it's not allowing the use by right so um I will close there that's really all I have for the presentation um I'll hit it over back to tuck if you want to open it up to the public or any I have a couple of questions when did the city prohibit this type of of use I'm not sure it was uh ever specifically prohibited U or or change when was the zoning changed to disallow this type of use my understanding it was never changed to allow to take out that use in industrial district it was just never permited industrial district that was permitted in those districts that were immediately adjacent to the Waterfront because it was uh considered a water related in uh dependent use uh which would address um the designated Port area requirements no but uh we're being asked to change the zoning to allow it correct so was it ever allowed and if it was when did that change and why was it changed my understanding that it was never allowed in industrial district okay so never ever in our history uh going back to the 30 odd years I've been here okay okay thank you maybe to tag on tag on to that question a little bit maybe asked a different way um what was the reasoning behind grandfathering in the current use and what does that current use look like um grandfather a grandfather juice is a use that was there prior to any change in zoning so you can't the zoning can't go back and disallow the use if it if it's changed so it's automatically grandfather and so what we're saying is is that use was already in place before there was any zoning that affected this at all and then that was just allowed to continue at that point correct all right and what kind of uh use is that what sort of facility are they running there they do seafood processing can any more uh specificity about that exactly what they're doing I I don't other than um in the past when I've spoken to them they just call themselves Seafood processors I need to look it up I don't remember is that 50 Eastern a may I ask if that company has already had a processing facility on Boston Harbor elsewhere are they expanding has there been any difficulties their other location or is this I'm sorry which the 50 Eastern app site right as far as I know that's their only site okay I guess my question is because there are some other seafood processing facilities elsewhere around Boston Harbor so my question is is it the same company that's expanding or is this a new company have there been any any difficulties with other locations no the um company that expand is actually here if you would like to have them explained that's up to the chair and that would be up to the chair um anybody in the audience like to speak on this matter David David mindin representing Boston Provisions which is the company seeking to locate its business at the facility and I have with me Mike G and Mike mon Mike mon is the CEO of the company and uh Mike G would like to make a presentation that hopefully will answer all of your questions and he'll be available to any that he doesn't cover for you so may I bring him up F the microphone so just a very quick question so you are representing a new company that wants to come to Chelsea somewhere in one of the industrial areas or are I'm well it it's a company that's been in existence for a very long time starting as wolves fish which had markets in various areas including Harvard Street and Brookline years ago I used to go there so I remember it um they're also taking over savenor's meat um and they've been looking for a new facility to locate that would work out well for their business and they would just love to come to Chelsea I've heard Mike presentation to um the city manager and a couple of City counselors and to me it's very impressive but of course I represent them um but I think it would bring as was stated it'll bring jobs it'll increase the tax space and there won't be any any detriment to the city um this area um the facility that's proposed was the bread factory previously I think it was signature breads was it the name of it um it's been vacant for a very long time the landlord has done some improvements to it to maintain the facility and the landlord and the prospective tenant have wonderful plans to modernize the plant and Mike can speak to exactly what will be done there but his point of emphasis will be there won't be any cooking there so he can explain what the fish processing is and and U what exactly will go on in the facility any other questions for me but Mike Mike is much more um knowledgeable about the specifics of the project hi thank you uh my name is Mike G I am one of the owners of Boston Provisions Boston Provisions is a processing and distribution business we primarily process center center of the plate proteins um to deliver to about 1500 customers locally here in New England um we will uh our hope is to move our and consolidate our facilities from um South Boston as well as Cambridge into a new facility here in Chelsea we'll be um bringing over 150 jobs from both of these areas we will not be keeping our space over in those two locations um we anticipate that uh 150 will grow to probably about 300 jobs within the first um 12 to 24 months of of occupancy um the majority of our employees about 80% of them live within very close proximity if not within Chelsea um so this represents a you know a serious decrease in commute for most of our employees um our business is um taking um whole fish or um sub Primal cuts of meat and breaking them down into portions we do no cooking of any products um and we do no curing of products we do we don't do anything like that it's it's just processing repackaging putting on small trucks to deliver to most of our customers our customers consist primarily of um small restaurants um local um establishments you know from around New England so you know um you know as I've explained to the city council and we had a group that came and visited our seafood processing which is specifically um the business that's um that is being talked about tonight and um you know Seafood and Meat if you put a piece of fish or beef on your counter there's there's no odor until you actually cook the product so I I expect to have very little um odor or emission um you know we care deeply about um the the quality of our product the safety of the food that we we produce and we work very hard to keep everything extremely clean um we're leaving South Boston because South Boston doesn't have the space to support businesses of our size and so it's it makes a lot of sense to find a location that's in close proximity to all of our customers so the majority of our customers are within the 128 belt chel represents a great location with multiple access routes to the city um again it's very very close to the our primary employment base you know um I share in the ownership of the business with um almost half of the employees in our company and we sharing the profits with everybody so we are a community business we we um care deeply about all of our team members and any single way that we can improve the lifestyle of What's um I consider to be um very um physically challenging work there's a lot of putting thing picking things up putting things down movement of products you know anything we can do to improve everyone's life and lifestyle is is our Focus um we are we are very excited about the idea being in Chelsea you know we've we've searched all around the different um local communities we've looked outside the city and this um particular location in in area really checks every single box for us um and we're we're Overjoyed at the idea of coming we were disappointed pointed to understand that seafood processing um uh didn't allow wasn't allowed to special um uh special permit um but we're hoping to to make that change because I think we be um a significant benefit to the community and you know we we we're excited we're a local business you know we care about um you know everything that has to do with with being a New England native you know majority of our products are sourced locally we try and connect local farms to local chefs and we seem to really be F feeling a need that some of the larger companies that do the same sort of business as ours that that are spread out across the country you know we can really focus on on connecting you know you know um local businesses so that's kind of our intent um you know we'll have you know 30 or 40 trucks that are small box trucks that'll be moving in and out of the facility daily throughout the day and you know we're we're just excited at the idea of being here and we really appreciate the opportunity that you guys are are are considering um seeing that it's a change in in your you know your histo historical zoning law a question for you yeah um so I I heard you mention uh trucks a certain number of trucks coming and going through your facilities do you have any uh water facing plans as well any boat uh traffic we do not um we're not in the business of off floating seafood and then moving moving it into the building um the majority of our product now comes through Freight forwarders and certain areas or we buy it from wholesalers um to you know to distribute so we we will not have boats offloading fish um in in the community whatsoever okay no plans to expand in that direction um occasionally you get someone who asks but there's not really Waterfront access for us to be able to do that so that's not really our business plan our business plan is to be um a to really deliver a good logistic service for our customers and we are able to get those customers through adding value to product you know most of our competitors again are buying this product that's that's processed somewhere else and then they go you know um box in box out type service we really feel like we add value by finding the highest quality ingredients breaking them down ourselves and then and then shipping them out thank you yeah no problem so I have a few questions to ask uh regarding um one is will this has any um comes to any pollution or anything involved you know we um it's very important for us to use 100% of what we bring in is sold so we basically have almost no byproduct that comes out of our processing um so there's there's very little pollution um you know our our um HVAC exhaust systems everything is pumping air inside the building there's no real um ventilation that comes out of the building other than you know a few pipes here and there but it's um we we don't create any pollution um other than you know um having trucks but we're we're exploring expand you know changing our Fleet to electric vehicles and all that um and and doing whatever we can in order to not have too much um uh pollution okay and also this um you know the other concern concern is with many people that lives around Eastern a and some other part there is a lot of like apartments complex um any of the prevention of smelling or anything that will impact I I foresee um no impact in air smell or um air quality um that will even remotely touch near any of the residential although there is a building that's on the other side of the parking lot that we're looking at um you know my only fear that I've described to the city council members is the building has been dark for a few years so people can get used to um no noise certainly we'll have um when trucks are moving around there's noise we don't um operate any 18-wheelers or anything of that not to say that they won't occasionally show up um to deliver product but that's that's not our B our business is small box rocks but it still creates some level of noise um but you know nothing outside of what's um normal just on the other side of the building with all the distribution companies you know there's um there's fruit companies as you know produce companies spice companies um and you know they if anything their business involves a lot heavier Trucking than our do ours does so we won't in terms of processing odors um I can almost guarantee there'll be none um and but in terms of um sound of trucks certainly there'll be some thank you yeah but again our our trucks are not 18 wheelers so we don't have the downshifting noise or anything like that they're they're mostly um box small box trucks vans I think it's a wonderful use of that building I mean we've been or that building has been looking for a tenant for a while and um the proximity to the Waterfront makes perfect sense for a use like that um the concerns I would have is um is this going to further cut off pedestrian access to the Waterfront I mean to there is such little um Waterfront within Chelsea that the public can enjoy so um I would just hope that you would strive to be a good neighbor and engage with the public and I don't know if you planning like a retail component um but I would just take into careful consideration the pedestrians in that area and um you know I don't know if you've planned your truck routes and all that but you should really study the traffic in that area yeah nothing nothing would make me more upset than um dis displacing or angering any of the neighbors and and um I'm I'm very proud of this business we started with three employees we have 115 at this point um this is not something that uh this is not a business that we're anticipating some giant financial gain from this is something that um allows me to to experience the the joy of giving back and and and collectively working with a team of of of a a huge amount of people compared to average businesses so um certainly any sort of uh I wouldn't want to have a negative impact on anyone and and if we um from what I understand the process of a special permit is a public process of which I I very much look forward to having these discussions and figuring out the best ways for us to fit within the community um I don't anticipate again any sort of emission problems in terms of the smell of food um you know certainly I have concerns of a building that was has been dark and vacant for years um being reactivated and and I'm sympathetic um to to that reality um but you know the building is is there to be used and it has been used historically and I think out of um if I look at our business compared to the majority of companies that occupy industrial space in the in the neighborhoods I think we're far more involved in the community we work really hard it's um to um to be um to be a benefit to everyone rather than be a hindrance and and that that includes you many of our restaurant customers advertise the name of our business on their menu so we we certainly wouldn't want to do something that caused a rugus I can attest to that your company has a sterling reputation and I I I've always had a good experience good well we have we have a direct consumer business that we um do internet sales with primarily um but I would we there's been lots of chatter of of having some sort of um retail um you know location that you know with some sort of you know cooking food and we've been discussing all those things it's not specifically in our plans at this point but if there's an opportunity to do it we we are we certainly will jump on it and anything we can do that that is a benefit to everyone we want to do we want to be a well-known business and and and um again we're very proud of what we put together and we intend to to grow in that sort of fashion great and I would like to think that your business plan would um promote the use of water transportation down the road yeah I that as we evolve transportation is is a um is is a big issue I me um I'm lucky enough to have a car to get to and from work but so many of our employees you know with being 3 miles as the CL crow flies to South Boston it can take over an hour and a half to get to our facility so any way I can to reduce that um you know that that travel time have something that's closer that makes it you know walkable property for a lot of our employees that's that's what I'm hoping and and uh you know and I I think we'll you know we'll achieve that certainly as it relates to Waterfront access um the lot itself uh doesn't have access to the water um specifically the second level of of the factory where we we will be um I don't um I'd be happy to figure out any sort of way to promote access to the Waterfront and from what I understand possibly there's going to be some sort of bridge built around the water near the marina there if we can do anything um including you know helping take care of that area we'll do whatever we can I mean it's an amenity for me as much as anyone else and my employees you know we spend a lot lot of time in the office so you know anything we can do to help that we we will okay I have a couple of questions sure what are your hours of operation today today we have activity that um seems to run from about 4 a. till about 5:00 p.m. okay but but how many days a week um we're open seven days a week okay so we're it's we're a 365 day a year business so certainly there'll be activity and what about water um water for our building yeah you use a lot of water yeah there's no doubt about it you guys we we we certainly will use water for sure so and so what are you doing about uh waste water yeah um from what I understand and I'm I'm not the owner of the building um there is adequate drainage um that is you know no different than we would have in South Boston so water goes in all of our um drains within the facilities that at least we operate in today and we anticip in the future everything if there's scales or or such that are coming from the fish all that is trapped it's thrown away I guess that would be the only piece of the fish that's not reused is anything that comes out of the drains so but it's you know um normal waste water is what I would anticipate but um otherwise you know trapping everything that we can okay so the only time that you guys don't operate is like from 8:00 at night at 4:00 in the morning overnight I'm I'm not you have shifts two shifts we our Our Hope would be to be successful enough to have more than um Two Chefs okay but um and that really also depends on how the nature of the community starts to want to receive its product you know today we don't have um overnight shifts because our chefs are not ordering in a way that would um require us to do so but I certainly wouldn't want that restriction out of the gate but I I I would be very sympathetic um especially if I was living across this you know the parking lot in the building that there would be certain hours of the day when I wouldn't want to hear trucks backing up and and pulling forward but um from what I understand signature breads was a 24-hour um a day facility um when they were in operation so they the that restriction doesn't seem to exist and but I don't think we're again we don't have um we don't we're not really using 18 wheel 18wheeler trucks I wouldn't imagine any of those would arrive in in the middle of the night um I that doesn't seem to be what happens um I'd like to share that my mom used to work at signature breads so I'm very um passionate about keeping jobs here in Chelsea um and so we I think that we're here for a zoning Amendment and not particularly for the site and so I am going to share that I'm quite surprised that this isn't allowed by a site plan review already and I think it's a perfect way a perfect opportunity for us to bring this opportunity city of Chelsea we we are a um a I don't want to call us a a leader in understanding um infrastructure for the seafood Community but I I in some respects I come from a commercial real estate background back in the day and you know there's um it it seems to me that the processing industry in South Boston is um specifically in the massport areas is is there is going to be a sunset to most of those businesses and our ability to work in that area um whether it's just the the um you know the traffic that exists in there um throughout the day you know the the cost of building new new modern infrastructure the um we the our original idea was to be in that location but they've made it very difficult for us to exist and I I can understand um you know somewhat why that is I'm I'm discouraged that the that Seafood is um such a kind of a backbone to being in New England and Boston and I'm I'm I'll be sad to leave that area but we we won't be the last business that will be excited to move jobs over here I think we'll kind of lead lead the way well I'd like to make a motion to recommend the zoning Amendment as described um before can we move forward anybody in the public would like to say something question uh this is a public is this a public are there any other uh members of the public here who would like Robinson sir thank you very much I appreciate it thank you for listening excuse me Leo Leo Robinson 83 Warren adal city council I had a lot of the same concerns that this board had until I was able to go out and look at the facility I was concerned about the smell I was concerned about how they were going to uh deal with their trash um they answered all those questions for me while I was there the trash is self-contained are the was no real smells outside of uh the building and actually there was some employees that worked there were from Chelsea so their hope is to come here and expand in Chelsea by increasing the number of jobs um within the first um 12 to 24 months while they're here and I think it'll be beneficial to the city in regards to economics here's a company that's going to be leaving the seaport to land in Chelsea and whether this kicks off other businesses that want to take a look at Chelsea um it's a possibility I know most people don't know that myself and the city manager I've been pitching for uh the toy company from Rhode Island has hasb to possibly take a look at excuse me some of the Chelsey sites here because whether Hasboro or other companies look at that they might want to take a look at coming to Chelsea and provide some meaningful jobs I think their company to were Chelsea residents who are actually working there they're doing pretty well they live here within the community and I think it gives us a great opportunity to provide more jobs to Chelsea people like to second the motion put on the floor approve sorry apologies hi everyone my name is Monica Elia Sana I am a resident at 44 Prospect AV here in Chelsea um I wasn't here for the whole presentation and I have to be very transparent I have not looked at the proposed amendment uh for the sea uh seafood processing but I definitely just want you guys to think about the environmental impacts it does seem like they have a thoughtful process for the waste management um and it doesn't seem like they their uh facility is a bigger project than I thought um but it'll be great that more Community input and engagement is part of it because I think not a lot of people are here people don't know about this amendment I just knew about it because I opened my website today to see see what was happening today with planning and I was very curious and just reading a little bit about the environmental impacts that green sorry greenw pets fought for so so many years and have to be transparent I work with green Roots but I'm not representing green Roots tonight it is very important for a lot of community members to know about this project um so for me as a resident speaking tonight I just want us to consider the environmental impacts that we fought so for so many years uh but just thinking about seafood processing what comes to mind yes is the impact the odor and air quality that we already have bad air quality here for so many other reasons uh including the Tobin Bridge so much um trucks going by but thinking about the seafood processing what comes to mind as well is the waste management W water use and treatment he health and safety risk and noise pollution so these are just some things that I want you guys to consider um you guys have read the amendment I hope in more detail than I have um so I hope you do consider those factors and once this project goes into um more processes that Community is here um in these pebs um that we and I'm happy to be able to bring more people into the space and as I hope that other counselors come here and are able to bring their constituents here thank you other questions there has been a motion made um was this seconded yes it second want to motion all right well uh we'll call a motion uh all in favor I I I any opposed the motion is carried we will recommend U the petition zoning thank you thanks for coming in same to you thank you all very much appreciate thank you again all right part two of this is uh the zoning Amendment um regarding accessory dwelling units William yes so uh the next proposed zoning amendment is uh related to accessory dwelling units as some may know uh the state has passed the affordable homes act uh in August and so a big part of this act included regulations around accessory dwelling units uh and so beginning February 2nd of next year adus as are often referred to as will be allowed by wri in any single family zoning District um and so the express purpose of the affordable homes act and specifically this portion of it is to try and alleviate the housing crisis uh the state projects that by uh requiring municipalities to allow adus by right in any single family zoning District this will create about 8 to 10,000 new dwelling units in the form of adus um so uh we uh are one of the municipalities that don't allow adus we don't have regulations um around adus uh some municipalities do and they are now working to align their own um regulations with what the state has put out uh but so we have put together a draft zoning Amendment um to try and put some you know regulations around accessory dwelling units uh and so what this proposed amendment does and I will go through this uh kind of each part part uh is provide a definition for adus which is Def uh definition coming straight from that state law uh we restrict the number of adus to one Adu per lot uh we prohibit short-term rentals of adus we provide some guidelines for design review and parking requirements and we also update the table of principal use regulations um I do want to preface this that um when we drafted this we are like we're still awaiting final guidance from the state specifically from the executive office of uh housing and livable communities on how to interpret and Implement implement the state law um I will get into that a little bit uh so this is just a draft uh and we are just waiting on some final guidance um but like I said I'll I'll address that but really this was to try and put together something to provide some sort of Baseline Amendment so we can mitigate any sort of potential impacts and handle any potential you know cases for adus that come through uh you know February and beyond um so I'll go to the next slide so the First Amendment really is to just integrate adus into our regulations for accessory structures uh So currently uh we don't allow any sort of accessory use on a lot uh other than an accessory garage and that accessory garage shall occupy no more than a combined or shall occupy more than a combined total of 25% of the floor area of the related approved occupancy permit uh and so all this kind of first element of the zoning Amendment does is it includes accessory dwelling units so no accessory use or uses within a building other than an Adu or an accessory garage shall occupy more than a combined total of 25% of the floor area of the related approved occupancy permit um an accessory dwelling unit may not exceed more than 1 half of the gross floor area of the principal dwelling unit or 900 sare ft whichever is smaller so that we go into the definition of natu so that is a part of the State defined state definition of an Adu so essentially what that says is if you have a principal structure that is 1,000 square ft the Adu can be maximum 500 square ft if you have a principal structure that's um 2,000 square ft half of that would be a th000 however 900 ft is the max and Adu can be overall can I just interject a Qui quick question um how are where are we getting the initial square footage numbers that these percentages are based on because they're kind of all over the map will there be like a measuring um like for instance if there's say they want to turn an attic into um an Adu the ceiling height would impact what's included in that score for versus included so I'm just wondering if there's a process by which we'd be like approving the initial square footage before the percentages are applied does that make sense yeah I'll let John uh this the state regulations actually Define gross floor area um they actually Define it a little bit differently than our zoning defines this we have to revise that as well um and then um as as far as a pitch Roofing that's actually a code issue too so this does not negate building code yeah or or basements for instance uh you could convert a basement um provided that it meets building code issues minimum 7 feet and right so if it currently doesn't meet um 7 feet right and they want to get a unit down there then the percentage of space that it would B be based on would not include the basement if it's not habitable space it's not livable space it's not counted as as Flor okay and um anyway I'm just in my experience Square footages are all over the map so it's like is there going to be some sort of process to make them all equal you know like what a realtor says is square footage might be radically different than what's on record right realtor could tell you whatever he wants to tell you but uh the law will define what gross floor area is and uh and each individual uh structure that is looking to add an Adu will be the minimum FL the maximum FL would be based on that actual unit based on the definition uh uh that will be found in the ordinance okay so theyd show existing conditions drawings of which would show how the numbers were yeah um if if arrived at the state is is going to have to codify how square footage is calculated to facilitate these adus I mean this just occurred to me is that going to change how property taxes are calculated I mean is that going to change square footage for pro you for properties across the board I mean I don't expect you to answer be able to answer that right now but that's that's that's a no because the the zoning right now has a definition of floor area as well it's just different from what the state is proposing and the assessment is not based on this definition it's based on a definition that the assessors use right there's there's a definition but then there's um you'd have to demonstrate that you're following that um calculation of square footage with a drawing to back it up I would think will is going to talk about a recommendation later I'll just remember that I'll bring it up after will after will see that this could be problematic that's the only reason I'm bringing up so on a high level though is it our understanding here that the state is saying that as a matter of right single property owners have got a right to build an accessory dwelling unit that's about that size maximum but subject to all of the other applicable zoning code you know and all of that subject only to re reasonable regulations on dimensional and parking and even parking okay even the state has regulations avative to parking uh that being that you cannot require an additional parking space for any unit that is within a half a mile of a train station bus station communal rail a Ferry Station um and and if it's beyond the half mile you can only require one parking space understood okay um I just let you know these regulations a draft right now they're still working to uh get public hold public hearings on them and get uh revisions of necessary so yeah there's fine lines to be explored around the edges of this but on a high level people are going to have a right to build these sorts of structures up to a certain size limit subject to these car outs that we have that we're talking about there they're still in flux is that right okay what um so you just basically Chelsea because because of our s are tiny size we're we're pretty much then there's no parking requirement with these adus by virtue of how this ra law is currently written correct as I read it it's a half a mile like a bus stop a train station pretty much everything in Chelsea means that there's no parking restrictions around this not a bus stop a bus station and that being uh where the buses either start their route or end their rout for example Sullivan station has is a bus station as well Ruggles is a bus station just I mean would that mean then uh what what do we consider a bus station in Chelsea then no we don't have one okay so then where how does that affect that communal rail station okay the Silver Line stations even the station over um the wood Island station in um East Boston is less than half a mile from Chelsea although there are no residential units in that half mile so were you able to tell me then what does not fit into do pretty much all the Chelsea then qualify for no parking restrictions then at that point except for maybe a tiny corner of Prattville or something exactly okay okay um another question for you guys is there is there any um I I we I noticed we didn't put in any amendments as in regards to property lines are we on on a planning when when proposals for 0 units Adu units come in will there be any um guidance as to property lines or how far they can build out this thing because it looks like they can build a separate unit they can build on top they can build beneath or aside and right now we've restrictions in place on where things go on property lines and creating variances what how does this affect that the the way this is written right now is they are still subject to the setbacks of the primary building there's question whether that is suitable enough uh or whether the state will consider that too restrictive um I in addition to the regular setbacks you know single family home side yard setbacks a quarter of the building height or front yard SE back 20 feet um there we also have setbacks relative to accessory structures like garages and usually it's 5 feet um yeah and I do want to say that um and I was going to get to this in the end probably should have made it a bit clearer at the beginning when we drafted this Adu Amendment the executive office of housing livable communities had not provided any guidance on how to interpret the state law and the sense we were getting was that they would get to it but we very unclear of when they would get to it so we weren't sure if guidance was going to come out until next February before then Etc so um we wanted to try and get something in because we we kind of expect that adus might be coming down the pipeline um since then they did actually release some guidance on December 6 so uh what let me go through the the draft Amendment and then we'll get to like what our department is sort of recommending to the planning board um but yeah sorry can I yes one more uh question this is specific to single family it is allowed in any single family District in the district okay single family District being defined as any District that allows single families okay so if if no it's it's Residence One residence two and Resident three so the industrial districts the business districts commercial districts they might allow multif family but they don't allow single family okay so if it is a a district that allows for single family homes but the property is say a three a Triple Decker three families you know maybe it's condo could an accessory dwelling unit be built on that property from our reading of it yes okay as of this again these are only draft regulations they are going through revisions they're going through public hearings and people are expressing their concerns they may change it but at this point yes but the way we've written it is just one structure so it would only be attributed to one of those units no worries no worries definitely appreciate the questions um so the second part of this um in the draft amendment that we wrote up uh would be inserting a new section like dedicated to accessory dwelling units uh which would restrict the number of adus to only one accessory dwelling unit allowed per lot uh it would prohibit short-term rentals as defined in section 34241 um and then we do try to provide some design review guidelines uh so the first just being that you know any Adu will be subject to design review by the department a pering and land use planning and then um itus should at minimum be designed to reflect the appearance of the structure to which it is accessory uh the unit should be built with similar architectural features and utilize similar paint colors uh and then for units constructed in existing accessory structures set at the property line the design should minimize the number of Windows set at the property line and so those are the two design review guidelines um that we included in the draft Amendment again as we've kind of all been talking about you know this will still still be talked about and discussed to possibly figure out more specific or particular design review guidelines for adus um the third and fourth element of this amendment are just sort of bringing adus into our minor site plan review uh so um there's a couple of different things that kind of trigger a minor site plan review and so it would just be inserting that a construction of an Adu would kind of trigger a minor site plan review and that the building inspector May seek the assistance of the Department of Permitting and planning uh permitting and land's planning uh to assist with that minor site plan review um the next is actually including a definition into our definition section in our zoning uh so an accessory dwelling unit means a self-contained housing unit inclusive of sleeping cooking and sanitary facilities on the same lot as a principal dwelling subject to otherwise applicable dimensional and parking requirements that one maintains a separate entrance either directly from the outside or through an entry hall or Corridor shared with the principal dwelling sufficient to meet the requirements of the State Building Code code for safe egis two is not larger in Gross floor area than half the gross floor area of the principal dwelling or 900 ft whichever is smaller and three is subject to such additional restrictions as may be imposed by municipality including but not limited to additional size restrictions and restrictions or prohibitions on short-term rental as defined in section one of chapter 64g provided however that no municipality shall unreasonably restrict the creation or rental of an Adu that is not a short-term rental um and so this is a definition that's coming right from the state um and that last part of like no municipality shall unreasonably restrict um the creation of rental adus is still something that is being interpreted and we are still waiting upon like kind of final gu guidance and this definition is already in effect yeah the rest of the um regulations don't go into effect of February 2nd but this one is already in effect this is just allowing it to go into our ordinance then the parking side of things so as John explained a little bit earlier um an accessory dwelling unit that's located outside of half a mile from a Commuter Rail station subway station Ferry Terminal or bus station um will require one parking space anything within that half mile there is no parking requirement and these are the zoning districts that now would allow adus by right so the R1 R2 are three Waterfront and Waterfront Upland districts as John mentioned it is not allowed in the uh retail business retail business 2 Highway business business shopping center Port industrial Light industrial Light industrial 2 naval hospital and uh yeah the two Naval Hospital districts Sal but yes and so as kind of mentioned that you know again this law was passed in August uh and the state just essentially just released draft implement mentation guidelines on December 6th and those draft guidelines will be going through a public input process and might change might become even clearer there might be additional guidelines that come out of this public process um and John and I when we first drafted our Adu Amendment we were sort of again kind of under the impression that just like we had no idea when guidance would come and we sort of assume or kind of expect that adus might be coming through the pipeline in February so we really just wanted to try and be prep pars it's to take some time to has to go to council and then come to the planning board and get approved to take some time to do that um so since the draft guidelines from the state are going through this public input process and are subject to change and will inform how we uh adjust our current draft Amendment uh our department recommends that the planning board recommend to the city council that they postpone their hearing until the final guidelines are promulgated to allow for the city comp to comply with the regulations so we are recommending that the planning board recommend to the city council to postpone their hearing of this draft Amendment so we can get the draft guidelines once they've are finalized by the state and then update our draft Amendment and then kind of come back to the planning board because clearly there's a lot of questions and still things to figure out right because in in addition to the changes that might happen in the regulations we have other questions right now now as the zoning is is written even with this amendment each new unit would require whatever the minimum unit per um structure or or per lot is for the the district for example in the R2 um for anything one to three units it requires additional 3500 square feet well we all know that Lots in Chelsea most a lots in Chelsea are smaller than that so does it is it practical to have that requirement and still expect that a adus are going to be coming in probably not so we need to do a little bit more analysis and come up with a a different type of restriction and then um the building inspector who is the zoning enforcement officer has some questions relative to that as well I have even some questions in regards to I mean as a town can we restrict the amount of bedrooms for an AUD can we uh possibly consider making um either the owners be the with an AUD is is it something that we can consider having the owner either be in the accessory dwelling unit or be in the main building as a consideration we're um yeah and then I'm I'm deeply concerned about the parking issues with additional units going into all the city so at least to the owner occupancy kind of question I believe the the state views it as an unreasonable restriction yeah so we cannot put that um on um what was the first part of the question talk bedroom limitations I'm not sure like and or the amount of people who can use an accessory dwelling unit no yeah um again like the the state was very clear that the purpose of this is to try and generate as much new housing units dwelling units is possible and one form that they could take our adus and as we've kind of discussed some of the for adus can take a variety of different forms as well right now we could technically have 10 people in a unit uh technically yes practically probably not does does Chelsea have um any regulations regarding the number of unrelated persons okay yes but that would then be the only restriction um I mean I don't think you could have or what is the number of unrelated persons like say in a two-bedroom apartment um because it's usually no more I think in Boston it's four and my recollection is the same my recollection is the same in Chelsea but I don't know exact I don't I don't remember exactly yeah because I I my concern would be you know if you have this tiny little U that you know an unscrupulous landlord could use for an extended family so you could have a dozen people living in 500 square feet um just to answer your question it is for okay under our definition of family um yeah I just don't see happening in 500 square fet or 900 square ft it's practical probably not itical yes yeah I have another flavored question that's kind of a little bit more around the what's possible and then what's practical parts of this given the small size of most of the Lots in Chelsea and given all of this discussion about you know what different types of units are even possible in those facilities I'm P picturing a lot of the city the only way you can really go up is up or down there isn't going to be enough footprint on the lot for an ancillary structure freestanding or attached or otherwise and so I'm thinking to myself you know is this something that is going to be held out as something that's available as a matter of right but practically speaking it's going to be somewhat impossible for a lot of owners to do by virtue of the fact that building up is going to come with a whole slew of considerations and so to building down probably even more I mean talking about dredging out new basement and dropping floors I mean is there any sense from the state about how far they're willing to go to bend the current uh you know rules around those things to accommodate all of this now the city's dimensional regulations either as they exist now or as may be provided for in in a revised Amendment would be in control um is so the type of unit could be it could be an attic extension it could be a basement conversion it could be an addition to an existing structure it could be in an existing garage or it could be in uh an addition to a garage so um I mean there are some I don't know how many lots have garages but there is that opportunity um yeah and what I'm kind of thinking about though is um those lots that aren't big enough for those ancillary structures is there some sense that people are going to be able to say add a floor you know the way that some commercial buildings are doing or are we going to still be able to hold on to the max height restrictions on residential buildings you could limit you could restrict to the existing height limits okay um or you could amend them just for accessory dwelling units um but these are questions that aren't addressed in this this amendment and or do we expect that the state might give some guidance on this I mean we can't be the only ones faced with this the intent in writing this up really was to get something out the minimal that had to the minimum that had to be put out not having any guidance on on it and and realizing that it probably have to be amended in the future once we got the guidelines um but more issues have come up since then and that's relative just the issues brought up about lot size and whether it's practical or not right this to say I definitely agree that more information's needed so yeah yeah just eoh hlc was just so reluctant to even um bring up guidelines at the when we first when the first came out and they were holding webinars on it they were just so reluctant that we just felt that it would be February or March before we even got them but now they did come out relatively quickly in December and they're going through a month-long process I think they are trying to get them out before this goes into effect February 2nd excellent so yeah we should probably have some more clarity in some direction soon regardless they're aware okay if we don't get this ironed out by February 2nd or whatever and Adu rolls in what does that process look like for them um if they meet the minimum guidelines in the Adu law and the regulations and they meet our zoning as it is now they can they could build but they would still have to meet setbacks unless the state determines that our setback requirements are just or lot size requirs with too much yeah which would which would require that someone to challenge them I want to um point out some unintended positive consequences of this I think that if we can make some tweaks that would allow people to hold on to their homes and to accommodate you know a new child or a grandparent moving in or something like that it'll be stronger for the community it'll allow them um you it'll it'll help them economically because they won't have to have two different households and just from as far as the aesthetic like the the um you know how Chelsea looks if if we continue to fall prey to these developers who are going to come in and raise entire blocks of um of how existing houses and put up these kind of cheap um multi-unit houses that we're seeing or multi-unit structures that we're seeing everywhere we're really going to lose our character too so I I think just allowing for some tweaks is a very positive thing but um as long as it's regulated and it's not a free all because some of these units as they are they're so maxed out it's the the house is way too big to the lot every little Dormer and you know every little corner is filled so that's really not only unattractive it's probably unsafe as far as life safety and getting fire trucks in out of there so that's why I brought up the square footage thing if you if there's a lot that or there there's a structure that claims it has a certain amount of square footage but in actuality they've you know carved out a lot more square footage then um anyway we should have the square footage based on the assessed or whatever square footage is documented with the assessor Department that's probably a good way to have a checks and balances system or we would we could require that they indicate exactly what the square footage is yeah so one of my question is this is just me just thinking I mean it may not be part for this board maybe it could be for the others but like how are we going to be sure what they're doing is exactly for according to the affordable homes act so yes they're building an extra unit according to the Adu but how are we going to be sure what they're doing exactly is for that I guess I'm not quite sure what you mean exactly for that so meaning like are they really doing this for affordable housing or they doing it as a side is that something that we're going to be regulating or that something that it's not going to be the city involved there there was no requirement in the Adu regulations for affordable housing it's just it could be market rate it could be affordable but and you can't require it either there's just a lot of pressure on the housing market and this allows and then relative to how we find out whether they're doing what they're doing is not is one is your review the conditions you put on the development and then once it um they get their once you get their approval it goes for a building permit I have to approve the building permit we have to do inspections building department does inspections and prior to their aracy we do more inspections we have to and we actually have to sign off so there is some there are controls to see that doing what they're supposed to be doing yeah and is this city in general pro um short-term rentals or against it because you know kind of es and flows as far as um the city adopted a uh short-term rental ordinance uh and we have made some changes to the zoning to allow for it um one benefit is the city gets certain amount of taxes out of it um they're not see I would say more or less neutral the the one it does allow for people to earn a living on on their house so that they can maintain it but on the SEC on the other hand um it takes away potential rental units that are Rel that are relatively affordable a relatively affordable housing opportunity uh especially um we've had in the past requests to change entire apartment buildings over the short-term rentals and we've always been opposed to that because it takes them off the rental market right so this these laws should be sort of irrespective of the yeah EB and flowing of the other law right right the short-term rentals would certainly impact this but we might have a different attitude about short-term rentals five years from now so they should be one of the reasons I put independent of each other I put no short-term rentals in the amendment am I correct in that we only have 5% actual home ownership in in the city of Chelsea is that about the correct number I've heard anything from uh 5% to 25% I thought I read that it was about sorry if if if that number is actually correct then our we would potentially be allowing accessory dwelling units to to landlords right for to create even more rentals in the city as well okay y yeah and and all these questions are like extremely valid and I think John and I have had about five webinars so far this is like the Hot Topic in zoning in Massachusetts right now um so yeah like I think the question around what is a reasonable restriction and what is an unreasonable restriction is a lot of what these questions I think are getting at um and hopefully we will get more clarity um and so so I think that's yeah that's why it was almost an example of maybe John and I being a little too proactive because we didn't have any guidance and then we got guidance right as it essentially came to the planning board for discussion but I do think this is has been a really good discussion to raise some of these questions um because you know again we have these like webinars that are being put on and we can ask questions and try to get more clarity on them specifically it is a public hearing so tuck I don't know if you want to open it up to anybody if anybody is here and wants to just hearing you guys just hearing you guys uh discussion and just following a little bit about city of Boston I'm just wondering if this amendment could be adapted to home owner or like owner occupied that you can only build adus that are homeowner occupied I know that they finance for the city of Boston for only um I'm not 100% familiar with their SP is ring a little bit I'm very for adus in Chelsea I know in Salem they've been thriving and just building more home opportunities for just family relatives and people Aging in spaces with dignity so I'm all for it and I think that's something that in the Chelsea Community people have been pushing and it's a good alternative for folks and when we did stoning workshops that was something that a lot of people were moved um but I'm just wondering with just hearing you guys could it be home like owner occupied that it's only allowed so so the state has deemed um owner occupancy restrictions as like unreasonable um so unfortunately that could not be the case I know like adus are often seen as like um I've got the the term for it but it's like usually for In-laws or like relatives ET yeah yeah um and I believe even putting a restriction on like who could live there is considered unreasonable by the state in yeah just said one more more thing that I wanted to ask that I I haven't heard any discussion on in terms of like our sewer systems and water systems for for the and you know what I mean electrical grid etc for the entire city is there any thought g into that if we add a lot more units or I mean if we approve a lot more extra units in in with no limit on the number of people who can actually occupy them about our overall City systems that that can support that Etc any thought gone into that I would say not yet but I think that's a great point and I do Wonder um if in this process like once we get more guidance from the state um because again I think many of the questions that have been raised here are like questions that everyone's asking um possibly talking to DPW and trying to get an understanding of like what they view as like the capacity of the current Utility Systems um so I I I think it might be good to bring them in on a discussion around this as well um it's also one of the questions that the building inspector asked me as well yeah I mean I suppose it could be um a ratio of number of toilets per acre or per you know a certain amount of unfortunately that's not a zoning issue that's a building code issue okay but is can't we put a cap on it if we're like on the brink of maxing things out you know as a city if we are um treading and I think as as will indicate we'll have to talk with DPW in the building inspector yeah I think it just speaks to trying to bring in like most all the Departments that like deal with this like into the discussion so things are done effectively and like you know properly um so I definitely I think these are good points to bring in DPW um ISD Etc can I just make one more recommendation and this isn't just for this but just to have a differentiation in the zoning between lot area or lot lot coverage um the percentage of open space and the percentage of permeable surface so they're three different things and sometimes they overlap but I think it's it's helpful to people who are um you know designing these things to have that distinction right well we do have the uh the lock coverage and the um the only we didn't have that you talked about was the percentage of permeable or impermeable and permeable yeah because open space you could technically have a roof Garden for instance right but um permeable surface is is certainly my biggest concern and if we're going to be further eating away at that with these a then um you know it's just contributing to the problem the recommendation of the department is to uh suggests that the city council postpone a vote on this amendment until the guidelines stuff I will make a motion that we as a board recommend that the city council postpone their hearings until we have the final guidelines for review I second all in favor I motion is carried all right thank you William um and finally um on the agenda is our schedule of meetings for next year which is attached or included so I don't know if anybody wants to discuss them or not much to discuss just wanted to highlight uh that in September we will not be meeting on the fourth Tuesday of the month I believe it's the third Tuesday of September due to a possible City preliminary election and we can't hold these uh planning board meetings on election days and then November and December are the usual moving the board meeting up due to the holidays um so aside from September November and December all other months will be on the 4th Tuesday of the month uh and I've given everyone a physical copy so uh yeah you should have it and if you need it let me know I can always send one over any other uh business to bring before the board if not I'll entertain a motion to adjourn I second I will make the motion we didn't have the initial motion which one to adjourn oh okay you you go I think that counts you go I will make a motion that we adjourn I second all in favor I the meeting is adjourned happy holidays e