All All right, the meeting will come to order. Uh the first order of business is the approval of minutes from April 22nd which have have been emailed to all of us. So if there are no additions or
corrections, I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading and approve. I'll make a motion to move. Second. Thank you. All in favor? I.
All right. At the next order of business, and we're going to rearrange the agenda slightly by taking case 253 and 254 uh first because we anticipate that
those will be fairly short. Uh so first would be case 202503 at 89 Clinton Street. Uh Mr. Pearl and Tonda, are you
present? Introduce yourself and uh Joe Pearl, 89 Clinton Street, obviously Chelsea. I'm uh seeking to put a uh addition on the back of my uh my house. It'll be um a bathroom with a bedroom
and extending the kitchen out. Uh reason I'm doing this is for my elderly in-laws that are becoming to live with me. Both of them are older. One has dementia. They can't walk that well. So they would they can't come up the front stairs, which is about 15 steps. So they have to
come around the back of the house, which is only like one or two steps coming around the front. So everything will be all on one level for them so they can access the kitchen, the bathroom, things like that. Can we look at a site plan?
These are the the plans that we have that were submitted. Okay. But the a question for you about um exactly what's going on there. I just can't quite make out from uh the diagram to the right. Um are you talking about tearing down any existing structures? No, nothing's coming down. Yeah. So, right now it's
all like an empty lot back there. Okay. There's probably I'm like 6 feet away from the neighbor's house which has a 6ft fence there and I'm probably another 10 to 15 ft from the end of uh the
extension and that has a um retaining wall there which is probably about five or six feet high with another six feet stockade fence on top of that and there's all trees in back of there so the neighbors can't even see over pretty invisible to the neighbors then. Correct. Okay. Thank you. You're
welcome. Would you mind repeating that, but point to the um site plan there so we can follow along? Oh, uh could you just grab the mic and bring it over just so the folks on Facebook live and stuff can
So yeah, this is the extension going from another way going out this way to the back of the house. So the house So the house originally stops like right here and this extension is going this way here. Yeah. So in other words,
if you're looking at it this way here, it's like one just empty lot that goes around this way here to like a 5,000 square foot lot on the right hand side. There's no houses bes there's no houses beside me. So, what I'm going to be doing is I'm going to be extending this
part of the house out this way, and it's going to be squared off this way here. So, this will be the extension of the bathroom, the bedroom, and then the kitchen. I'm just moving out further so it's easier for them to access. Okay. Is the plan that you're
showing the same orientation as the site plan? Like, is the north direction up or are they different? Does that is that question understood? Like is the top of the page Clinton
Street? Uh, no. Top of the page. Clint Well, Clinton Streets Clinton Streets in the in the back. This is this I mean this is in the back. Clinton Streets in the front. I'm sorry. Okay. Sorry. I'm understand. I'm confused because one is oriented this way and the other is
oriented this way. Give me a second. Okay. digested. So So this is actually the back This is actually the back of the house. Yep. Got it. Okay. And there's nobody if And if you're looking this way or the back of the
house, this is where the neighbor's retaining wall is here. Okay. So over this side to the left, if you're looking out this way here, it's the neighbor's driveway. If you're coming this way here, there's a neighbor's backyard, but
like I said, there's a retaining wall about the size of this podium here, and there's another stockgate fence six feet above that. And there's trees all in back of here, so the neighbors can't even see. And way to the right of that, the neighbor has a big deck up there,
and they can't see over our trees as well. Thank you. You're welcome. Joe, have you spoken with your neighbor? Are they okay with your plans? Yes. Yeah. All Well, none of them really come out. You know, one was um concerned
about it ruing on her property values, but this actually to me is going to increase her property values. But other than that, nobody else has come out and I'm friendly with all the neighbors, so nobody has any complaints. Thank you.
I'd like to make a motion to um approve this special permit. I'll second the motion. Motion's been made and seconded to recommend approval. Uh all in favor? I. Any opposed? I motion is carried.
Thank you. You're welcome. Next door is case 2025-4 at 13 Medford Street. Alex Mterrey is the petitioner. So you have to introduce
yourself and uh describe your petition. Okay. Uh, my name is Alex Monterey. I live at 13 Memphis Street in apartment number three. I'm proposing to build a deck on the roof of um, my building. The deck
itself will be 15'2 in x 17t 10 in. Um, the reason for the special permit being required is not meeting the clearance requirements. Uh the clearances I'm proposing are going to be 9 foot6 in the front, uh 13 foot six in the rear, and
on each side, um up from the abuing buildings, it'll be 1 foot 6 in. Um the roof is the only location available to put a deck or any area for outdoor space. Um it's an existing non-conforming structure with um abudding buildings on each side. Uh the
front of the building absut contains um a fire escape and parking area. Uh there's already existing footings in place that were put there by the previous owner with the intent of building a deck in the future, but then they sold. Uh leaving these
penetrations through the roof um without putting any sort of covering on it is just going to create an issue uh in the future. Uh constructing the deck would add value to the property both as a potential rental or in the event of future sale. Um there's other buildings on my street with rooftop decks larger
than what I'm proposing that are not visible from street level. Um the deck's not going to intrude on either of the prop uh property lines on either side of me. Um it's the deck's not going to be any closer to the the neighboring buildings than any structures that
currently exist. So um when you came up with the uh the dimensions for the deck that you're planning, was was that uh that schematic based on the the the footings that are already in place? Correct. Understood. Is is the deck just for your unit?
Correct. And am I to assume that you are a Chelsea firefighter? That's a safe assumption. Yes. So I assume that uh this is up to your co that that code that something should
happen. Right. So is So is um access going to be from outside or is there like an interior stairwell up? There's an existing stairwell going
through a skylight um up to the to the roof now. All right. So like access is in place, footings are in place. It's just constructing. Correct. the actual deck. Um any uh are there any site plans
here indicating like the shape and size of it? I think all I see is the current structure here. Right. Right. Uh they should be in there. I I submitted them. If not, I have paper copies here if you'd like to take a look. Cool. Just
let's see if it's here. I would uh pass around the paper copies because it doesn't seem to be in the petition file that at least we have. Thank you. And what's the timeline to build this? And how do you plan to get the materials
up to the roof? Uh I'm not sure what the timeline will be. This permit application is kind of it's I applied for this initially like two years ago and things have been backed up. So, I mean, building the deck itself probably should take a week or so. Um, I've
talked to the contractor that I was planning on having do the project and he has a uh like a boom lift that he can get the materials up to the roof. As far as the um visibility from a public way, how have you how far back is it
going to be from the front? And have you been able to determine, you know, the height of the railing to, you know, the opposite side of the street where you'd be able to see it, right? So, um, from Medford Street, so my neighbor at 17 has a larger roof
deck than what I'm proposing. And from Medford Street, the deck's not visible whatsoever. Um there's a staircase going from Broadway to Eldridge Place and from there you can see like the railing of his deck and that's about it. Um were you asking also for the the clearances
again? Um well you're saying that it's going to it's not going to be visible from a public way because your neighbors isn't visible and it will be aligned with the face of your neighbor's deck. Is that it'll be smaller. Okay. But the front
edge where the railing is it'll be set farther back from the edge of the building. So, it be less visible if anything. Well, the goal is that it's not visible from a public way because it's in a historic district. Yeah.
On on these plans, just for clarification, it looks like it's kind of in the middle of the roof. Is that correct? That's right. Yeah. So, so yeah. So, you do have a blockage from visibility on the front. Correct. Okay. Okay. Do you have any plan for drainage for
the for this? Um, you know what I mean? When rain hits it or is there like do you have a connecting to a drain or any situation that'll keep you um so the the rainfall will just fall between the the walking boards. Okay. Um and then there's already gutters in place off all
the the roof is sloped to the back of the gutters. So, and they went over about the roof is stabled enough. Say it again. Sorry. Is the roof stabled enough and everything? Double check. Make sure architect came and take a look at the the framing uh that's in place up in the attic. So,
okay. Very good. Yeah. Well, assuming it's not visible from a public way, I'd like to make a motion to approve. I'll second it. Motion made and seconded to recommend approval. All in favor? I. Any opposed?
Motion is carried. Thank you. Thank you. He's gonna Do you need a file? Will needs to file. All right, continuing along. Excuse me. Uh, number three is
2024-26 at 105 to 115 Park Street, Essex Street, and Ellsworth Street. Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. U members of the board, Anthony Rossi on behalf of the petitioner. I do have uh Mr. David Troy, the architect of record who's to
the left of me. And I do have Scott Thornne from Vaness who's our traffic um analysis um individual. And I also have Hector who's the developer somewhere behind me, the owner of the property. Um since the last meeting, we did have a
neighborhood meeting um at Green Roots. Uh we actually had a couple meetings, but we had a neighborhood meeting um on that date and we also took input from this board and comments from the previous meeting regarding some um really changing the um interior footprint of the building. The exterior
really has not been altered. It's more of um the unit counts and the unit mix. So originally we had 120 units. We reduced that down to 100 units. Originally we had a limited amount of two bedrooms. It's now going to be 40% two bedrooms and three bedrooms. So the
new mix, just for record, is 30 two bedrooms, 61 bedrooms, and 10 threebs. Uh, of which now we have 40 out of 100 units. Before it was 16% twos and threes. Now it's 40% twos and threes.
Uh, we have 15 inclusion every units. We did not alter the open space. Everything else is all built with correct dimensional reliefs on it. Um and the only other thing was the special permanent parking which has not been altered which is the um 50 parking spaces. Um we took the comments from
what we heard from this board and also from the neighbors not just at the meeting also when we had our neighborhood meeting and I know the board wanted to see more twos and threes. So we um we redesigned it to now have more twos and threes. As a result,
the inclusionary units that originally out of 120 units, I think it was one would have been a two or threebedroom unit. Now out of the 15, six will be twos and threes. So actually on the affordable component, you're now going to have more twos and threes available
as inclusionary units when it went up almost 60%. because the ratio and that's essentially the changers internally on it based on the comments and what we had meetings with um people in the neighborhood and I do we didn't have the
private of the traffic analysis at the last meeting um we did have it when we met with the neighborhood uh a study but if I can I'd like to have Scott Thornton come to this podium and talk about a little bit about the traffic analysis that was done on this project.
Thanks Anthony. Uh for the record, Scott Thornton with Vanessa Associates. Uh we prepared the traffic study uh that's that was circulated uh previously and um we base that on the 100 units. It's
really a uh items like trip generation uh that go into the traffic study are really a function of the number of units, not so much the the number of bedrooms. So uh the number of units that was incorporated uh was 100 th those
trips were adjusted to account for mode split which also accounted for the the limited parking and uh we included also the retail space assuming some of the uh the existing tenants that are on site
would relocate to the existing or to the proposed site. Um in general what we found was that when we and we have I think four background developments that are included in the traffic study. Um we looked at at uh I think six
intersections. Uh we noted we looked at crash data. We looked at uh transit data for uh the five bus lines that run through the site or through in the vicinity of the site. And um in general
what we found was that uh the intersections the uncitalized intersections in general operate uh with about 10 to 15 seconds of delay um under under existing and future
conditions with or without the project. Now there are some locations uh particularly where Broadway is involved whether it's you know congress congress a or everit that intersect Broadway those have a lot of delay associated with more than 50 seconds with or
without the project but uh one thing um that was uh actually can you I think it's probably page 10 maybe that has the has the study area There we go. Uh, so
these are the locations that we looked at for the for the study. And as I mentioned um you know these these intersections of um of Essex Essex with
Pearl, Essex with Ellsworth uh even Ellsworth out to Congress, Congress with Park and Pearl. Those intersections don't operate too with a lot of delay um over the course of an hour during the morning and the evening
peak hours. These two intersections, Congress with Broadway and Everton Cross with Broadway, they do have a significant amount of delay. Um but what what's really an issue I think with
um with the study area is these this section of Pearl Street and Park Street in Congress that come together where there's where there's a lot of uh surprisingly a lot of speed that takes
that takes place, a lot of weaving action that occurs through here and it's not it's not really desirable for uh for for pedestrians. And there is a project I think it was mentioned at the last meeting uh there is a a state tip
project that's proposed to um to imp uh improve this segment where Park Street is and Pearl Street come together. Before we get to that plan, I just want to note that we have access out to with one garage out onto Essex Street,
another garage access out to Ellsworth. And what we were proposing because because Ellsworth is 13t wide at this end and 10 feet wide at this end and it's posted for two-way travel. Um,
we're suggesting that it be uh revised or reconfigured so that it would be one way in the southbound direction. That eliminates the condition where you have uh people that are that are coming out
Ellsworth onto Congress that may be held up or or backed up by the queue that extends uh waiting to get across Park Street here. Um, it's also, you know, we think a a safer condition uh to have
this as a one-way segment comes coming out into Essex with um with less traffic volume on Essex than on Congress. But John, if you could go back to that um that first page that had the or that had
the plan. Will is running it. Yeah. Are you talking about this that one? Yeah. Thanks, Will. Um, so this this plan, um, and it's it's
noted on DO's TIP plan as being funded through the 2027 TIP program. Um, but at the neighborhood meeting, we heard that it's it's actually more likely to get constructed in 2030. So, which is still
within the seven-year time frame of the traffic study. So, we incorporated the improvements that are proposed here into the traffic study, but but just to walk you through the changes, you know, this this line follows the existing uh
segment of Park Street and uh this line follows the existing segment of Pearl Street. And what's proposed is kind of teeing up uh the Pearl Street approach over here,
uh narrowing the the Park Street segment over here, and adding traffic signals at both locations with pedestrian crosswalks and pedestrian signals, bike lanes on Pearl
and Park, and adding a traffic signal at this intersection. section of Congress with Park and Pearl as well with full uh full pedestrian accommodation there with wheelchair ramps and uh and pedestrian signals. So, you know, I think in
general um we think that the that the site is in a good location to to function with limited parking. We think that that five bus lines that run five days a week, uh, four bus lines that run seven days a week provide a real
attractive option to people that may not have a car or don't want to have a car. And um, and we think that the, you know, there's enough uh, capacity to capacity to accommodate the project. If you have any questions, I'll be here to answer.
Can we look at the front edge of the site along Park Street where you'd have potentially bikes and, you know, people window shopping and com, you know, commuters on foot all trying to navigate
a tight space? Can do we have enough space there realistically for all those things to happen and enough room for a um you know root ball of a tree to happen within that amount of space. Um I'm I'm
thinking the answer is no right now and that the retail experience would probably be more successful if there was a little more breathing room at the street level. I'm sorry.
Just to uh respond to that, we actually did set the footprint along the retail set back um by five feet at certain points, three feet at the narrowest plus the sidewalk. So, um, we
did we did respect the fact that there will be an 8 foot to 10 ft of of sidewalk. Um, I mean, I think that is a better pedestrian experience than a just a 5ft sidewalk. So,
is there a site plan that shows the trees and the overhang? Yeah. You want this site plan one more? Well, the aerial that you just Okay.
So, please, thank you. So, what we have here is um a composite landscape plan. Mhm. So, you have the retail frontage which would be
paved and you have um you have the playground on taking advantage of the 20 foot setback on the south side. Um and then you would have the courtyards and the terraces and again uh we did set the
retail frontage as far back as possible take I mean because it is a curvature so it's not an exact um 3 foot to 5T I mean it's that will be faceted uh we did try to have as many um but what we're
looking at those green slivers is that the differential between the face of the upper stories And at the ground level, yeah, I mean the, you know, this is just demarcating a basically Yeah, exactly. demarcating a a kind of a a canopy if
you will, right? U that's what the elevation shows is actually it shows that there will be a canopy not projecting out beyond the the setback, but uh it would demarcate the difference between a retail base and a
and a residential uh residential top. So, I think it would be more enticing to walk by there if you had a little more breathing room. Okay. Um I just don't see that as a place that people are going to want to Yeah. If I may mingle
in front of the stores and and the thing is we we all want to see this succeed. This is how right but a lot of these first retail spaces don't succeed. So Okay. So, I wasn't sure if you were aware, but this is the sidewalk on this portion, and this is the part that's
being recessed back that you see. Then your retail comes in over here. So, it's probably close to double what you see on Broadway now existing. So, I'm not sure if you're familiar that there's two layers. There's a sidewalk and then
there's a a seed. No, no, but but that's just an aerial. This is more of a site plan so you can see it on face. So here's your sidewalk and here's your retail frontage and then here's where your retail
begins. So, I mean, uh, the further you go in, I think probably it's too much because I don't know what you It wouldn't really be more of a retail component. It's supposed to create more of a pedestrian walkway. Maybe Scott, you want to talk a little bit? Yeah. I I
just wanted to point out that with the um with the with the the state plan, this area, it's is is going to be extended and it's probably going to pick up another say 8 to 10 feet at least in
this area. So that'll provide I mean that almost be like a like a small plaza that'll be there. Um but then and then in this area there's some additional um uh sidewalk extensions there, but that would all be that would all be at at uh
the sidewalk grade. Correct. And at the same time, we we don't want to these aren't large retail spaces. We don't want to sacrifice what the Broadway corridor is to have that foot traffic. And one of the spots we were looking to
if you can go to the retail component I did this will this shows the seven units. Yeah. Actually you just had it. Yeah. I don't know if these can zoomed in. These are the larger units as you can see on this part. So where we
try to incorporate the laundry like one of the things we heard about the neighbors and they really want that laundry to come back. These all factor in because he does need a larger space and it might be one or two of these spaces and he wants to buy all new
equipment and so forth and reinvest in it because all the equipment is old. So these might be one space in of itself and he's sort of like right on the property line now. And then we also have that convenience store that the neighborhood wants to see and that would be more incorporated over here. So
they're not large spaces after that. you're looking, you know, at 700 square feet and then you got 1300 and you got 700 square feet. So, they're smaller spaces, but we can envision that these might be one space. This might be one space for the laundromat. This will be
one at least one for the convenience store. So, when you're all said and done, you might only have two or three less spaces left over for the neighborhood, but it does have a reveal. And I know Scott when we were doing the design, he knew what the city was doing down the road and how that's all going
to be expanding on top of it. So we took that all into account in order to build that and that will have like an overhang for the floors above. So as far as people seeing it as retail space, it will differentiate right away because the way it's recessed back in on it on
that area. And I don't know if Scott talked about this, but the trip study that was done regarding the current use, which is no longer there because the fire, it was a far more extensive use of traffic than a residential use because of the peak hours. But um as you're aware that uh there is no residential
stickers that can run with this property due to the ordinance when you seeking relief, am I mistaken, John? So the 50 spots here are really going to be the only cars. And one of the things we talked about even in neighborhood association is that our concern originally when we were talking about
doing multiple bedrooms strong likely or not that when you have multiple bedrooms better chance you're going to have a vehicle than a 450 or 500 foot one-bedroom studio. Um and the bus routes would would probably play better role for the onebedroom studios than it would be for the two bedrooms. So, at a
lot of these two bedrooms, if they do have a vehicle and we have the 50 spots, we can engage the tenants that come in there and do commuter hours. So, they leave by 9, come back by 5. So, we can utilize those spaces for commercial
retail tenants, visitors coming in, going to those spaces by offering commuter hours. And a lot of these tenants, let you take their vehicles to work and come back after that. So that's we looked into all of that when we reconfiguring these units.
So you could see the dark line as being the existing setback and that's the face of the upper stories. This is the existing setback as in as in this the dark line is the plot plot plan or the boundary of the plot plan. Okay. And the front facade up above goes to the zero
lot line. Yeah. The upper part of the building is it right up against the property line? No, it's not. No. No. Not at all. No. Okay. No, not on this side. And also you could see if this is three feet, this is another seven. So that's a
10 foot sidewalk. And then it goes as far as 16 17 ft of a sidewalk. That's a pretty generous even I mean I don't even think Broadway has that much of a width of a sidewalk. So, just wanted to make
sure that the board understands that we are not um squeezing the retail experience. In fact, we're being very very generous. Okay. Just one more question. The earlier plan you showed
um um I thought I saw a bike lane. Is there a bike lane proposed for down the road or is that has that been Sarah? Are you talking about like this plan? Yep. Yeah. Maybe I'm Yep. Okay. Yeah.
There are If the bikes are being accommodated, my Yes. concerns go away. Yeah. Yeah. No, they absolutely are. Okay. Yeah. And and not only that, we will have bike storage in the building also. Thank you.
Uh, so continuing on about the traffic flow, I'm really want to say I'm impressed with the level of thought that's gone into your analysis here and um the kind of reimagination of the traffic flows around there. I have a smaller question around just the logistical thing around the back side of the building. You mentioned before that
there was a plan to uh make the road that runs behind the building a one-way street that then pours out into um Essex Street there. Yeah. Um, and I noticed on the plan that you've got a playground space that's set aside right along where your garage would exit and
then all of that traffic would route by. And my question is is what sort of mitigation do you have in mind to keep, you know, to for the environmental issue for the playground that would be caused by that? I can talk about that. So, we're going to that whole area is going to be fenced
in um enclosed. It's a pretty decent playground, 20 ft deep, goes all the way down. And if I may approach, you have an entrance, come in over here for vehicles. And then if they exit, they can come out this way if it's one way. Um, remember there's only 25 vehicles on
that level. And there's 25 and the other level. So these wouldn't be interfering over here. It's really these 25. So you're not having a lot of trips, per se, because you're not you're not going to have 25 vehicles leaving. And the at the same time, hypothetically speaking,
it's throughout peak hours during the day. We created this playground. We're gonna actually work with the city to try to make this a playground that the, you know, the neighborhood can use as a whole, not just for the building. And my narrower question is really what sort of buffer do you have in mind there? I see there's some kind of trees illustrated
there. You would have a you would have a probably a stockade fence. We'd have to go through design with with the city. a stockgate fence here going all the way with a gate coming in probably in in this section here where you have a walkway. You know, you would this would probably be all enclosed in so nobody
would come in where there's vehicles coming in. It would all be gated off and this level here. So, I don't envision any children be able to walk Yeah. the traffic lane. It would be coming in on this angle here. Okay. If that makes sense. Thank you. It does. Thank you.
just wanted to say um you know we really appreciate you guys the hard work that you guys put in in one month um because we did put in a lot of pressure on you guys but you know that's the reason why we were put in this t in this position you know to make sure this will benefit
to our city um one of my question is I you know sorry my brain is a little fried I just got back um my question is el abuel and the laundromat did They agree they want to come back. Yeah. I mean, um, I can't speak for Hector, but
he did speak at the last neighborhood meeting. He's already engaged with both of them because he first thing he asked him if they want to come back and he wants to work out lease terms with them. And even talked about when he builds the building in phases to try to let them not have a, you know, essentially a long
shutdown in operation. And one of the things, uh, Delana mentioned, as I stated, is that all of his equipment was old. Am I Hector? Sorry, am I if I'm saying anything wrong, correct me. But uh and he wanted to install new equipment and new place. So, he's
excited about that and doing um and Hector is going to do, you know, pretty laxidasical lease agreement because essentially, listen, it's not a great time to lease retail spaces in general, but to get a tenant that's already there and it's good for the neighborhood and
occupy for the building, it it's a plus plus for everybody. Um and he he was basically going to work around his construction drawings to implement the plumbing plan that would work with his type of laundromat. So we expect once if this does get approved to that for them
to be engaged in that level because that would go into construction design. Now if that makes sense that makes total sense. Thank you. Yeah. Please remind me how long the if this passes how long the proposed building time is for for this particular plan. I
mean uh we well let's just assume the the permitting after appeal like appeal period expires you're looking at probably sometime in September right and then it's going to take you um I would say six months to do construction drawings. I'm actually have to work with Hector right now regarding doing like a
construction budget for lending institutions and so forth. So, six months for construction drawings and then from there you you if everything goes good, financing will be in that same guideline. Then you're looking at probably a 12 to 16 month buildout for
the project. I mean, I'm not going to lie to you, rates take a big part in the world we live in today. You know, if you talked to me three months ago, I thought we were going to be going down and now we're going up. So that all factors into everything. But we're hoping by time he's already starting to engage
spreadsheets, construction drawings now so he can, you know, expedite the time and hoping that when this all falls into place, you know, the rates will be better to to move forward. But he wants to move forward on this. Also, the um the new city plan for the
traffic layout is you said that's seven about seven years out. Is that what you're you're saying? Uh not quite seven years out. Yeah, design I think is supposed to occur in the 2027 year, but
construction is supposed to take place by 2030. I The reason why the seven years is that in order to effectuate a traffic study, you're supposed to look out seven-year period. Yeah, we have a seven-year horizon in a standard traffic study. Sure.
Yeah. Also with that um the proposed um construction plans for the Park and Pearl kind of corridors. Um those plans um the preliminary plans from the state were also submitted to the historical commission. And I just wanted to bring this up because we have an um a new member as an architect and he was trying
to sort of visualize like what it could look like. So I just thought this was kind of interesting. It might not be as accurate as some of the more updated plans, but just thought this could be helpful to like Sorry, I'm like trying to figure out how to move this. Um could be just somewhat helpful to like kind of
look at like what the intersection might look like with some um street lights and whatnot. So, um so yeah, but just wanted to say that those plans are kind of in the preliminary design phase. Um and uh yeah, just thought this was kind of
possibly helpful. Well, have those plans been uh approved to move forward in totality for the for this particular corridor here? So, the are there still in just a a planning waiting for approval phase? Yeah, the
these plans from the state are in this preliminary design phase and they reached out to the Chelsea Historical Commission because this these corridors run along um some of our historic districts and some of the sidewalk work will be impacting like historic structures. Um so the the commission is
still in the process of like reviewing and synthesizing some comments but um but yeah so we still just need to send those comments to them but most likely yeah the commission feels pretty confident in these plans. Tuck is it possible we can open to the
public? Say it again. Is it possible to open to the public at board? I don't believe it was closed. I It's still open. Are there uh any members of the public
who would like to address the board on this petition? Yes. Please, sorry. Please introduce yourself and give us your address. Absolutely. Good evening board. My name is Maline Garcia. I am the uh owner of 25 27
William Street which is just about three to four blocks away from the subject property. I am also the owner broker of Meline Garcia real estate and have been in this community in real estate essentially all of my life but essentially in real estate for over 30 years and the reason why I am here is
because I am here to support this project. The main reason is the 100 units but the really main reason is the 15 affordable housing units. I have witnessed firsthand how impactful having affordable housing in our community.
I've seen how it can essentially transform the lives of many people in our community both financially and for improvement. It's so much easier to work and study and do all of these things when we're not worrying about where the next rent's going to come from. In
addition, the other thing too that I like about this building is that it's going to help us with the issue that we have with supply and demand, right? Because people may say, Maline, why are rents so high in the community? Because we don't have the supply. And whenever
you ease the supply, you're going to alleviate the demand. Secondly, I have a list a mile long of people that are looking for affordable housing, specifically studios, onebedrooms, two bedrooms. I almost brought the books,
but I thought that would be a bit much, but happy to share them. And to me, it's important that we help our community. Affordable housing is what's really important for our community, but it's also very empowering for our community.
So therefore, I respectfully ask the board to please consider this project because there's a lot of families that can benefit uh from having this property built. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?
Questions, comments, motions? Just real quick, just want to remind the board that there are three actions that the planning board must take today. Um, a recommendation to the zoning board on the special permits that are required by this project. A special permit that the
planning board will be voting on yourselves um around the depth of the vegetative buffer between a non-residential and residential district and then a major site plan review. Um, and you all have proposed conditions from the department. Um, but just want
to remind everyone that there are three actions that the board needs to take. I'd like to um bring up a point on the first of the special permit recommendations about the time frame proposed tail and residential parking
time frames. I'd like that to be a little bit more flexible than it currently is right now, especially for the residential portion of it. It listed that they can only park there from 10:00 p.m. to 7 a.m. So I I imagine that most
stores are not going to open until 9:00 in the morning. Um so we we may want to just look at that and make it a little bit more flexible in my and that's just my comment on that one for a start. Regina, that was my uh I I wrote that up
and I just put that as an example. So the board is welcome to put whatever time frame that they would like to. Also another just clarification um the tra the traffic um impact assessment or the transportation impact assessment is
proposing to make Ellsworth a one-way. That is something that the planning board cannot grant. That's the traffic um commission that would have to like grant that. And so you'll see later on and one of the conditions is a to ask the petitioner to make a request of the
traffic commission um because we cannot place a condition on a project that requires another board to approve it. Um but so this condition would just be asking them to request that Ellsworth become a uh a oneway but the traffic
commission could choose to grant that or not. I just wanted to make that clarification. So I would like to make a motion to approve the project with certain conditions special permit recommendation standard conditions as applicable. The
residents of the units are not eligible to participate in the city's resident sticker parking program and prior to the issuance of the occupancy permit. The petitioner shall provide the department of permitting and land use planning with a specific address of each unit white
roof. Provide a roing control plan. Provide for a shared use of the parking provided for retail uses. Example, available for retail from 7:00 a.m. to 1000 p.m. Residential from 1000 p.m. to 7 a.m. A special permit for buffer
standard conditions as application. So, I I would suggest that we go like one at a time. Um, so if we wanted to vote on recommending to the zoning board, yeah, on whether or not to approve or deny the special permit for parking, um, I would just, yeah, just to
make it a bit easier for the the minutes taking. And I don't want to have I want to support retail, but some residents don't use their car, and if you want them to leave parking from 10, they have to be able to If you're renting an
apartment, you get the space. Retail. I I want to support retail. I I'm happy to do it. I live in a building where sometimes tenants take take my parking space. I come home at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. I work, you know, I leave my I leave I go to work at 5:00 in the
morning, I come back at two. This this would kill me. So, you know, and I I don't want to sh to share parking spaces. You could assign the only thing I can think of is to assign a specific space to if someone agrees to go into
that. But if you know weekends pe you know once once it finds once people find out that that parking space is there how you going to police it? Who's going to tow it? It's we it's it's really it's a mess and no one wants no who wants to
become a parking police in the parking lot. So, I I don't want to put I I do want to respect and do the ordinance that we have to, but I I don't know what to I mean, I understand 50 what we have
to do to the residential and help retail, but I I can't. Mimi, why don't we maybe consider adding some sort of like compromise there? Like so that maybe there's 10 spots available to retail within the parking lot during a
set period of time or 15 during a set period of time. The rest is assigned to residential. We have such limited parking with this these units. And now that I'm really grateful that you guys expanded it to include, but if you have if you have a three-bedroom, you have if you have children at home and you're you
you you running errands, you come back and you have a little kid and your parking space is now taken because the the it's going to come out that you can park there if you want to go to the laundry mat. I mean, it's just going to be a nightmare. I think it's going to
be, you know, a very serious sort of nightmare. If I may, if I may, I recommended that condition because the uh applicant did make a statement that there would be retail parking on the first level and it just didn't seem fair, especially when they're not
providing the full amount of parking spaces that they're required that those spaces would be empty overnight if they're just set aside for retail. So, if there's an opportunity to share them overnight, I just thought that that would be a better uh outcome for the laundromat 24 hours. Pardon? The
laundromat's 24 hours. That's what everybody loves about it. It's a 24-hour laundromat. If you're coming home, if you're working at a bar and you're coming home at a bartender. Yeah. But and you're coming home at 2 o'clock in the morning and you're tired and your parking space is being used by somebody who's I I It's hard to share. I mean, I
get what you're saying, John, but it's really hard to share and it's I I've experienced it firsthand. It's really annoying if you come home from work and you're tired and you just want to go home and have something to eat and someone's in your parking space. But that there has to be a balance here because the planning board did at the at
the last meeting or the meeting before asked about parking made a had expressed a big concern about parking for the retail especially if there were going to be restaurants there and the applicant tried to accommodate by providing for uh retail parking on the first level. But
to set it aside just for refill 24 hours a day when that parking is not going to be used at did not seem fair to residents. John, does it make sense if we stated 10 parking spaces for the retail and 40 for the residential? And then if by chance
we have residential units that do end up leaving a certain hours and they get a benefit for rent on the parking, we at least have that option to do that for those tenants and designate the 10 parking spaces for the first level. That's up to the board. Yep.
I recall from the last meeting there was some conversation around this uh you know the push and pull between you know the residential and the retail parking and I I recall the petitioner and correct me if I'm wrong had a plan for managing the kind of day-to-day friction
that might arise from that that this is he does he manages he manages all of his buildings this is not abnormal this is probably an industry standard in these type of buildings I mean I don't uh we have buildings right Now that we have commercial and they vacate, I I used to
live in the Leather District and I used to park in commuter hours in the parking garage right in front of me. And that's so I I mean I have no problem stating 10 units designated like we stated originally for the retail on the first floor, first level and then we have 40
for residential. Um so and we can have it like that. But I think it eventually what it I don't think I don't think we want to dictate what residences want to do or not do because maybe one resident will say instead of paying $150 for parking they might say I'll pay 50 and I can have commuter hours and they'll be
benefited from it. I don't think we want to hinder right. But another way my question is is your your client has experience in the ability to kind of manage that day-to-day push and pull as it arose. So if that situation were to come up where someone was working off
hours and just really couldn't abide by commuter parking hours, then there'd be some mechanism to to address that. 100%. 100%. We're not talking about 200 units to manage here. We're really talking about 50 units and maybe we might be talking about a handful that might be
commuter hours, you know, four or five, but four or five for a building like this is impactful for a five retail. Fair to say the market might even dictate you know what you know how that works you know what people are paying to willing to pay on top of what their rent is for the parking space. If it wasn't working
we wouldn't be doing it. You mean I mean it's just reality. It's just like if you're not if you're going to have a tenant that's going to want two parking spots in a studio onebedroom. Most likely you're not going to really put that tenant there because you're going to affect the two-bedroom unit. So the landlord would be able to control that
type of marketplace. But uh but we would have no problem designating 10 retail like we originally stated and 40 for the residential units. Thank you. Thank you. I like this idea of it of 10 and 40. Um a little bit better than what the
existing writing is for this. Yep. Do we need to just address this with a small addition to the amend to the current recommendation? Christian, you were you were reading the recommendation. Do you want to just amend that a little bit for the retail
versus maybe we assign 10 spots for retail and the rest is all residential? We just include that language right now. Yeah, but this we're discussing the first condition I think right now. So provide for share use of the parking
provider for retail use available for retail um for what time? Change the time frame too. Okay. Yeah, take out the time frame. Perfect. Yeah. All right. And for
provide for share used of the parking provide for retail use available for re 10 retail spaces and 40 resident spaces. And I I'll second that. All in favor? I
I abstain. And I also abstain. Now are the rest of these conditions are acceptable to everybody? Well, we should read through them again because they're different. You want them read again?
Sure. So, I'll make a motion um for the major site plan or to recommend the major site plan review seeking approval to demolish two structures and for the construction of a 120 residential dwelling unit
structure with seven first floor retail units with the following conditions. Um with the standard conditions as applicable. All trees are to be a minimum of two and a half to three inch caliper. Um, and to install a fence
along the Ellsworth property line to protect users of the proposed playground and to serve as a planted buffer. Did I mix those two up? I just I just want to correct. I I believe it's now reduced to 100 units, not 120. Just want to Sorry, I was going in the same No, I know. I
just want to just So, um, sorry. I can we rewind? Okay. For major site plan review seeking approval to demolish the two structures and for the construction of a 120 residential unit with a structure
with seven first floor retail units and the following conditions. Um to use permeable pavers. You still reference 120 units. It's because the agenda maintains the
same description from the original proposal. That's that's where the 120 is coming from. But so the board has voted to approve a special permit recommendation to the zoning board. We are now voting on the major site plan review. So you may continue Sarah on meeting the conditions for the site.
Okay. and with the following conditions. Um the use of permeable pavers or pavement um to install a fence to protect um to submit a P and LUP lighting
submit to our department a lighting plan. Okay. Yeah. Planning and land use with all the exterior lights to be compliant with is IDSA standards. um to submit she to submit to the planning department an exterior signage plan and
to provide a left turn only sign at the Essex Street driveway exit and um to submit a landscape plan. Oh, we got more here. All drivers are to be placed under
stop sign control with painted stop bar included. All signs and pavement markings installed with the project shall be designed to meet the current manual of uniform traffic control devices standards. Signs and landscaping
adjacent to the site shall be designed and maintained so as not to restrict lines of sight. um to submit a request to the traffic commission to make Ellsworth Street a one-way from Congress to
Essex and implement transportation demand management plan to support a multimodal transportation plan. The plan should include but is not limited limited to make available public transportation schedules
um to post information on car share services to provide information on available pedestrian bike facilities and to provide information on MBTA passes. I'll second the motion.
That's a motion. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Abstain. Also, one abstension. Uh, the motion is carried. All right. So, now there's one more for
the vegetative buffer. I've been asked for I've been asked to read the special permit buffer. Um, so that is with standard conditions as applicable. um for special permit seeking approval to construct a planted screen of less than
10 ft between the the B or and the OR2 districts and the special permit buffer would contain the following conditions. Standard conditions is applicable. All trees are to be a minimum of two and a half to three foot cal caliber and
install a fence along the Ellsworth property line to protect users of the proposed playground and to serve in place of a planted buffer. All in favor? Sorry, I'll I'll second that motion. All in favor? I
abstain. I abstain. I will send all these conditions to you guys. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members of the board. Thank you for taking the time to work with us with these last two projects. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Good luck. The uh next order of business is case
uh 2025-2 at 1824 Grandville Road. Uh El CIO is the petitioner. Uh good evening everyone. Uh my name is Rebecca Edmonson Cororum. Um and I'm
here with Adam uh our architect as well as our our owner back here as well. And thank you for letting us come back and and reimage everything for you. Uh we have a new design from the last time we were here. Last time we had a two family. Today uh we have a one family
design for you. Um just a bit about just a bit of a refresher about the lot and the history of the lot and things like that. Uh if you don't mind service number one. So we have two lots that my client
bought. First he bought 24 Grand View. Um and that is a 6,500 square foot lot that was first subdivided back in 1917. And the h the existing one family that there that him and his family live in was built in 1943. Um then he bought 18
Grand View next door. Uh 18 Grand View is a smaller lot because it was subdivided in 1988 uh into what is now 14 Grand View and 18 Grand View. Um these were the square footages that were it was an approval not required uh
subdivision. If you just go one slide further uh just kind of shows you it's very small print I understand but if this is our subdivision that was filed with the registry of deeds. Um the just of note uh this the house uh was already
standing upon the subdivision at 14 uh Grand View. It was also built in the late 1940s. Um so today we're presenting to you uh one family uh design um very similar to both uh structures on both on
either side. Um, but I just want to I'm going to give you the highlights and then I'm going to give it to the professional to talk about um the building itself. Uh, just to give you a breakdown of what we're presenting today. Just next slide. Good sir. Thank you. Um, we are at a we're in a
residential area R1. We're at 26.5% 26 five feet in height. Um it's a four bedroomedroom two and a half bath um unit or structure. Uh these is the
square footage for all the floors. The garage is still underground with the two spots in it to make it parking compliant. And we have the storm water management plan the same. Uh and we also have our engineer here to present um any uh with any questions that you might
have. Um just uh that about takes care of everything except for I just want to go over what we're looking for today as far as relief goes. Uh if you don't mind one more one more down sir. Um we are here's the zoning chart uh for this new
pro this new design. Um we are only requesting variances. There's we we were at six now we're at three. Um so the two that we can't control are whatever we built on the we we need a variance for the lot size because it was subdivided
at 1988 standards. Uh and also um the minimum frontage uh was at 50 back in 1988 and now it's at 60. The only thing we are that isn't about the lot itself is about the front yard. Right now we have a 20 foot setback uh in your in the
zon in the zoning requirements. Um but each uh house at 24 and at 14 are at 10. And so there allows in your zoning regulations to ask for a variance to make sure it's in line with both the houses on either side. So that's what we
are asking for today. Uh before we were asking for a maximum coverage um variance. We have now reduced that to below the maximum coverage allowed. Um sideyard, we are now compliant on the sideyard both minimum and combined. Uh
and then uh parking we are compliant so no longer need a special permit for the parking the tandem. Um and uh we are also the only other special permit we that we are looking for today is for um the 24 Grand View. Nope.
If it was subdivided previously at that height and at that size and approved like that, you don't need any approval for it. Okay, never mind. I take just pretend I didn't say that then. Um I'm sorry. I was under the impression we still need
the special permit for Grand View. Um so that is what we're looking for today. And I'm going to turn it over to Adam for breakdown of the new design. Hi everyone. So the design hasn't changed much
besides uh the unit the side setbacks and uh this is uh the site plan as you can see we are like uh the required setbacks is like right on the setback we're looking only for the frontage as you can see it we are even
you know a bit inside from left and right houses for the frontage the front setback back and then can you go to the next? So that's the the basement where we have like two parkings and uh the location of the trash and the recycle.
Here we have the front entry entering to to go to the first floor and then we have like the entry from the garage. And if you go to the next slide, this is the first floor where we're locatedating like the the living area, kitchen, dining, and the guest room and the
backyard that was designed uh by the landscape. It's imitating the landscape design which uh didn't change. And then the the second floor we have located the three bedroom and two baths. I so these are the building elevations.
That's the front rear and uh we also did a shadow study with the time and all that. Do you have a video? So, I also left the the date, the time, and everything since last time was a bit confusing. So, that's December 21st,
7:30 a.m. So, 12:00 p.m. That's, as you can see, the building is not affecting the That's 3:15 December 21st. I was watching soccer when I was filming
this. I'm sorry for that. I didn't know the voice was coming. I'm a crazy soccer fan. I didn't know that. I noticed that really really. So that's 7 uh a.m. on the June 21st. That's at 12:00 p.m. As you can see, the
building shadow is not affecting only at 5:00 p.m. on the summer. You can see it's affecting only the first floor, but none of the second floor. That's the only time that the building is the building shadow is affecting the other building. And by the by the way, my team
won that day. So, I just want to introduce our landscape came back as well. presentation on the new design. If you would like, please ask us any questions that you would like. Well, I think
you've done a great job breaking it down and explaining it and certainly making modifications. Um, my biggest concern was the neighbors on your left. Um, but have you run these new plans by them? Uh, I did send
um, sorry, I did send the uh, the design to their spokesperson, Mr. Ricey. Uh, just as background, Mr. Recy and I are both on the Everett zoning board. So, we're very good friends. So, I I always make sure that she does get that so she can distribute to her aunt who is the
lady with the two family on the other side of the street. And then um the lady at 14. So she does have that design. Okay. Would anyone else like to say anything? Okay. Well, I'd like to Oh, no. Go ahead. Yeah. So, I
I'm Thank you guys for making such an effort to improve this plan and to make the neighbors happy. Um it it seems to you've come up with a very workable design. I would just ask one thing in your ongoing consideration with your windows on the third floor. Would you
consider adding two sets of two instead of just three in the center? And it's not obviously a requirement. It's just a design aesthetic idea for you. Um but other other than that, I think you've done a lovely job on this uh making this
work. The front elevation or rear elevation? On the front. That's okay. My client says absolutely. I have one question that two on the second floor.
Is that like an open window? Uh there are sliding doors. It's like they call it Italian balcony. So that's still going to be a little balcony or just sliding doors? No. No. Just sliding doors. Just sliding doors. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.
Any motions? I'd like to make a motion to approve of the standard conditions as applicable um and the use of permeable pavers and pavement. Um the the residents of the new unit are
not eligible to participate in the city's residential sticker parking program and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. The petitioner shall provide the department of planning and land use planning with the address of the unit.
Um you shall submit a um landscape plan to the planning department as well as a lighting plan with all the exterior lights to be dark sky dark sky compliant and or is IDSA standard compliant with IDSA
standards and also to provide a rodent control plan. Also, just real quick minor uh correction, we did not just update our proposed conditions for this. Um with this new design, they are um compliant with parking requirements. So, they would be eligible to uh per uh
participate in the uh residential on street parking sticker program. So, like this new design, they are now compliant with parking. So, apologies for not updating that. Second. I'll strike it from the record, right?
And correct it. Okay. They are eligible as opposed to not eligible. Correct. Yeah. And I'll second the motion. Made and seconded to uh recommend approval to
the BZA. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Abstain. Abstain as well. One, two abstain. Three. Three obstain. I'm sorry. It's Jessica, Eric, and Regina. Okay. Thank you.
Okay. The motion is carried. Thank you very much to the Mr. chairman and to the board and to staffers as always. Thank you for all your help with this. Yes. And the uh the zoning board meeting is July 10th. Sorry. Zoning board meeting
is Tuesday, July 10th. June. June. Sorry. Sorry. Yes, sir. Long day. Tuesday, July 10th. Yes, sir. Thank you. Going to have a uh five minute break
before we continue with a meeting. All right. Next on the agenda is um the zoning amendment. A further vote on the zoning amendment to section 14-106 J6.
introduction. All right. So, we brought this zoning amendment to the planning board. I believe it was last month. Um, the city council voted to send it back to the planning board for a recommendation back to the city council. This is just how
the process works. Um, so yes, I will get into the zoning amendment. Um, if the slide goes. Okay. So currently we are prop uh the current zoning regulation that is section uh
34106J6 uh reads that any relief from off- streetet parking requirements in this zoning ordinance shall disqualify that location from participating in the residential parking sticker program. And you'll see that any is bold and italicized. So any kind of relief from
any parking regulation disqualifies a petitioner um and their tenants uh from participating in the residential sticker program. So that means you know relief such as like relief from the number of required parking spaces, relief from the
location of parking spaces. Uh we don't allow parking to be within the required front yard or within 5t of a side lot line. Um and then also parking dimensions. uh so the size of parking spaces uh the parking aisle width
etc. So we are proposing that the amendment read that any relief from the number of required off- streetet parking spaces in the zoning ordinance shall disqualify that location from participating in the residential parking sticker program. Uh and the reasons for
this are we feel that the original intent of the zoning regulation was to address those developments that did not meet the number of parking spaces required. And while it's infrequent, there are cases in which petitioners do meet the number of parking spaces but maybe are putting it in their front yard
or like needing relief for location. and we just felt that it was unfair to sort of apply this restriction to those cases that actually meet the number of parking um required parking spaces uh just because we feel like that was the original intent of this zoning regulation.
Um so yeah, are there any So yeah, I have a question about that. So I guess one of the things that I think about with that is like doesn't that sort of overall allocate parking to people who already have off- streetet parking?
So, this did come up internally when the department was sort of like going over this, but we felt that to change the sort of parking sticker program in a way that would prevent folks that have the required off street parking from getting
parking stickers would be a change that only the city council could make. We felt like, you know, that that's like a change to the entire program from my understanding. um and not necessarily like a zoning change. Um so while you might be right, we do
feel like this the way the regulation is sort of enforced is a bit unfair to folks who are actually meeting the number of spaces. Yeah, in in the sense that they're meeting the number of spaces, they're meeting the black letter of the law, but you know, they're they're hogging parking. I mean, if you
have off- streetet parking, I would even propose the idea that if you have off- streetet parking, you shouldn't be able to get an on street sticker, giving the, you know, all of the conversations we have in these in these meetings about, you know, the push and pull around parking and how this just kind of increasing density that's already a
problem. I mean, it seems to me that that's giving more parking back to people who already have some at the expense of people who would not otherwise have some. Yeah. I mean that's there they should be somehow rewarded for that for you know
relinquishing their sticker. Um but I think in other circumstances we want to deincentivize like someone paving over their front yard to try to create free parking spots. And I've seen a lot of that. And the only way that I could
see deemphasizing that or deincentivizing that is to have some sort of permeability requirement or some you know something that um is another requirement within the open space requirement. So like within the
um language of zoning that dictates you know how you can develop that lot and what materials you can use. Yeah, I agree. I think this is going to incentivize creation of super tight
parking spots. Parking spots that are super close to a structure. I think it's a little bit of a slippery slope. I agree with a general principle of it. So I I would I would argue the point
with you that just can can you give us some scenarios where you think that this would be where where would this play out because it's it's still extremely limited as it's worded as as the new amendment. And to um Eric's
point, we obviously don't want to have people being tricky with with um taken advantage of it, but I I I think it's it's very very limited. Correct. Can you can you kind of outlay a few examples of how you think it would play
in somebody's favor? When you say play in someone's favor, do you mean like like what do you mean? So, so what in what circumstances like if we could have an example of a circumstance where somebody would qualify to um
they've met the required parking minimum standards, but there's something there's a tiny thing off. So, give me give me give us a couple of scenarios so we can sort of envision that idea of what would qualify. I can give under the new change. I can give you one specifically.
Um, last year the board approved a uh subdivision on 81 Library Street um which allowed for the construction of two two family dwellings. Each of those dwellings had the proper number of pocket spaces. However, they were
located within proximity to the buildings with uh uh windows on the first floor and within the side mirror lot lines. Therefore, they were not eligible to get the sticker parking, but they did have the number of spaces that they were required to have
and pardon. So then they got no parking relief at all by virtue of that small little problem right there. Yeah. Okay. Uh to be honest, that's the only one that comes to my mind right now. I got I would have to go back and look each every one of them as will indicated.
It's probably not usually if they can't meet the setbacks, they probably can't meet the number of spaces as well. But so it's not going to happen in every one of them. And um in each case in those cases where in the past where they have met the number but can't get the spaces,
they would have to come back to the board to change the conditions because it was made a condition of their of the permit. And okay, there might be another situation that we could um incentivize developers to give back
parking spots that are to eliminate curb cuts that once were so that we're adding more ability to have parallel parking, you know, on on street parking. So, for instance, say they had a horseshoe
driveway. I mean, there's very few lots in Chelsea that can do that. But, for instance, if they were to reroute their parking within their lot so that there's only one curb cut, you know, maybe there's some incentive there to um, you
know, give back curb space. Does that make sense? I'm just trying to run that over my if I could think of an instance where that would happen. Um, see, I want more people to participate in the sticker program because so many
people illegally park in Chelsea and it's really hard to manage that and and so the more people that we can get into the residential parking means we also get their tax revenue because you get the excise tax from them. they have to
be so to it's I don't want to push them away or have them figure out clever ways to get around the parking and also when you have visitor well we you can't get visitor parking limited as it is it's like it's a you know it's
um I don't want I don't incentivizing people by doing something negative doesn't really incentivize people don't want to go to the negative they want to go around the negative people want to participate in the posit positive. So if we can get them to to participate in the pro in the program in a positive way
besides thinking of incredible or like I'm just going to get the ticket and I'm not going to pay it which happens a lot is sort of like so I I I understand we can't change the ordinance as much as I would like to because I think it's a
very bad ordinance and a lot of you know a lot of cities are now even eliminating parking requirements for developers all over nation. nationwide because they want affordable housing. So, you know, since affordable housing is our is a big
concern, eliminating any kind of parking spaces does help with building affordable housing because you're going to you're going to get rid of that's a big requirement. And so, you know, I I like the new wording. I think it's fine.
I think we should sort of change it. It's uh my a small point, but I agree. You know, parking is hard and annoying and challenging and car traffic is what it is and it's not I don't see it getting
much better. But that's my thoughts. So, yeah. And over the course of this conversation, I think I addressed my own concern. any egregious instance of super tight parking spots or super aggressive curb cuts or putting a parking spot
close to an abetting property is still going to come in front of planning board for variance. So we can always shoot it down. Um so yeah I'm starting to think that in terms of like this particular
uh this particular question it is appropriate to modify um so it's only for number of parking spots but I agree overall there's probably an opportunity at some point
for a broader conversation about parking. outside the scope of this. One more question and this actually kind of for John. Um, is this how how real an issue is this? Is this an issue that's kind of academically come up and people in course of reviewing statutes have
decided, hey, you know, this is something that we could change to maybe address a fairness issue we perceive or is this something that's more in response to real issues that have come up time and time again before this board and others? It actually came as a response to that
81 library. I can't say it's come up again and again. Like I said, it's it doesn't happen frequently, but it does happen. Okay. So, not purely an academic question. It's, you know, but, you know, not something that's really something that we're confronting all the time either then. Correct. Correct. Okay.
Yeah. It's still relatively infrequent and I feel like we would have to kind of comb through some of the case files um aside from Library Street, the example that John's bringing up. But I feel like I like remember, you know, a case coming before the boards where they did
something and they have tandem parking. Like they're meeting the number, but they have tandem parking and our zoning doesn't recognize tandem parking. So, they're kicked out of the sticker program. And so I think we all kind of recognize that the the situation we have in Chelsea
around parking, our current parking regulations, the parking ordinances, parking requirements, I think needs a kind of larger look at it. And I'm hoping like the master planning process will be sort of diving into those questions. Um, so like I feel like this zoning
amendment is more like somewhat of a band-aid for now while the master planning process kind of dives into these larger questions and maybe at the end of that process we'll have some better insight into how we as a board um how that we as a city can like better
address concerns around parking, around traffic, etc. So, um, so yeah, I think like we might generally agree with that there's some large issues that we need to like, uh, figure out, but, um, yeah, this seems pretty common sense to me and
and that it has a small applicability. So, I don't think we're going to, from what you're laying out, John, it doesn't seem like it'll create a lot of problems for us, but it will maybe create some benefit for some people some of the time. So, I'm I'm in favor of this right
now as it stands. The piece Eric mentioned a minute ago about how really practically speaking, any attempt to circumvent this through creative means is going to still require some level of approval from at least this board. You know, makes me feel pretty comfortable
with this and you know, this let's keep things moving forward. I support this also. So, someone just needs to make a motion to recommend to city council. I'll make the motion a motion to recommend the adoption of this uh revision to the city
council. I second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion is passed. the Chelsea master plan update. Yeah, I I can start. Um, but before we get to the uh updates, should you be
introduced? Uh, yes. This is Adam Roy. He is our intern in our per land use planning department. He's been with us since January, um, but has now been working full-time since his semester ended. He is a student at TUS. Um, Adam, if you
wanted to hop up and stand up front, you can, but if you wanted to sit there, you're also fine. I I can see the screen. I I'll sit here. It's okay. Um, but it was informed to me that, um, there were just some some clarifying questions about master plans,
the process, um, from what they go through, and just sort of their intent. So I have a brief little presentation that hopes to um guide the discussion around the updates uh moving forward. So if you want to move on to the next
slide. So just very broadly what is a master plan? Uh it is a roadmap um for the future um for the city. It provides guidance for how the city wants to move forward and develop. Um, and in order to
accomplish that, it creates a plan for growth, but also for preservation and change. So, what what about the city do we want to keep? What about the city? Do we want to change? And to accomplish that, it sets out um policies and proposals for the city to adopt to reach
the goals that are outlined through this master planning process. Um, and then lastly, the master plan is not set in stone when it is passed. It is a living document that is meant to be shaped and adapted throughout its lifespan. Um I
think Chelsea said they want their their visions are to last 15 years, but these things can last a long time. The last one Chelsea did was in 1970. So hopefully it's not a 50-year vision, but um these are meant to be living
documents. So then moving on, why have a master plan? Um, as I've briefly mentioned, it is the framework that guides development. Um, so master plans help set the goals, visions, and priorities that inform city officials, developers, and community members, and
allows them to work together to achieve a shared vision for the for the future of the city. Um, additionally, it is a great opportunity to give residents and community members the opportunity to shape the city's future by um large
commu community engagement efforts that the master planning process should entail. Um, and then just like what what are the steps for um for creating a master plan? Um, first and foremost uh
is gathering public input um for the visions and the goals of the community. So Chelsea is still kind of in this phase. Um but this is ongoing with steps two and three which is just collecting data about the current state of the city and analyzing that data to understand the needs of the city and how the
current policies and regulations are performing. Um so that is kind of what's going on in Chelsea right now at the moment. Um but as we continue to engage the community members and start to formulate the goals that community
members, city officials and and other people who live and work in the city um have for the city, that's when the city can start evaluating potential future opportunities and then also outline the preferred policy options and plan to achieve the desired future
um through the community important data collected Um and then lastly, once this plan is sort of in place, it is the board the planning board's job to approve the planning to approve the master plan. Um and then
once it's approved, it's um the responsibility of the city and the and the planning board to monitor and amend the plan as you see fit. Um, so these are some of the guiding principles that Chelsea laid out in
their RFP. Um, but these are also subject to being changed through community input. So some of the things that Chelsea highlighted in their RFP were focusing on a livable built environment. Um, increasing their harmony with nature, creating a
resilient economy, um, bolstering workforce development. um increasing equity within the community um fostering a healthy community and also engaging in responsible reg responsible regionalism
within the Boston metro area. Um and to achieve these sorts of goals um Chelsea laid out nine different focus areas within their master plan. A lot of these are kind of recommended by the state but are are required to be in
a master plan by the state but Chelsea has also included some some additional ones. So these focus areas are land use and zoning, housing, economic development and mobility, cultural and historic preservation, environmental justice and sustainability,
transportation and mobility, parks and public spaces, services and infrastructure and then community health and safety. Um and then if you want to move to the next slide. Um within each of these focus areas, um there will be an assessment of where the city
currently is at. So that data that they're currently collecting and then they will also have policy considerations within the each of these sections. So that is informed by not only the data that's collected but also the goals the that have been outlined
throughout the engagement process. Um, if you guys want to take on some extra homework, um, there are some some good master plans that have been um, passed recently in the area, um, Somerville, sorry, Summervision 2040,
which is Somerville's master planning master plan, um, really does a good job. Their website outlines the the steps that they took and the engagement efforts that they had um, pretty well. Um so if you want to understand sort of
how how a master plan comes about their website details that pretty well. Um next stop reve um river's master plan. Their website outlines the goals and the policies um that they have for their city moving forward in a pretty
straightforward manner. So I would recommend that one to look there. And then vision Lynn is Lynn's master plan and and they have some solid visuals that you guys can look at as well to see. Um and then these are just three examples just to familiarize yourself
with what a master plan could be. They each do some things a little bit differently and you can take some things and offer recommendations to the uh steering committee and the master planning committee going forward. Adam, are any of these um also done by UTIL?
I don't know if Util has done any of these. I don't know who their um consultants were. Yeah, Util is the consultant that was chosen to lead our master plan, but I I do recommend if if you want to take a look at some some example master
plans and what they can be, um these are three good ones from the area. So, if you want to move on um now that there's kind of a basis, Sarah, if you want to give any updates. Sure. Well, I wanted to try to
um create a framework for how we discuss the topics that were um mentioned in your earlier slide. Oh, sorry. Sorry to cut you off, but then we can we can move to the we can move to the next slide and and it gives a little bit of a framework if if you want. Yeah, I thought you
mentioned Yeah, that was an earlier slide, wasn't it? Sorry. Yeah. So, this is sort of the framework that Will and I have discussed. Um, and it's just moving forward. We wanted to look at the I think you you Sarah highlighted
these four in your email to us. Uh, specifically land use, zoning, uh, land use and zoning, cultural and historic preservation, transport transportation and mobility, and infrastructure as sort of some of these focus areas that the planning board can yeah can highlight.
Um, for those of you hopefully all of you filled out the survey, the Palante survey, and if you're not aware of it, let me know and I'll make sure to forward it on. They were going to end it on the 23rd, so I'm not sure if it's
still active, but it's important that we get your data. So, um, maybe we can print out a hard copy, but they had listed something like, I don't know, 10 different categories, and I thought those were the ones that we should be
honing in on because they impact the built environment. um you know the survey is trying to gather all you know information from all different sectors on what works and what doesn't work within Chelsea but our planning board can't you know address
all of those things um some of them are more policy related items but I think if we can focus our attention on what might result in modifications to the actual zoning map the zoning plan and the
zoning ordinance. Um, I think that's really what I'm hoping to, you know, bring back to the steering committee. And Todd, by the way, is also on the steering committee. So, we have um I think there's 10 of us or or I
don't know, 12. Do you know how many people, Todd? Um, anyway, we are only meeting about Oh, of course, John. um we're only meeting about five times, so there's big lapses of time in between
each of those meetings. And I think we can um get a lot done and extracting as much um you know, as many comments from you guys as possible would really add a lot of value. Sarah, what's what's on the propo what
what is proposed right now in terms of master plan? Have we seen anything other than just like truly just a discussion phase? Yeah, Todd can attest to this. Yeah, we it's just been real
um largecale overview. Um but if we look at the different topics, we can kind of break it down into how we can um form discussions that you know that aren't all over the place. Is there
Is there a a sort of like an overarching vision that you're seeing people people kind of like coalesce behind? Well, certainly the hot button issues, you know, the the the issues that um the comments like they're gathering data.
They didn't have all the data back at the time of our last meeting, but there are certain issues that are really um becoming, you know, they're not surprising, but um becoming evident that those are where we're going to need to focus most of our attention.
Parking's one. Um access to affordable housing, that's a huge one. um you know transportation concerns, you know, not just parking but um you know physical
safety of our streets. Um congestion uh yeah that I mean traffic transportation well really how that impacts traffic certainly air quality um green space
I don't remember that being a priority but that's certainly an effort that the city is focusing on in the what is it the open space master plan that's yeah the open space and recreation plan that I think that came
before the board like last year yeah um so within these four topics I I just let me just explain what I think are the important things for us to focus
on within each of those four and then perhaps we devote time after each of the next few meetings to a more meaty discussion, but just so that you can be thinking about it. Um, so land use and zoning, that's, you know, what we concern ourselves with for
the most part on this board, but um, uh, let's see, so city development and allowed uses in various parts of the city. We've got um as an example the fish
processing zoning amendment. So what kinds of activities should be happening and which parts of the city and how can that lend itself to um you know everything from more jobs to
better access to the waterfront. you know, those overarching um decisions really have um huge impact. Um and are we you know can we somehow
uh incentivize better access of the waterfront within the confines of the DPA which is the designated port area which requires water dependent uses um along our industrial waterfront. Can I
can I ask a question? Is there is there um in terms of like figuring out this overall Is there a map of all basically unused or buildable lots that are potentially up for development
somewhere down the road in Chelsea? Is that sort of do we have access to that online or is there something that that we could look at as we think about like what sort of you to to Sarah's point about if we're looking at zoning if
we're looking at building long-term like literally a what do we say 15 20 year plan here 10 to 15 10 to 20 year plan like what have we got left that's even buildable and what would we put on it you know what I mean so we I guess we would need to be considering those
things correct Absolutely. And if that data hasn't already been collected, that's something that we should certainly recommend to the consultants to um pull together. There there have been various efforts in
the past to identify what land is available. But um part of it depends on how you defined available. um a number of years ago one of the nonprofits in the city looked at what they termed to be as available and they
but it included people's front yards. So I mean technically is it available? It depends on you know what the zoning says really. So um really what the the messport is going to say is going to be a policy and it's going to provide recommendations and probably one of them
will be update the zoning. you know, we've been doing doing zoning peace meal for a number of years and, you know, a an overall hall of it for a more consistent um which will and I have been trying to work on for uh past year and a half. Um
obviously needs to be done as well as the looking at the zoning. Getting all this data in one place would be huge. You don't like for instance what I don't understand I'm sorry to cut you off is I don't understand why you haven't had Forbes in there. Forbes is the biggest parcel of land that can be developed and
you guys aren't devoting any ef going to be the future of Chelsea, it's going to be fors because it is it is historical. I would love to save those buildings. It has it's has access to the water. It is everything that
Chelsea wants to be. You could put housing and yet there's no mention of it in the master plan. It's like it is the it to me it is the master plan. It needs access to as John and I were talking about before it needs access to both sides. You need to build a bridge. You
need to build a tunnel. But I am sort of perplexed why that isn't even on here. It's like that. Will there be a more public review of that green effort separately? It hasn't been mentioned yet because they are still in the information
gathering stage. there was go they're working toward a um a public meeting at the end of June to to let the public know what they found so far in their review. Um and then once they get that information they will work toward
looking at advancing sites like Forbes and how how do you go about planning for it and how do you go about zoning and looking at it from a zoning perspective or a land use perspective or environmental perspective. Right. And I mean that was a perfect opportunity for the city to
get a foothold on what little waterfront we have um that's not in the DPA. So that but that's one thing that conversation comes to mind for me just hearing you talk about this is um you know is there some
faction of any of these committees that are working on this gathering information kind of collecting information around what sorts of demand there is here in Chelsea. So kept in p, you know, to give an example, you know, we had the fish processing facility in here a couple of months back. You know,
there was an appetite on their end to to come to Chelsea. That's why they were here. And, you know, I know we have other things coming up in the near in the near term that's also kind of proposing new uses for formerly industrial space. And I'm also thinking about what goes on over on Beum Street and the the fruit warehouses and all of
that. And I've heard rumblings over the years that there was an appetite to do something else over there, but all of that, you know, would certainly implicate land use and zoning and all of that, but do we have any idea of who wants to be there besides who's there now? Is that something people I think we
need to look at broader context. There's so much exciting stuff happening on the lower mystic for instance and this is time to start um implementing you know to to um make some
changes to accommodate bigger grander things along our waterfront in the future. Um, you know, I I keep bringing up muttered transportation, but there's all sorts of things happening on either side
of the mystic. And I would hate to think that 10 years from now, we're still trying to figure out how to um get there. We're going to be very late to the game if if we don't prioritize those types of things now. But again, if we
have a map, a diagram of, you know, looking at our zoning map and where we can maybe make some modifications to get a foothold here or there to um, you know, drive ourselves further towards
whatever that vision is that we that comes out of this planning process. Then, you know, we have a um a diagram of what we're trying to achieve. We'd want to even think about maybe using some of these changes as a way to maybe even attract things that we seem to feel
are desirable too, right? As opposed to just respond to whoever shows up that wants to be here, right? We have to accommodate it and then, you know, of course, we want to attract um good developers that are going to add value to our community and to create jobs. Um
sorry, what were you gonna say? I actually have a question in regards to on Winnaceimmit Street as it currently stands. It's the one with lime on the corner of it. There used to be a ferry from there, John. Is that that property at the end of Winnimmit? Is that um it
appears to be private. Is there water access? Is that something we could ever reconsider an agreement or a zoning amendment that would allow us to even have a water transportation taxi out of Chelsea? or is there another area that
we have currently that we could sort of to um Sarah's point that we can kind of have some sort of access to the to Boston or other other areas both either Mystic or or um Boston Harbor that we
could create a water taxi situation that area at the end of Wesim it is privately owned uh and there is actually access it's a shipyard uh that's been active up until relatively recently. Um, yes, there was a a ferry there at one point. There was also a ferry from the
up here at Muriel Manley Park at one point. Uh, and the U Boston Harbor Association. I forget what they're called now. Uh, Boston now or something like that. Harbor Now, pardon? Boston Harbor Now. Boston Harbor Now. Uh, actually did a study uh several years
ago looking at various sites uh including one off of marginal street. The issue with that site is of course the module street bridge that limits the uh uh the access up there. So it has been looked at uh a number of different
times. So and yeah potentially there are sites that you could do it. The limitations are the costs for doing so and then uh the ridership uh and do you promote ridership from outside the city to come in but then you're increasing traffic flow in the city and then you
have to provide parking for it. So addition additional question to you there's beautiful brown brick buildings down there that somebody's renovating right there on Wimmit. Um, I'm assuming they're privately owned, but you know, I mean, it would be sort of I look at
something like East Boston that's created the the people who built those new buildings right down on the waterfront have created water taxi access points. So, there's been obviously a public and private partnership going on. I mean, is this something we could entertain where we
have kind of that happy marriage between between commerce and so the city isn't footing the bill on I would not say that's a happy marriage. That is an isolated cultural white I that you you have taken East Boston and you have
identified it up to the wazoo. That is what they did. Those apartments are extremely expensive. You alienated everybody else in that neighborhood. I mean they look pretty and that kind of stuff. Same thing with Seapport. Same, you know, where's Kevin? Where's Kevin White? Where's Kevin White when you need
it? But I mean, if you wanted to look at somebody who was a great city planner, who I admire a lot, I would say White was the best one. He took down the expressway. He built he built Faniel Hall. He built he put in a wind tunnel,
which I love because I happen to be very partial John Hancock building, but it is a giant wind tunnel. That is a man who had a vision for a city versus Manino who had Seapport and then you have uh Walsh who had East Boston and I think both of
them are incredibly not Bostononian places and that is those are city planners you know and seapport's going to collapse in 20 years that's what in 20 years you'll be lucky if the buildings are still up there so I you could tell very strong opinions
about this so I you know I it it is city planning is is very complex and stuff but I particularly did like those builds anyway sorry um but just getting all this information
that we're talking about in one place like the Boston Harbor Now's studies the Mr. G River wershed studies on the um the cool block program you know just getting all this information in one place would be hugely helpful for all of
us making decisions so that we can see what's you know going on in the area when we're looking at one particular lot you know it's just we we want to make decisions in a more informed way
so in order to I guess like frame our thinking specifically surrounding like opportunities and threats and transportation Is our master plan considering a future replacement of the Tobin bridge? Because
it is an older bridge. I think an RFS is out. Oh yeah, that's for consultants. So in terms of thinking through a plan, is it is it with our current Tobin bridge
or is it through a future bridge because that changes things. It adds pedestrian access. Of course, it adds a possible train station. Who knows? Well, that's a perfect example. I mean, the other thought is, you know what? What if that
becomes a tunnel? You know, turning that into a tunnel is not off the table. But in doing that, it creates all this open space. So, how do we use that space? Those are the types of things that we should be thinking about. you know really forward thinking turning
everything into a tunnel even like under Chelsea well this is or only theor theoretical at this point but you know the other thing we should think about 15 years from now the automobile may not be as relevant as it is right now so all
the space that gets freed up from roads for instance I mean we're going to be evolving in many ways and we just need to um accommodate that in, you know, how we make recommendations for, you know,
changes to the zoning map and ordinance. Well, like that kind of just speaks to the complexity of this overall project because all of us are carrying our own sense of ifs. I'm thinking a future Tobin bridge. Others are probably
thinking current Tobin bridge. Others are probably thinking like this gigantic tunnel that goes under Chelsea and I feel it's challenging to come up with recommendation and all of us are operating under like our own
assumptions. Well, um I think looking at the current problem problematic areas where neighborhoods are cut off from amenities because of you know infrastructure such as the Tobin Bridge. Um, you know, I think one of the
overarching goals should be to make this community more livable without a car. And that would involve having a certain number of different types of amenities within a certain walking distance. Those are the types of things we should be looking at a little more
carefully. Um, so those are the four categories. um you know, transportation, infrastructure, land use and zoning, and um cultural and historic preservation. Um those are kind of the
categories that I'm hoping we can get into deeper discussion. Sarah, is there any um is there any or John, you could probably address this a little bit more? I mean, you guys are talking about some of the city traffic parking uh things
that are going on. Is there any current plan to rework our sidewalks and our landscaping to make our city a more walkable city as it stands? I mean, I know they've been working on Broadway, but as an overall like connecting things
on a foot walking plan along with beautifying it on a landscaping. Is that in play already or is this something we can work on? Uh, it's both. the the city is working to improve the sidewalks and walkability. Uh I know uh housing
community development has an annual program where they um repair sidewalks that are are um are in poor condition or install sidewalks where there are none. It's actually not that many areas in Chelsea where there are no sidewalks. There are some, not a lot, but they do a
major they do a repair through the community development block grant program. DBW does also uh do does repairs as well. Is there an overall plan we could like kind of have access to and maybe you know even put in some input in terms of just planning or
thought process on that too? I right now the emphasis is on where the sidewalks are so poor that they need to be replaced for for safety purposes. Um and then and there are other plans to um connect uh different parts of the city
but also different for example we have a um program our open space plan uh says that we want to use greenways to connect parks as a way of of improving access and also a way of improving uh uh landscaping in in the city. So uh so
that's going on as well. Is there room for more that we could talk about? Sure. Yeah. Um, Adam, you mentioned the word regionalism. Can you explain that a little bit more so that I understand um what that Yeah, that encompasses. That
was just something that Chelsea listed in their RFP that you two responded to that they're looking more to be a responsible partner and player within the Boston metro area. So, not just segregating itself from the area, but
working with the other communities. um in the region to ensure better development because planning is not just confined to the 1.8 square miles that Chelsea exists in. Right. It what happens in River, what happens in
Everett, what happens in Somerville all impact what happens in Chelsea, too. So, okay. But not just from a transportation standpoint. Are there other I I think I mean I think from a transportation standpoint yeah you could take the same way like if working with the MBTA and
working with MASDOT and and some of those more regional players is is definitely something that I think would be a plan of of the master plan here. So um and just the last item to bring up is
climate change. All the um infrastructure that we need to be thinking about to you know prepare for whether it's um rising temperatures or um potential like inundation
from storm water. You've all seen what happened in New York during Hurricane Sandy. um we we need some serious infrastructure to really protect ourselves and you know how that all ties into the storm water system and things
like that. Um you know we mention in our requirements we we often ask for white roofs that's um to reduce the heat island effect. We have very few trees in
Chelsea for instance and and the temperature is above what it should be. So how can we um try to address that in some of our planning? So light roofs, more trees,
um you know um well uh what is it? higher SRRI, you know, a lighter color of um materials in general, even the pavement to lessen the
microclimate, the rise in temperature in the microclimate. Um, and you know, unrelated to the inundation types of flooding, we have, you know, rain flooding that really has created a lot
of problems. So anyway, that's a major thing that I think um needs to all be baked into this master plan. Yes. And so obviously the master plan is taking this like really high up bird's eye view of the city and we're still very much in the early stages of the
master plan, collecting data, assessing what is the current state of the city. Um, and just to as Sarah mentioned, over the next couple of months during our planning board meetings, we want to kind of dive in a bit more into these four topics. And so,
Adam and I kind of put forward a sort of uh these general questions of like, you know, what are the strengths and weaknesses as it relates to infrastructure? What are the opportunities and threats as it relates to infrastructure? You know, an opportunity could be the removal of the Tobin Bridge and changing it something else, or it could be a threat, you know,
just some examples. And so, um, I think for next month, we will be talking about the transportation and mobility section. Um, I also think Sarah, you have some like more in-depth questions that I think would be good to send out to the board, okay, via email. uh don't respond
all and answer those questions, but just think about them and bring your comments and you know thoughts to the next uh planning board meeting because as Adam went over the planning board is the entity that is supposed to adopt the master plan and then also be one of the
entities that tries to implement the the plan. And I think in the past often the case is these larger plans that the board should be in tune with and aligned with and trying to implement often come to us right when they need approval rather than at the early stages of it.
And so I think it's actually extremely important that we engage in this and really discuss so the the thoughts of the board and its members make it into this planning process so we're not just kind of rubber stamping a plan but rather we were a part of the process of creating the plan. Well, I I and Will
and John and maybe Todd have a question for you. In terms of a master plan that's out there for a long period of time, what sort of resources on a financial level do we have to devote or or or will it just be allocated once we
have a plan bit by bit or are we also considering grants and funding? Like how are we for whatever we want to put in play? How are we paying for it? Do we have any Is there been any discussion about that or just work on the plan and
then we'll figure out the cash later? No, at some point we'll have to talk about it. I mean, we'll have to identify we'll have to identify what are we going to work on, who's going to be responsible, how we're going to fund it, you know, and there's going to be various ways of funding either through our own budget, through grants, through
special uh legislation or whatever. But it will have to come as part of that that study. Yeah. So, I can send an email uh letting everyone know like, you know, we'll be talking about transportation and mobility next month. Um, and I'll throw
these questions in there, but also Sarah, I think you should email your questions as they relate to to um transportation and mobility. Um, and yeah, we can kind of keep having these discussions over the next couple of months. Yeah. And could we have a map at
the next meeting so we can Yeah, have some graphics to speak from. Definitely. Thank you. I think we would also be helpful. I think it's when I was a strategic consultant, so this is all giving me flashbacks and nightmares. Um
um but I think it's also important to have a shared knowledge and understanding of what's currently happening. If the city has policies or working on projects already, um I don't know if it's easy to create like a blurb or like a little summary to give us that shared knowledge coming into that
conversation. Yeah, I think what comes out of this survey will be, you know, distilled down so it's clear on what the um city's biggest priorities are. Yeah. I'll make sure that the link
to the survey gets circulated as part of your email. Do you do you have a timeline on survey results and analysis? Well, they the analysis is all the data is immediate and it's just amazing these maps that they've been able to come up
with from the sort of halfway point of the survey, but you know, they're still they wanted to give it a couple more weeks before putting an end to it. and all that data. Um it, you know, it's really pretty interesting some of their
findings. Um I can certainly bring in well I don't know if we'll have those maps available in time for the next meeting, but maybe for our August meeting um we can see some of those areas that are um you know that people have voiced their concerns
about. Cool. I think that was all we had for this point. Um, I got those action items written down, so I will uh send those things out. Okay. This uh zoning amendment discussion for the ADU is uh continued
from our last rather brief discussion. That is an optional item. if the board is interested in having that discussion at this time. Yeah, just to put some more context, um
we are still really Adam Adam is taking the lead on this project. Um and so we're like still in the process of developing an ordinance um and trying to figure out what are some unique ways we can um add to this ordinance to advance the goals of um the city like you know
trying to provide more affordable housing through this etc. Um, so we just wanted to provide a presentation that goes into more broadly like what ADUs are, what they could look like, you know, what are the benefits. Um, and then some of the things we are thinking about. Um, but again, yeah, like as Tuck
said, if if the board I know it's uh 8:20 right now, so it's up to the board if y'all would want to hear this, but um there's no like time urgency, I don't believe. Um, last we've talked with Mike McAteer, the director of the building department.
He uh has said that the has about a dozen folks that are sort of asking about ADUs um and asking for denial letters. So how long do you need just to lay out what your slideshow like 10 minutes?
All right. So uh similarly um this is a continued discussion that I was not a part of but we'll try and catch you up to speed on where we are with ADUs. So um just again some really broad
um just what is an ADU. It is just a smaller additional accessory housing unit located on the same lot as a as a primary residence or principal dwelling. Um, and in order for it to be an ADU, it must be fully self-contained. So, there
must be a kitchen, a sleeping area, and a bathroom. Um, and then the state of Massachusetts provides a nice little graphic of of different types of ADUs. So, you can have a detached ADU, which was completely separate from the house. Think like a a little backyard cabin.
Uh, you can have an attached ADU, which is just an extension of of your house, similar to what Joseph Pearl was doing today. um but not not entirely an ADU but something along those lines. Um you can
do an interior upper level unit, so an attic unit um if your primary dwelling can handle that. You can do an interior lower level unit or just a basement unit. Um above garage units are are
common as well in in more suburban areas typically. And then uh garage conversions can be done pretty frequently as well. Go for it. Converting an attic. So yeah, adding dormers to an attic space that
doesn't have um the you know standing height to be considered um habitable space and making modifications to make that happen. Yeah, definitely. and in in Chelsea. I mean, I think the ones that you're going to see mostly are going to
be attic units, basement units are the most common according to Mike for what he's gotten, but um we've also seen some interest in an above garage unit. Um and then some detached units on on lots that they would make sense for.
But then if you wanted to continue um specifically within the context of Massachusetts, um what is currently allowed by Wright in any single family zoning district is a protected use ADU. Um, and this
narrows the definition of an ADU a little bit, um, and defines it as an accessory dwelling unit that is not larger than 900 square ft or half the gross floor area of the primary residence, whichever is smaller. And it
includes the condition that the ADU has a separate entrance way either from the outside or hallway within the building. Um, as I mentioned, protected use ADUs are a permitted use by right in every single family zoning district. Um, in
Chelsea, that would mean that's the R1 district, the R2 district, the R3 district, the um waterfront district, and the waterfront upland district. And then if you want to move on to the next slide, that is the area of the city um
that ADUs are now allowed by right um as a protected use. So, um, moving on, I I thought it'd be helpful to try and provide some context from from neighboring and similar communities that that have had ADUs as a
part of their ordinances previously. So, a lot of these images come from the city of Boston and its surrounding suburbs, um, like Somerville and Cambridge. Um, and one of the most common, uh, ADU types that we'll see in Chelsea is
probably a basement ADU. Um, and from the outside, this building, it seemingly looks like any other building, but that bottom level has been transformed to an ADU. Um, and you can sort of see a mock floor plan for it. Um, moving to the
next slide. Um, another common type of ADU that would be seen in Chelsea would be a split unit ADU. So, that's just taking one floor and then dividing what was one unit into two units. Um, again looking from the outside, you would have no idea that there's an ADU inside. Um,
but you can see an example floor plan that's provided there as well. Um, moving to the next slide, um, you you can see something like garage conversion. Um, or just adding an addition to a garage. Um there are several garages in
Chelsea that that could be um converted or added to to allow for an ADU. Um someone came into our office recently looking to to do this. Um but he'll probably run into some troubles, but it
is still an option for for many residents as well. Um moving on. Uh here there's an example of an attached ADU which from the outside you it looks like you wouldn't even know that there's a separate unit within that
building. So if you want to hit the next button right there is this the separate entrance way um to the ADU that is in this building and it doesn't change the the the landscape of the house or the character of the house that much. It just provides an additional living space
for for another person or family. Um, so then moving back to protected use ADUs and the current zoning ordinance that Massachusetts has enforced or has passed into law. So what can actually be
enforced? What can we change in our zoning ordinance? And essentially it's any regulation that is equivalent to or less restrictive than the current regulations for the primary residence or an accessory structure whichever one is
more permissive. So um for example any dimensions that are put upon an accessory structure or the single family or or their primary residence also is put onto the accessory dwelling unit. So,
for example, um the maximum height of an ADU is allowed to be the same maximum height as whatever the primary residenc is in that in in that uh in that zoning district. So, in our our one district that's 35 ft, I don't think anyone's
going to be coming in with an ADU that's 35 feet tall, but as a as a sort of extreme example, we can't enforce anything below 35 feet. Um, in addition to th that sort of regulations, we're we're also allowed to
impose short-term rental regulation restrictions upon ADUs. So, if we're looking for ADUs to be primarily for residents, um, we can not allow short-term um, rental restrictions.
Um, for what cannot be enforced, the list is a little bit longer. The state obviously wants ADUs, so Um what cannot be enforced is any owner occupancy restrict requirements or other occupancy requirements. So you cannot
enforce that the owner be living in the primary residence. Um nor can you um enforce any familial relations, any income restrictions, any age restrictions on the person who is living in the ADU. Um, additionally, we cannot
enforce any parking requirements for an ADU. Um, the the statute says that you're allowed to have up to one parking spot for any for any ADU that is outside of a 0.5 mile radius of a bus stop or
transit station, but essentially all of Chelsea is within within that parameter. Um, additionally, um, ADUs do not count towards the unit caps or density of the total area and we
cannot impose any other unreasonable restriction that completely nullifies the use of land within the single family zones for ADUs that imposes financial hardships for the development or interferes with the development without
the city's legitimate interest. So that's sort of the more broad vague regulation that the that the state has. Can you go back to the third one about density? Yeah. Um so that's just like in our R3 district. Um what is it? Four.
You can't have up to 12. Uh three the minimum density is 12 units per acre and a maximum is 35. Yeah. Uh so they would not count toward that 12 or 35. I see. Um what about F? Is there any So is
there adding that? Um I mean the ADUs do count towards floor area of of of the total structure. So okay, if if you were to add an addition to your house and sets you over the F requirement, then
you would be required to get a to get variance relief for for an F for F. Um, considering a ton of Chelsea's in a flood plane, any restrictions regarding constructing AD views in a flood plane?
Uh, yeah, we can we we can enforce like no B I mean basement aren't currently allowed in in a flood plane. So, if if that's your concern there, they're quite common in the flood plane. Yeah. But I have a basement in a flood plane. Okay. Well, yes, we can enforce no ADUs in the
basement of of a flood plane. that that is another thing that we can't enforce. Does the statute describe how square footage is tallied? Like is it to the outside face, the inside face, you know,
um space under a certain or over a certain height like is that up to the community? Yes, it it does to an extent. It's essentially just all livable area. Um but also for the primary residents it includes like basements and attic spaces
and stairways which like our current definition for gross gross floor area does not include. Um, so if you're like we were just dealing with this, the person who wanted to build an an above garage unit, his house is only 1300
square feet, but we don't know exactly how much the state would consider gross floor area because his total building area is closer to 2500 square feet, but we don't know if that's including basements or attics or um other things
that might Yeah. So, who's policing that? like who you know how do you decide on what the proper square footage is? Do you the state the state lays out the definition who would be enforcing that would probably be the ISD. Um
they're the ones who have that information. Um, we don't have the information for every building, but they would. Can we Can we get that information so we can make I mean, if we're we're
ISD has has that information. So, they if if something if they were to be building an ADU that is too large, they would give them a denial letter. Um, and they have access to both the definitions that the state provides for gross floor area and um the gross floor area of
people's homes. Um, moving on, there's some more regulations surrounding protected use ADUs. Um, if the proposed protected use ADUs does not alter the exterior of the structure, so if they're just looking to convert a basement or an attic, um, even
if the structure is non-conforming, it is still allowed by right um, as a as a by right use. Um, additionally, any addition to um any addition to the existing structure is
subject to dimensional regulations. So, like you mentioned, um, F requirements, uh, if they built the addition and that set them over and needed F relief, then they would still be subject to that. Um,
detached ADUs are also subject to dimensional regulations, but they are also subject to dimensional regulations for an accessory structure. So, the one difference would be um they're allowed within 5 ft of a rear yard rear yard lot
line while um most uh single family residences are are allowed within 20 feet. So, that that's one change that the state has required as well. Yeah, but yeah, the these are
the Yeah. Um, again, I don't think any any AD would go 35 ft because it also needs to be under the 900 square foot regulation, but yeah, I don't Yeah, we'll move on. Um,
question for you though in that regard. So we we can't do height restriction. But if like just hypothetically if we a person by right can build their ADU it's only five foot from the lot lines of their neighbor and they decided they
wanted to do something tall but not not very wide square footage and they were compliant with the 900 square feet but now they're blocking the neighbors views on either side. What happens in those scenarios? Are they automatically granted it and the neighbor has to deal with it and that's
the end of that or or are there do we have do do we as a board do we as a city have have guidelines that we wish to place on in terms of that yeah for elderly
people that's why they're fighting it so badly I mean, it kind of seems to me that if that if that scenario came to pass, they would need more than one variance to actually make that structure happen. So
they may they may meet the ADU ordinance around the 5 foot setback and the 35 foot maximum height but you know in order to make a self-contained unit there I would have to imagine the design challenges would be significant enough where they would be in here anyways
asking for relief on things that we can enforce. Yeah that they I think that Oh sorry yeah I I'm pretty sure that the practical ramifications are going to be, as it
says here, interior. I don't think there's going to be people constructing turrets up in their backyard. Yeah. You mentioned that you you can't build one of these in a flood plane. Uh but the flood plane is changing all the
time. So, are you grandfathered in under the current adoption? Just just basement ADUs. You can put like an attic idio in the flood plane that that you can't restrict that, right? But I can see that coming up a lot. Um, have the new has
the new flood plane been adopted? Are we still working off the 2016? We adopted that last year, right? The new the states Yeah. FEMA FEMA flood maps came out, new ones, and we adopted the uh the new zoning. I see. Okay.
Well, anyway, I can see that being something that comes up. Um, and just to confirm, all proposals for interior AUD still need to get
approved by inspectional services. Yes. Yeah. Every ADU needs to be building code and fire code. Um, okay. Approved. So, these aren't like just getting built without approval. um ISD is looking at
every single one of them and then if they're allowed mo like as most interior mo most interior ADUs are going to be allowed by right. So zoning will not see them um because they're not changing any dimensional regulations of the existing footprint and it is a use that is now by
right allowed within single family zoning districts. So that is just up to ISD to make sure that they are compliant with building code. Um, is there any process that we could add to allow a
butters to have any say in some of these matters? I mean, you brought up a view that might get blocked. I mean, uh, it seems like we should allow the butters to be part of this conversation. You know what the city can do is we can do
we can uh implement reasonable design guidelines. For example, if it's located within 5T, you may want to restrict the number of windows that are on the a butter side so you're not overlooking the property. But they have to be reasonable and they have to be specific.
They can't be general. Can't say, "Oh, they have to meet the character of the neighborhood." Not specific enough. Yeah. Um and I'll And I'll throw out a specific
suggestion. A ton of our ADU ads are probably are are probably going to be uh constructed under grade and air pollution is also greatest under grade. So we should
probably ensure all stoves are vented outside so that they can get some air circulation and that there should be uh mitigation for radon in every basement unit because I'm afraid of those
potential that that that should be within their um realm of inspections. Yeah. Um okay just uh moving on just quickly
go through this slide. So just EOHLC which is mass housing in livable communities estimates the ADUs will add 8,000 to 10,000 new units over the next 5 years. I feel like that's a little ambitious especially given the current
market on on just how much it costs to build these things. Um, but currently in in Chelsea, as will mentioned, about a dozen people have already gone to ISD seeking denial letters or approvals for for their ADU development. Um, and as
I've as we've talked about, it's primarily going to be interior ADUs with the exception of of some um additions, garage conversions in in some of the areas of Chelsea that that have more space on their lots.
So then briefly just like why is the state requiring this and why do we as a department sort of promote ADUs as as a as an as a good way to um as a good policy option. Um firstly they help
increase the supply of housing. So, not only does it essentially upzone all of our single family zones by by one unit, it also provides the opportunity for smaller units to get built, which are generally more affordable. Um, they also
provide opportunity for homeowners to have an additional revenue stream from their property. Um, they also are a low impact form of infill development. So, as a city like Chelsea, which is already pretty much developed, ADUs are an easy
way or are a way to help um add some more gentle density without without drastically changing the character of the community. And then also some something that's a little bit more specific with Chelsea is that it could it could potentially help
formalize some informal living spaces that that currently exist. um if people are currently living in in basement, the property owner can um register that as an ADU now as it's now an allowed use and then that is now subject to um
building inspections and hopefully improve some living conditions as there as well. Regards to new ADU units, um I don't know if you'll have the answer, but it's it's are they now um just taxable as
extra square footage on a Are they are they taxable as a se separate unit? How does that work for Does anyone know the answer to that? Just out of curiosity with with new additions. The question was asking how would an ADU be
taxed? Would it be taxed? John, do you know? I I don't know. Yeah. I don't know what we would have. We'll have to ask the assessors. I'm assuming it would be counted as extra living space. An extra unit would therefore increase the value of the house. Yeah.
Yep. Yeah. Um well, you have a meeting with assessors on Thursday, so we should be able to talk about that then. Um and then yeah, I'll quickly go go through this slide because we we've touched on it a a little bit already, but um currently a lot of our dimensional
regulations would would like restrict um a lot of byite construction of detached ADUs or an addition or additions to single family structures. Um, so we we see if we want to support ADUs that that
we would need to adopt a new zoning ordinance that would make it a little bit more reasonable for um property owners to to develop an ADU if they see that as a as a tool um to help them but
also help the city. Um but then also um an up-to-date zoning ordinance gives Chelsea a little bit more control over our own parameters sending ADUs and we're not just subject to the state's desires.
So moving on to the next slide. Um here are just some some ideas that we have as a department for um potential regulations for ADU ordinances. So, if we're looking to um promote ADU development, we can ease
open space requirements for lots to in to include an ADU um like an a detached ADU or um an an attached ADU. Uh just to make it easier for them to meet the minimum open space requirement, we would
just remove the 10 by 10 foot uh restriction and make it a 5x5 foot restriction. So, it allows for more of the total lot to be counted as open space within our zoning requirements. Um, we also could include the option to
rent ADUs at below market rate for tax incentives. This is something that we wanted to discuss with assessors, but currently the city of Salem mandates that all ADUs are rented at 70% of market rate value. Um, but then in exchange, the additional square footage
or the additional unit, however they're taxed, it isn't assessed on their property taxes. So, property owners still pay just what they would normally pay for their primary residence. Um, that that's a potential regulation that we would need to do a little bit more
research into, but it's something that we could look into if it's what something that you guys saw as valuable. And then also another thing that we briefly touched on is we can um design clear and measurable design guidelines
uh within historic districts and throughout the city if if there are measurable design guidelines meaning like one window on on the side abuing uh a lot or something along those lines. But I would suggest that we add
something about permeability, you know, percentage of permeable surface on the top one. Okay. Yeah. Um I mean again all open space requirements
would stay the same but yeah definitely definitely that could become a problem if it's you know less permeable surface by adding you know more more roof.
So currently we have um a 20 ft set back from each property line. Is that correct or is it 10 right now? uh depends on the district and most residential districts that's quarter of the building height. Okay. That's for the side. Yeah. When Adam said 10 by 10, for something to be
considered open space, it needs to be 10 at least 10 feet by 10 ft. So if someone has like a small little piece of grass that's like 3 by six or whatever, we don't count that as part of meeting the open space requirements. So what Adam was saying was if someone wanted to
build a detached ADU or an addition on their house to sort of ease our current open space requirements, we were suggesting that or or thinking about rather possibly reducing the 10x10 requirement for open space to 5x5. So
more of the lot could be counted as open space and we couldn't be seen as unreasonably restricting the development of an ADU. We probably don't have this situation in too many places, but do roof gardens count as open space,
as green space? Yes, they can. Gardens do. Yeah. But they're also expensive to construct. So that would count as open space and green space, but not permeable surface.
Correct. And also, I mean, this department and the housing community development department um did submit a grant application to kind of I think do what you're kind of suggesting, Sarah, like look into more sustainable
or green zoning measures. Um no guarantee that we get that funding or anything, but just wanted to say that we did submit a grant um application to help develop some of these things, which I think would include permeability um or you know, other things like that. how to
address urban heat island uh I would just I mean if if we're currently of a 10 by 10 I I would just say that we we should try to maybe consider doing that on a um have some sort of have have some sort of guideline
that suggests that based on the existing lot size then then there can be easement in terms of the 10x10 and normal requirement as opposed to it just being five feet. Because if it's a if it's a lot that's very overbuilt and
they want to add an ADU and then there's basically almost no green space at all on it, it might make more sense to have something that has a little flexibility built into that to to keep as much green space but still allow ADUs to be
built is my suggestion on that one. That makes sense. any other like suggestions or questions because again we're still in this like you know development phase I guess or design phase I don't know what what you want to call it we're still thinking
through some of these ideas and as Adam said we are meeting with assessors to kind of possibly talk about what Salem does and if that's feasible or even wanted so we we have right now only basically the historic district has any kind of design guidelines at
as an option, but for an ADU, can can we I mean, is it possible to have the ADU um have at least some sort of um design compliance with the existing building in terms of how it how it looks or or no,
John, is that an unreasonable restriction or is that reasonable? it if it can be clearly and objectively and measurable. If it's measurable essentially, you you can't just say make it look like your
house. Um but you can say my house has X gable, the ADU should have X gable. Um then that would be a measurable um guideline that you would be allowed to impose.
Yeah. And only a portion of our historic districts um it's like it's a part of the downtown residential historic district and then the uh the Naval Hospital uh Naval Hospital they allow single family, right? Yeah. Yeah. So, and then that
area like Admirals Hill essentially are the two historic districts where we could put objective measurable design standards um on ADUs. Are are you going to have diagrams? Like I Somervilles is great. They've really
did a nice job trying to make it easy to follow, but you know, everything's a diagram. So, is that what we're thinking? Like when we eventually do we eventually do a a zoning rewrite. Yeah. Something
to make it a little bit clearer. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, if there's no other comments or questions, um I I think this is all we have for this point. Um if anything pops up later, please feel free to like email me um or John and or Adam.
So, yeah. Do I hear a motion? I'll make a motion to end the meeting. Second it. All in favor? Hi. Second.