Good evening. This is the zoning board of appeals. Um we are here. Um let me I'm going to start by taking our roll call. Um starting right there. Name please. Put your put your put >> here. Robert
Arthur Arsenal. Joe Mahoney. >> Marilyn Vega Torres. >> And I'm Janice Tatara. Um, we've taken that part care of business that little piece. Now, I also have people had the opportunity to re re review the minutes from the previous meeting. >> Yes.
>> Do I have a motion on that? >> I make a motion to accept the minutes of the previous meeting. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> We're going to take things a little bit out of order today because we have a relatively brief agenda. So, we're going
to move immediately to 20267 165 Central Avenue. Michael Allercon. I told you we'd get you started early. Come on. Please get up here. Make sure that you're um when you speak that the button the microphone is on and that you speak into the microphone.
The button. Yeah, there you go. Thank you very much. That's perfect. Um let's get everybody settled. >> So for this for this I'm going to repeat this is we have already heard this case. No, we have not heard we have heard this case but this case has not gone to the
planning board but we have um the planning board did not meet last month. um we are we have the option we always take our recommendations from the planning board but we act independently and in this case we are at a position where we are about I personally I think it's a relatively simple case and at the
same time it is um about to hit our statutory deadline and we are joined by >> Joan >> I know I was going to say Joan Cromwell and um I was going to she so she's been we've joined by Joan Cromwell Joan we're taking things out of order we're going
to 165 Central venue. >> Okay. >> Because this is the only case we're hearing tonight. So, so therefore, we're taking a little we're being a little un not in the usual way that we do it in that we have this has not gone to the planning board. It will not go to the planning board, but I think um we we
have heard this case. Remind us, introduce yourself and remind us very quickly again what it is you're looking for. >> Okay. Good evening everyone. Uh my name is Michael Alcon and I am the owner for the property at 165 Central A, Chelsea.
Um so we have a uh we were trying to do a project at the entrance of the house in the front of the house of my property. [snorts] Uh currently there is an there is a main entrance that is not being used and is not usable as it is in the current in the current condition. Um
it's know the stairs are old. It's unsafe to the way to get in and out is really not >> you can't use that door. that door. >> Yeah, we can't use it, you know, and really we only have the rear entrance as as in and out only. And uh >> in case of an emergency, that's it, you
know. So, we're really trying to uh >> So, in summer, you want to build a landing and new steps and that's >> landing, new steps, and you know, make it good. Yep. So, we able to finally use it. >> Okay. >> Pretty much. >> Um is there I'm going to before I open this to the public, is there anyone who has any questions about this?
>> Has there been any changes since last month? Have you made any changes to the plans or anything like that? >> No, nothing has been touched. No. >> Okay. Okay. >> Sorry. I didn't get a chance to get a chance to uh >> Please introduce yourself. >> Oh, sorry. I'm uh Caesar Alon uh helper
with Michael Carpenter as well. >> Um his brother and we didn't get a chance to like uh do drawings or um send some in, but I mean I took a picture of a house and pretty much to show an idea. Well, I that's Well, we can't that would
need to be in the record and you can't do it if it's not on the phone. So, Okay. Okay. So, but we've seen we've seen what you're proposing in what you talked about talked about building the steps because they're not usable. Right. >> Right. Right. I mean, we're just trying to build a landing and uh stairs to the side pretty much, you know, just change
the the layout as it is right now. >> And that's what you told us last time here, right? Correct. Yep. >> Um any questions, other questions before I open to the public? Is there anybody here who wishes to speak on this since there's nobody in the audience? I assume that's not the answer to that would be no. Um I'm going to close the public
particip Oh, no. I'm not going to do that. Well, actually I am going to because there's nobody here close the public participation portion of this, but we need to go through the variance and special permit criteria. We need a variance for the front yard setback and we need a variance for the extension of
a non-conforming use um because it it goes deeper into the front yard. proposed structure extends deeper into the front yard setback and for special permit it's to construct a landing um yeah it's just another change to a non-conforming structure.
So let's go through the variance. So the answer so we're going to ask you these questions and you have to at this point and though things may change this we have to answer yes you have to we have to agree that you have met each of these conditions in order for us to approve
it. So I'm going to read read each one to you. Um if you're not if it's not clear, let me know because I talk really fast. >> The variance is sought because of soil conditions, shape or topography of such land or structure and especially affecting such land or structure but not
affecting generally the zoning district in which it's located. So you need you know the the right now the front yard you're asking for front yard setback pretty much and um and it basically it's all about front yard setback. So um is
the variance is thought because of that? I mean because of the size of the building. Why do you need is is why do you need this? Well, all right. I'm not being very clear. The variance is thought because of the soil conditions or the structure. You can't build a stairway at all
because you're going to violate the variance no matter what. It's any any way you built it's going to be in the in the setback. >> So you wouldn't be able to have any steps or entry there at all. >> Right. Exactly. Yeah. The the 1050 according to the codes here, we wouldn't be >> Yeah. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. Do we all agree? Yes. Yeah. Okay. Sorry, that was me being not very good. >> A literal enforcement of the structure will be a substantial hardship. You won't be able to use your front door. >> Yes. Hardship. Yep.
>> True. >> Emergency. Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> It's been a hardship for last three years. So, >> it's going to continue to be one. >> Yes. Um you can you can um grant this relief without any detriment to the public good. It's not hurting anybody. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Desira they're not all this easy but this one's a relatively straightforward one guys. So I just want to you know desirable relief may be granted without um change dergating from the intent or purpose of this chapter. The chapter is for housing. This is not getting in the
way of housing. This is a good thing. >> Great. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. special permit. So, this is again to reconstruct, extend, alter, or change a non-conforming structure. So, you already have a structure that's not
conforming to the current zoning, but you're now ch further changing that by building this step, this the stairs. That's what that means. So, you already have a structure that doesn't conform, and now you're just adding to that nonconformity by building the stairs. And um that's why you need the special permit.
>> Correct. Um, so let's just talk about these for a couple minutes, guys. Um, the social, economic, or community needs that are served by this purpose. It's I mean, it's not He can't He's got to get in his front door. >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. >> Uh, traffic flow and safety. There's no
there's no traffic implications at all. >> Um, adequacy of utilities and other public services. >> Again, not issue. Not applicable. >> Yeah. Neighborhood character and social structure >> completely in keeping. Yeah. >> Yes. >> It'll it'll improve the appearance.
>> It improves. Yes. Exactly. No. Impacts on the natural environment including drainage. >> No. >> Doesn't appear to be any. >> Um pan potential fiscal impact including impacts on city services. None. >> None. >> Non-existent. >> Um and for you that's it.
>> So that being said, um does the does the board have any Oh, and I guess I shame on me. This is Will Chetchio first. meeting as the board lead and I have not acknowledged that and we are equally
joined by Adam Roy who's this is his first meeting. So both of them thank you very much and of course the everpresent Hector Bella. [laughter] >> So I apologize for not starting with that. Um so used to you guys that's um so does the does the board have any does
the department have any issues with this? Uh no, the department uh supports the the approval of the special permit and variance. Uh it's a pretty straightforward project standard conditions as applicable. Um but they really are trying to bring their front
steps up to code and make them as safe egress for people to utilize. So >> So do we have a motion to approve with standard conditions as applicable? Maryland. >> I make a motion to approve case number 2026-07165
Central Avenue with the standard any that may be applicable. >> Yes. >> Second, Joe. All in favor? >> I. >> You're good. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much. >> Just good luck. >> For your information, uh it'll take us a few days, about a week or so to write up
the decision. We will file that decision with the city clerk and we'll also let you know when we file it. And then the 20-day appeal period will start and then once that 20-day appeal period is over, you can then get your decision and start meeting the standard conditions that are
placed upon this decision. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> All right. Yeah. Perfect. Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much everyone. Appreciate it. >> Oh shoot. I didn't I had to press the button wrong. Sorry. >> Okay. the other um other four cases that
were we're going to ask to move three cases because they haven't been to the planning board and they are I I one we don't have timing issues with them and I think they're they're a little more complex than this was. So um I would I'm going to take individual motion but I'm going to ask that we continue to the
next meeting. So may I have a motion to move 2026-1320 River Ravier Beach Parkway to the next meeting which is August 11th. >> Make a motion. >> Joe second. taken. >> You go. All in favor? >> I >> I >> Same conditions apply to 2026-083737R
Central A. Also recommendation to move this to the next meeting. >> I make a motion. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I same issue 20269 one Lafayette a Nicole Dunn condition request to move this to the next meeting.
>> Make a motion. >> Joe, you go. All in favor? I And that is it. So, >> and ju just to clarify for the record, the next meeting is August 11th, 2026. I don't know if you said you did. >> My fault.
>> Next meeting is August 11th. Um, I only said it on the first one, though. Um, so we also have just a couple of minutes. We're not be able to get out of here that quickly because we have a couple brief presentation will be made by Will and Adam on some ongoing planning
initiatives. Yeah, just wanted to provide an update uh on some ongoing planning initiatives. I'll pass it off to Adam for the uh first part. >> Yeah. Um Will and I wanted to take advantage of the shorter meeting to uh try and implement some of our goals for
the department going forward and uh some of our goals for the board going forward. So, one of our key goals is to uh make sure the board is informed on what the city is doing and what the department is doing um with ongoing zoning zoning initiatives and planning initiatives so that you guys know what
you're voting on, what the goals are that you're voting on um and how best to make your decisions going forward. Um so, with that said, um we can go over some of the recently adopted zoning amendments. Uh this past spring, uh city
council adopted four new zoning amendments. Um first was the accessory dwelling units. Uh the second one that they passed was the West Chelsea mixeduse overlay district. They also passed a 40R district, the Fitzpatrick Prattville Smart Growth Overlay
District. And they also made a zoning amendment to the our inclusionary housing ordinance. >> Are you going to go through each of those so I can ask what West Chel what West Chelsea means? Yeah, we're I'm going to go through each one of these in a little bit more detail um on the next
slide. Yeah. Um so the first one that was passed uh accessory dwelling units was adopted in April of this year and you guys have already had some experience with that with um the Springville case and with the Lafayette case now before you. Um and it essentially allows ADUs in all single
family zoning residential districts. Um, and what we did with this o ordinance is that the state provided us minimum guidelines and we took those guidelines and then adopted them to meet the Chelsea context. Um, and it was >> the state requires us to do it, but we
get to set our own >> requirements because it's not this is not something Chelsea's elected to do. This is something the state has passed a >> Yes. The state made it legal. um we didn't have to adopt our own ordinance, but the department decided that we
should to try and make it a little bit easier for for ADUs to pass um in the in Chelsea and plus some of the minimum requirements that the state made wouldn't allow ADUs as like easily as they would have wanted within the Chelsea context. So, we made a few
tweaks um to try and allow ADUs to be um easier and more like more by right throughout the city. Next slide. Um, >> back to that one a minute. So, it's interesting. So, I've seen the o the
detach unit, the attach unit. So, they could actually build a floor. >> They could build >> if it's within like the the height requirement. >> So, they could they could add a floor that's considered an ADU. >> Yeah. So, as long as it meets the requirements for an ADU, which is just
you have a separate means of entrance and then you meet building code for >> Okay. So, you would still need a separate means of entrance. >> Yeah. That could be that could be through a shared hallway. So, >> right. >> You could basically take the attic and convert it. Yeah. Exactly. You have to
make sure that there's a proper egress out. >> Exactly. Yep. Same thing with basement um in all districts that are in like a flood plane district. Um >> Yeah. And just to add on to that, I think talking with the um director of
inspectional services, Mike McAteer, I think there's been a dozen or so uh ADUs that have been permitted that you know are by don't even need any sort of zoning relief. Uh so they are spurring up in the city. >> Okay. >> Interesting.
>> Yeah, that's helpful context. Thank you, Will. Um moving on to our West Chelsea mixeduse overlay district. This was one of our larger planning initiatives that was really um spurred by a lot of planning efforts that we've done in the the West Chelsea area over the recent
years, but also spurred by our comprehensive planning effort. Um for West Chelsea, what that means is really just the area around the the commuter rail station. So, Market Basket where those uh new Vero apartments are um that
that area over there down to like the Spring Air Mattress site and the uh MITC building um over there. Yeah, it's a >> pretty large area. It's a it's a very large area that um was highlighted in our MA in our uh comprehensive planning
effort as an area for growth and transformation especially given um its transit accessibility in that area and its lack of residential housing currently. Um so what we wanted to do in this district is allow for a lot of largecale mixeduse transitoriented
development. Um, and with that, we wanted to emphasize building form, um, open space, walkability, and really try and create this area as a a new place to go to in Chelsea. So allowing these sorts of developments that uh would be
attractive to bring in Chelsea residents, having that green space and open space that brings people to the area and sort of creates a corridor along Everett Avenue from the transit station to Broadway that is more walkable and more pedestrian friendly.
>> So essentially you're talking like a location like Floramos. Yeah, Floramos is is a site that could be redeveloped and provide a lot of housing and and sort of mixeduse development, maybe an active storefront. That's something that we're really trying to incentivize in
this district is is re-engage this this area of Chelsea that's underutilized and allow it for mixeduse development that allows for a lot of residential but also allows for that active ground floor that brings people to the area.
Um, this was adopted in June by the city council. So, it is currently um an overlay district for this area. Next slide. >> Yeah. Also, just some context to um the
base zoning in these areas was essentially all industrial or business districts. So, definitely no or or shopping center. So, no housing allowed whatsoever. And I think as Adam said, there currently is no housing really there. Uh and it's a perfect kind of
place to sort of funnel new housing, new growth in the city. So yeah, the next uh zoning amendment that was passed by city council in June was the Fitzpatrick Prattville Smart Growth Overlay District. Um and this is very
similar to the overlay district that was adopted um to create the duo apartments. So it was through the same state statewide initiative called 40R or smart growth zoning which um which really incentivizes mixed income developments.
So, we've utilized this to take advantage of previous public housing authority sites like the uh Inis Apartments and we transformed those into Duo. This zoning, this Fitzpatraic smart smart growth zoning district um is
essentially running the same playbook over by the Woodies and Brookies in the uh in the Prattville neighborhood. So, it's looking to redevelop that site and allow for new mixed income housing uh new mixed income housing on the the
housing authority site up there. Um and uh yeah, in June the city council recently adopted it. Um and we're looking to take advantage of the 40R program and um redevelop some of those uh public housing sites and um make it
just a better place for those people to live. And sorry I keep adding. Oh [laughter] no. Yeah. Uh the if anyone has were present at those like public hearings either at the planning board or city council, you heard Paul Noiki, the director of the Chelsea Housing
Authority, talk about how uh those buildings those those public housing units were built in 1949 and 1951 and essentially haven't had any significant updates since. So they're like in massive need of of updating, redevelopment, etc. So, just wanted to
add that context. >> No, thank you. That's helpful. Um, and then for one of the more controversial um zoning amendments that was passed in this in this past spring was the changes to our inclusionary housing ordinance.
Ultimately, this was spurred by um a recognition of our city manager and city council for a need for new growth throughout the city. Um and also our data announce or data showing that the inclusionary housing policy isn't
achieving its main goal of providing a substantial number of affordable units across the city. Um in the decade that it's been active, only 49 units had ever received a building. only 49 affordable units had ever received building permits
um to be constructed. Um and we after conversations through with developers and seeing how much housing was being built in peer communities realized that the inclusion our inclusionary housing um ordinance was also dampening housing dampening housing production in the city
of Chelsea. So, not only was it not producing as many affordable units as we'd like, but it was also dampening just general housing production across the city. So, um, the city managers kind of spurred this initiative to update our
inclusionary housing policy to meet the market conditions and just generally support housing production and try and better balance um, producing more affordable units while also allowing for more housing um, to be produced and allowing for that new growth revenue to
help spur some other city initiatives that really um, can produce more affordable units like funding the affordable housing trust fund. um and supporting more um affordable like 100% affordable housing developments across
the city as well. Um the specifics of this so in relation to what you guys will be permitting it reduces the requirement from 15% of all units to a tiered approach of roughly 10%. So from uh similar to our old or ordinance, any
project that comes in with 0 to nine units between 0 and nine units does not trigger this requirement at all. Um but for all projects with 10 or more units, they are subject to the inclusionary housing ordinance. But for projects with like 10 to 14 units, you're only
required one. 15 to 24 is required two, and so on until you get up to 50 units where um 10% of units are required. Um for the AMI requirement, it reduces the
AMI requirement um but provides it as an option for larger projects. So it still requires 80% units and 50% um AMI units at roughly even proportions um but then just eliminates the 30% AMI requirement
for all projects as that um frequently through our research we found that it doesn't even cover the cost of of maintenance for a unit. So, it's really difficult for for um for private um for-profit developers to to um maintain
those units. So, just requiring 50% and 80% um eases that burden and provides greater flexibility. Um but we still do provide an option for that deeper affordability um by um
allowing like for projects with 50 or more units um instead of providing 10% of units they could provide only 5% of units at that 30% AMI level. So it tries to balance um the options a little bit more and provide for uh flexibility for
how developers want to achieve our requirements. Um, in addition to those AMI requirements, um, the inclusionary housing policy also reduces the inloo fee payment. It was $400,000, but it is
now reduced to $275,000. Um, and that money will go directly to funding the affordable housing trust fund um to provide for more affordable housing elsewhere in the city. >> Anything else to add, Will? >> Uh, no. But also, Councelor Robinson, I
see you've joined us. Um, the uh just to give you an update, we only heard one case and the rest were all continued and we're now just giving a presentation updating the board. So, >> I was I was caught up in AMI. I didn't
see a commitment. >> Great. Yeah. So, thank you, Adam, for going over the recent projects that have been passed. Uh I'll be going through some of the ongoing planning initiatives that you're that we're taking on. Um the first being our comprehensive plan. You've probably heard many different
names. I think we as staff we often refer to it as a comprehensive plan. People call it a master plan. Chelsea Palante. Uh we're kind of all talking about the same thing. Um but just to clarify that then an affordable housing overlay district. We will also be
examining our minimum parking requirements. uh a green zoning effort and then a zoning rewrite. So, first the comprehensive plan. Um I I guess how many folks are familiar with the comprehensive plan? Have we all
heard of this before? Uh >> not the details, but I >> Right. Right. So, yeah, basically we started this effort in 2024. Uh the last time that Chelsea had a master plan was a little over 50 years ago. Uh, and I think it's like the 1970 or 1975 like
Chelsea mass. >> That's 50 years. That's scary. [laughter] >> Well, and the the first sentence of that plan is Chelsea is a city like in decline. And also deeper into that plan or actually in the 19 like 50 or 55
plan, there is a sentence that says Chelsea can become the junkyard mecca of New England. So you can kind of see like what people's perspectives, what the city's perspective was back in those days. Uh we are not a city in decline anymore. >> So what's the first sentence in this one?
>> I mean actually I don't know. We haven't seen a full draft yet. We will be actually getting to that phase in in the planning process. Uh but effectively this is meant to provide a a guiding vision, a unified vision for residents, for city officials, for city staff to
all be like coalesed around and constantly be referring back to whenever we are thinking about passing new policies, thinking about projects that are coming before the boards, etc. How is it meeting this vision or advancing on this vision? How is it meeting these goals? Uh and so it's been an extensive
community engagement effort and we are wrapping up that kind of phase of the project. We've been really diving into implementation and like strategies. What are the strategies to achieve the goals and the vision that have been laid out and drawn from the uh extensive
community engagement that has happened. Uh and it is set [clears throat] to be adopted uh this fall hopefully at the October planning board meeting. Um, I believe September will be a full month of like public comment on a on the full draft.
And just to kind of go over, I think uh there's a good like graphic on the left. Uh, basically this plan is trying to find a balance between long-term prosperity as well as crisis response to stabilization that many gateway cities
sort of face. This is kind of the the c the crux the the contradiction that most gateway cities face. We are trying to build towards long-term prosperity, but we are also trying to address the immediate needs of our residents who are going through crisis currently. So, how do we do that? And some of the kind of
six themes that have come from the plan that have emerged are our families can stay. So, producing and preserving housing options for everyone. Our businesses prosper. So really think about how do we grow our regional and local economy, our strong community networks, how do we help people connect
to community support services, our safe neighborhoods, are we investing in safe streets and strong communities, our healthy neighborhoods, how do we invest in neighborhoods that are just, resilient and connected, and then our gateway to culture, diversity, and equity, how we how are we building cultural pride in a vibrant public life.
So every single strate there are strategies for each of these themes. uh and they are all trying to advance this like common vision that has been kind of brought forth from all the community engagement effort that this planning process has done. I know for us as staff
it's really exciting um because it just it gives us a guiding vision on how to move forward. We are also uh engaging in the process of creating an affordable housing overlay district. uh you know Adam had spoken about the inclusionary housing
update and also I think just from any of the projects that we see come through the boards if you talk with any resident affordable housing is always on the mind. Uh and so this effort is driven by that goal of producing more affordable units. How do we actually do it? if
inclusionary housing wasn't necessarily the tool, what are the other tools that we can implement to get the affordable housing units that our residents need and deserve? Uh, and so this effort is really trying to streamline permitting uh for these 100% affordable housing projects and really allow for greater
density citywide. And Adam is actually leading up this effort, so I don't know if you wanted to speak a little bit more into some of the specifics. Um, I know we're still in the drafting phase, so don't I don't want you to spoil anything, but Yeah. Yeah. No, we're we're still working through exactly what the what the requirements are going to
be, like what the zoning dimensions are going to be, but essentially the the thought process behind this is that um we're looking to give affordable housing developers essentially a leg up on on market rate developers in in the market
by allowing them to build more units on any given lot and then giving them by right permitting um to ensure >> like TND who does% of affordable housing. So when when a project is 100% affordable um we know that the
permitting cost and um can be expensive and can introduce a lot of delay um into projects. So if we can allow if we can eliminate that essentially for affordable housing projects that would give them more certainty when they're going into buying buying properties and
that would allow them to be more competitive on the market. Um, additionally, by allowing greater densities, um, they can put more units um, on that site, which allows them to be again more competitive on the market. It can potentially give them a leg up
when acquiring properties. Um, and again, this perceived reductions through in the inclusionary housing. >> Exactly. Exactly. Like our our our reduction in inclusionary housing wasn't because we want to see less affordable units. We want to see more affordable
units. We just recognize this as a better tool of achieving that while not dampening housing production citywide generally. >> Yeah, thank you for elaborating on that. And we also will be looking into our
minimum parking requirements. Uh so another goal here uh is thinking about how can we lower the cost of new housing and promote new and efficient land use. Um, I know we had talked about the West Chelsea overlay district. I think a big goal uh going into that effort was
thinking about, well, this is the West Chelsea area uh is our densest area in terms of transit. And so, how can we think about the other ways that people move around? And so, I I just I think we're already thinking about like parking requirements and how do we both
lower the costs for new housing, but also improve emphasize different modes of transportation. uh and and also just making a more enjoyable pedestrian experience, you know, walking around the city. Uh and so we will be reviewing minimum parking requirements. I believe at the beginning of this year there was
a community meeting. Uh we are doing a parking study with the metropolitan area planning council to kind of look at our parking lots. What's the utilization rate at different times, different days? Uh and kind of trying to see like are we are do our are are parking requirements
too high? Are we over parking, if you will, or over requiring to parking? Uh, and also just from data looking at our past projects that have been approved, we've effectively permitted a ratio of 63 spaces per unit. And I believe for the most part, our parking requirements
are one and a half spaces per unit. Um, so there will be more community meetings, more discussions on this, but just wanted to keep you all a breast that this is an effort that we will be looking into um and evaluating. >> And in doing this, are we re-examining
this requirement of when you get a special permit that waves some of your parking requirements that you don't get a sticker? I I I don't I I've always had some issues with that, but I don't know if that's part of of part of this looking at the effectiveness of of doing that. Is that part of this?
>> I mean, I think it's definitely going to be a part of the conversation. Uh I I know as staff that policy is a very tough policy to administer and keep track of um >> and enforce >> and enforce, right? And so I think it'll be a part of the discussion. I know the
main goal is really looking at our zoning requirements specifically, but that is a zoning requirement. So it it will likely be a part of the discussion and this this effort is both a partnership I mean most of these efforts are a partnership between us and our housing community development department. Um but just wanted to
emphasize that here. Then our green zoning project. The main goal here being how do we strengthen Chelsea's long-term resilience? And I would also say how do we address the uh immediate issues of like urban heat island impact. I mean, it's been so hot
recently and I actually just walked to Market Basket uh earlier today and I came back dripping in sweat uh and walking that area is probably the worst area of the city. So, in terms of urban heat islands, so um we were really reviewing our zoning uh looking to
propose new resiliency measures for new developments uh emphasizing coastal flood resilience, urban heat and storm water drainage. So, those were like the three areas that we were looking at to try and address through our zoning. Yes. question with go back to the parking. Yeah.
When you see a a parking lot so large uh as a market basket has uh is there a possibility of some type of joint venture so that more parking could be
available and then use of the Tline or what uh in uh that process and then also having parking available for people in community. >> You know, I think there is a possibility, but that requires, you
know, Market Basket being willing to like consider that potential. I don't think the city currently right now is thinking about trying to like have that conversation, but you never know through this process of evaluating our parking requirements that may come up as a recommendation or an idea. It may spur conversation. So yes, there's always
these possibilities, but it does require like um >> you know, two or three or just different parties coming together to actually have that conversation. >> And also go change going forward is different than revisiting something that's already been permitted and approved. So that makes it harder.
>> But back to the green zoning project, uh so we again we're looking at these kind of three areas, coastal flood resilience, urban heat, and storm water drainage. So, we looked at our current flood plane overlay district, which really just kind of follows the state's uh basic regulations or minimum
regulations when it comes to flood plane management. Uh, and so we looked at uh updating and improving making it stronger for uh larger projects. So, like larger projects may have to um elevate their their structures u higher
than the kind of state minimum regulations. We were looking at sort of a Chelsea climate quotient kind of model where new projects would be assessed certain uh a number of impact points. So if you're
building a project of X amount of size, you get assessed 10 points and then by planting a tree, putting a green roof and doing XYZ, you make up those points to >> carbon offsets, right? Yes. >> Yeah. The old traditional carbon offsets kind of thing. And then we also produced
a um resilient design guidelines. Uh so the the zoning amendment side of this project uh has not been brought to council yet. We are still sort of working on these tweaking these amendments and thinking these through. But the resilient design guidelines uh
which are really to help futureproof structures will be immediately put up on the website because those are done. Um, and it's a helpful tool, I think, for both boards to like look at when kind of considering can a project get more resilient, but also for like residents, property owners, developers. Uh, it'll
be accessible on the city's website. And just a a really helpful tool. Um, you know, there's kind of different case studies. If you were like a single family homeowner or if you were the owner of a mixeduse development or if you were the owner of a uh large multif family building, like what could you
what strategies could you consider putting in? what's the cost of those strategies, what's the cost of maintenance, what's its impact, etc. So, those design guidelines will be put up immediately. Um, and uh the the other kind of zoning amendment side of this project we're
still kind of working through. And then, um, a major major project is a comprehensive zoning rewrite. Uh, so when I when I first started working here, uh, John had mentioned to me that he helped write the city zoning code in
the 80s when he was like a consultant for the city and that he still looks at the zoning code and sees sentences and sections that he's written that don't make sense anymore. Uh, you know, or contradict a new piece of the zoning code that got amended or brought in. Uh
and so really coming out of the comprehensive plan, reforming our zoning is like the number one priority. Uh we have a zoning code that does not align with the city's vision. Um and is just extremely outdated and it's just as I
mentioned has been updated peace meal. So really taking a step back and looking at this entire zoning code, how can we make something that's holistic and comprehensive and actually matches the the vision that this comprehensive plan is now laying out? Uh and so we did apply for a grant to conduct a zoning
audit for a future revision. Uh and this is pro likely going to be a two to threeyear process. Uh but just a major undertaking that we will be working on. Um and again, you are the body that enforces the zoning. So we wanted to bring you in on it. And there will
likely be different points of engagement um and kind of feedback on whatever >> you can bring John back as a consultant. >> Yes, [laughter] we could. Yes, we could. You know, I was about to say I don't know if he'd be up for it, but I think he's crazy enough that he he would. [laughter] And then just kind of going forward, uh,
we we've been doing a lot of this kind of work like updating on different planning projects and initiatives with the planning board and we felt it's important that you guys should know about this too. Again, you are the body that enforces the zoning. So, keeping you a breast of all the projects we're doing, I think, is really helpful for you to understand like why do we even
have these regulations in the first place? What are their goals? um and help you kind of assess like projects before you. So, we will be striving to provide these kind of quarterly planning updates. Um we will be moving to trying to do some one-on- ones with board members before each meeting. Of course,
you can feel free to take us up on that offer or not. Uh but it's really just to help you understand the cases before you uh and just make sure that we all like know that we've looked at the plans, we know what relief is needed, etc. Um and again as we've been talking about the comprehensive plan is laying out this
new vision these goals. So really thinking about how do we implement the goals of the comprehensive plan. So that will be part of our 101 ones and something that we should be considering when cases are before us and then just kind of a part of all this really just
engaging the board more with cases and new projects that are coming from the department. Uh so that'll all be going forward. Uh, and I know myself and Adam and Hector were all really excited. So, >> and then more. Go ahead. My goodness.
>> So, Oh, yeah. >> We we saved this to the end. I don't know if folks saw, but um, >> Governor Mora Healey signed a state budget bill for fiscal year 2027. And within that bill are some changes to chapter 4A, the zoning act, uh, to help
facilitate housing production and kind of simplify some municipal processes. Um, Adam, I forget if you were taking this slide or not, but um, no. Okay. I was like, wait, did I jump in too early? Uh, but basically a a major change is a
change to variances. Um, variances have often been centered on showing like hardship that if this is enforced, uh, that there is some sort of hardship. And this is really kind of shifting to practical difficulty
standards. Uh so if this if a variance is enforced, is there a practical difficulty? Uh and then it also eliminates strict compliance with criteria. So with the case we just went through there are there were four conditions and they need to meet all four conditions. That's not necessarily
the case anymore. >> And that's the perfect case where if for some reason they couldn't meet the letter of one of those variances, it would be ridiculous to not have that relatively small project go forward, you know. >> Right. Right? So now it's a bit more
subjective rather than objective. And then it also strikes the ability to impose conditions on variances. So we actually have a project next month that only requires variances. You will not be able to impose conditions on
those variances if you so chose to approve that project. >> What's the practical reason for that? Do we know? Uh I believe it's to continue to support new housing production and
try to make it easier for projects to >> but it's kind of to shifting to a practical difficulty standard and then saying but in sometime applying that practical difficulty standard you get to put a few conditions. >> It's a little it's a little counter.
>> We have the actual language on the next slide which should make it a bit clearer. Um, and again, this is something that we sort of we came in Monday morning, we were like, "Oh, this this happened." The state will likely put out some resources on this. Uh, and we do hope to kind of move forward with
this new approach by our August meeting, but we hope to get you guys some resources and an understanding of how to even apply this. Um, but I think it really is around trying to make it easier for projects to secure their building permits. So, uh, instead of getting a bunch of conditions imposed upon them, uh, and then having to meet
those conditions, you now won't be able to like impose those conditions. >> But if they need a variance and special permit, then we can still impose. >> You can still impose conditions on special permits. Yes. Uh, but like we have a case next month that only requires variances. So, it won't go to the planning board for recommendation.
You could make a decision right at the August meeting, but you would not be able to impose conditions on that decision. And just to ask so in terms of imposing conditions um because sometimes it's subjective
right if we say hey we want a mirror and we put that special condition. So is that what you mean by eliminating that subjective input from >> the essentially like yes like we always have standard conditions some of them
are like just stating the life the life of the permit like you have 24 months to like secure this uh to secure your building permit or else the special permit that was granted to you like you know um expires. So those standard
conditions I believe we'd still be able to put because it's not really like imposing a condition. It's just sort of explaining the lifeline. Um, but this is these are the kinds of questions that like Adam and I hope to kind of figure out before the August meeting because we also have some questions around >> and I would expect you know like using
the mirror example if you wanted. We couldn't impose a condition for that but we would ask them if they would be willing to buy on their own please put a mirror in you know we could not impose that but we would have them hopefully you know if they say oh yeah we understand you could have a you need a
backup mirror there or something. So, I mean, I think it's it's it's a kind of a different negotiating tool, if you will. >> Definitely. >> I mean, because you still I mean, there are times when you want you you know, you guys do it all the time. You work with a with a proponent to refine a
little bit of what they're doing to make it in some respects either more palatable to us as a board or more palatable to the organiz. So, you you so they could come. So, that's sort of you almost have to do it in I would guess that backward way. you know they we would ask or have the board ask you could you would you be willing to put
you know but that would restrict things you know that would limit it to pretty narrow things but >> yeah because I was thinking in terms of standardizing conditions it's fair so if we have like the the request then I would think it would have to be consistent because if this is a
comprehensive part of the comprehensive plan then consistency is everything so if you ask one case before you You have to standardize that. >> But we can't we can't though. That seems like there would be no condition for that. >> Right. That's what I'm saying. So as
opposed to choosing when a mirror is most appropriate, we could make the suggestion. But in terms of adding it in as a special condition, you want to standardize the conditions as opposed to >> but but I think and I maybe I'm
misunderstanding with the variance, you couldn't you would have no standard. You would have no conditions. Yeah. At all. there were you can't standardize conditions there would be no conditions right so everything else would be it could be at their request at the proponent's request the requ willingness
to do it so you could not you know so um you know you wouldn't be able to say you know just like now when you have her list of standard conditions they wouldn't be >> but you guys would have standard >> well actually conditions >> well see it's interesting as we're discussing this I think new questions
are emerging in my mind around this because the law states the lifeline of the variant um we just often we put a condition on a decision that just emphasizes the lifeline of the permit and that they could seek like an
extension if needed. We may not be able to even do that because the law just clearly states what it states and you know we may not be able to do that. But I think about other conditions that come up like um conditioning a white roof or conditioning that the department conducts design review. we would not be
able to put those on there. Um though conditioning the department does design review is a standard condition that we often put. But for variances for special permit >> for special permits, yes, you could put it on that. But like for variances, no. >> Yeah, >> that'll be interesting.
>> I feel like since you guys can still deny variances, >> that can be your point of leverage with the petitioner. Um, and that that's something that's like that I'm thinking about like as we're discussing it is like >> if you have the leverage to deny something then you also could have the
le you should have the leverage to approve with conditions but hopefully there's some more clarity that comes out. >> But that's but then you like a very fine line of appeals at a certain point. >> Yeah, exactly. I think >> you know you could say geez we really think it'd be great if you put a mirror
here and and you know if they then put together a plan that they submit for approval and that approval has a mirror on it or a white roof on it. Then now >> that becomes part of their plan. But if what we say is we'd like you to do that even if we wanted you know they say okay
great and then they come back and say no we don't want to you know they could do that and we have no we have no >> yeah no recall >> I know which is which is why we're still we're still like trying to figure out but the language in like section 10 of 4A which like describes variances
eliminates the ability or the written ability to impose conditions. So, we're still trying to figure out what exactly that means, what boards can do. >> They can offer conditions, we can't impose them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. That's actually Yeah, that's really interesting to think about. Yeah.
Because like this is and I'll maybe zoom in a little bit. Uh this is the language. So, the perma granting authority shall grant upon appeal or upon petition with respect to particular land, you know, all the
legally language. Um, you shall grant a variance if >> Yeah. Not may, shall grant a variance >> if the strict enforcement of the ordinance results in a practical
difficulty. So, and I actually when we were talking about this, I was like, is there a definition for practical difficulty yet? And I don't I don't think there is. But so you shall grant if the strict enforcement results in a practical
difficulty and when you're making your determination, you would be weighing the benefits to the petitioner. Uh the weighing the benefits of this project to the petitioner and to the public interest, including the interest in supporting the production of housing against the detriment to the public
health, safety, and welfare of a neighborhood. So that's it. I mean, that's what we do. That's like that's almost like the special permit approach. You're weighing the positives against the negatives, if you will. Um, and in your determination, you may consider
whether the practical difficulty relates to soil conditions, shape, or topography, whether the strict enforcement would impose a financial hardship. So, now we're getting into some of the regular variance conditions. Um, >> but we're but we're applying the special permit criteria or more likely than not or, you know, three out of four or
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You don't need to meet all of these criteria that it's laying out. You may consider these, you may not. >> I like the last one. >> Yeah. Whether the practical difficulty was self-created. Yeah. >> So, >> we anticipate that the state will put
out more resources on this. Like honestly, what we've seen are a couple of sort of random law firms put out a couple of resources on this. Uh there's a very short Boston Globe article discussing some of this but more so the story behind these changes not the
actual changes and um we are part of the Massachusetts uh planning listerve and there's now been some discourse people actually like talking about it but >> which will in fact lead to amendment and we'll probably you know you'll see oh we didn't think about that when we passed this law >> right
>> haven't seen that before >> and so the mo the that's like a very significant piece of this changing the variance criteria Um and technically this law went into effect July 1st. So we are still kind of working through like what this means and again hope to
have a better sense uh and we'll have hopefully talked with all of you before the August meeting so we all know how to kind of enforce this. But there are some other changes. >> Yeah. Some of the uh other changes that they made the variance um changes being most applicable for what you guys do on
a monthly basis. Um but some other big changes that they made um with this is that they now allow residential use variances statewide. So in Chelsea we don't allow a use variance which means like if you wanted to propose a single
family home in an industrial district that would not be allowed. But now, since the state came in and said that we uh allow use variances for residential uses, uh a proposed single family home
could seek a variance for to to locate in the shopping center district, for example, um where um multif where housing is not allowed um by right, but now they can now seek a variance for that. Um, what
this also does is it eliminates special permit requirements for changes to certain non-conforming structures. So, if your structure is non-conforming due to like minimum lot size, frontage, lot coverage, or floor area ratio and your
changes are still within the setbacks that no longer require requires a special permit and that is allowed by right. Um uh additionally the changes that they made they are extending the special permit and variance timelines.
So typically you would have to start construction a year after receiving a special permit or variance. That is extended to two years now. Um so we'll have to update our standard conditions for special permits to match that. Um but then something that really helps us as like city staff is that we now can
send legal notices and abutters notices um electronically. So, this was something that was very nice for the state to include. So, while they threw a bunch of stuff at us, we now can send uh legal notices via email um instead of through certified mail, which saves us
not only time but also some some money in the process as well. So, >> I can also add as someone who does handle all that electron uh doing it electronically much better. In some cases, we have certain cases that I would have to send out 300 letters per
case. So in this it'd be really much more efficient a lot more I can focus more on doing other task versus basically having to put each and every individual mail per or per tenant basically >> and if you don't have emails for people do you have to send them by mail
>> yes the tricky part will be verifying people's email say yeah >> but yeah we we will we now have the ability uh like it's almost like moving the law into the 21st century a little bit Almost. >> Almost. Yeah. [laughter] >> It's very cost effective.
>> Yes. Very. >> It's also practical. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Um there are some other changes too, but the these are the the most important ones and the ones that um we thought were worth sharing. Once we understand more, we'll we'll go over it again. um whether we meet with you guys
one-on-one um between now and August or or we create like another presentation sort of outlining what the new process will look like for the August meeting before we hear those cases. We'll go over this again with you guys so that you >> so this is this is your um it's your department you decide how you want to
handle the one-on- ones. I think that for something like this it's almost better to hear for us all of us to hear it together because we we have different questions that we hear about and I I don't think that it's Personally, I would say it's not the best use of your time in a one-on-one conversation four times to repeat the same stuff on the
varian stuff. I think having conversations about cases, that's an individual approach, but something like this, I think we would all benefit from hearing it collectively. >> Yeah, I I think that's a good point. >> I don't know if you guys think that as well. >> I agree. Yeah, I think that's a great
point. I think in the one-on-one if again if you so choose to to take us up on that offer um we'll definitely go through the agenda uh I think we would probably touch on this but it may be worth at the August meeting before like we do the roll call we do the minutes
and then we do like a presentation on like how we should be applying this. we could think about doing something. >> When Will's talking about one-on- ones, but when Will and Adam are talking about one-on- ones, I always talked with Will, John, and Hector, and Adam when he was
there. Um, before every meeting to just sort of identify what some of the tricky things going to be, whether or not there would be a lot of people, you know, just I mean, you get a feeling for it. You we can't do that kind of stuff collectively because it violates the open meeting laws and the public meeting laws. But so
any of these one-on- ons would you know this gives you the opportunity if you have questions or concerns to raise them. So I mean so for me though they they have been very helpful and like and I think you know often I've had one-on- ones with each of you just to sort of because that's the way it has to be. So
I think so the the idea of having those particularly on cases where we we have had controversy or we're we're not quite sure. I mean there have been a couple times I've had conversations and I'm like I don't understand what they're even asking for. let's let's go through that and that's been very helpful when we get to the meeting. So So I think
that's what that's what the one-on- ones have been. So I've always I've been doing that now for years. So I think it's it's I think it's very smart to extend it. So if you can take the opportunity, particularly if in that particular month you see something controversial or something that that you
raises, you know, questions for you, that's a real good opportunity to get a better understanding and have that conversation with them. you know, there are not there's some cases that you don't need to u but there are often cases that you do. So, I mean, I I would just encourage you to take advantage of that opportunity, particularly in those
situations when it when when it looks like there might be some case that you know that raises your like what's going on here. So, >> and I think it's good for first of all, I think that often the boards need that type of guidance and that type of
checkin and I think that a lot of questions um we raise here that it's more real time and in the moment and kind of to look at the bigger picture in terms of what your department is thinking in terms of land use and zoning
and questions like that. I think that's great to have that opportunity to have those conversations and I think that a lot of the language is going to change um Janice in terms of when you speak about special and variances and the way
you ask in word. So thinking about today is July and then the next meeting is August and what that time looks in between to change the dictionary, right? Because there's a lot of words that new words are some words that we can no
longer ask or use. Um so to present prior to a meeting, I don't know how my brain is getting old. So in order of retaining all of that information I usually rely on Janice, but I think it'd be nice to have an updated dictionary in
terms of what the wording looks like, how you would ask them um would be beneficial. >> Yeah, that that's a great point of feedback because I think we are also trying to work on more resources for board members. Um again, we understand that like you're not you're not like
staff in the sense that we are staff for the city. So, we understand you're not necessarily in this field or in this world. So, I think that's a we could work on putting some sort of dictionary or something together. Uh, just to like kind of go over like what even is a special permit? Like what does that mean? Why is that there? Um, and I think
the whole point of the one ones and I think that's what you were getting at Janice is it's all about support like just supporting you guys. We we do this with the planning board members. There are times when not all of them take us up on it and that's totally fine. Uh, there are times when we meet with a board member and they haven't had a chance to look at the plans yet. Well,
that's perfect because we can talk through the plans and then when they go back to look at it, they have some more context and insight and can understand it better because I know when I first started, it took me a while to like, how do I even read this plan? Like, you know, it takes you have to build those skills. So, the 101 ones are always just
about supporting you guys. Um, and now with the comprehensive plan, it's like supporting you guys in advancing the vision and goals of the comprehensive plan. So, yeah. and questions or comments. [laughter] >> We just have
Thank you. You know, thank you. I mean, um, one, I think it's one, you know, it's wonderful that you're putting your own stamp on this board, and I really appreciate that and like that. Um, I think that's great. And, um, and again, I I've always I've always, um, taken um,
advantage of the one-on- ones and and I really like that and they have always made me feel more comfortable and so I think that's good. And, um, I am really interested to how this variance stuff plays out to be honest with you. Not not I mean I like the idea of
not having to meet sometime these ridiculous like pedantic quite frankly um responses on the other hand it's it's um it's it's giving us broadness on one hand and tying our hands in the other. So I'm kind I'm kind of interested to see how they handle that.
I also would like to add that depending uh what's more convenient for you where I know with Janice we do our calls so over the phone we also do uh can do Zoom or if you want to come in in person whatever is more convenient easier for you we want to make it accessible for you as well too.
>> Yeah we'll be reaching out to set these up and you know some sometime soon. I was actually realizing I'm like right like we can't even wait a week or two because next thing you know the August meeting is coming up. Uh but we are also curious about these variants uh and like
what that impact has. So So yeah. >> So do any other questions? >> Yeah, I have a couple of questions. Um just on a project the FBI building just got sold, right? Is the FBI still going to be there or are they leaving?
>> As as far as I know, the FBI is still there, >> right? They're gonna they're just going to rent from a new owner, right? >> Yeah. Yeah, I believe so. Um, I haven't heard anything to the contrary. Um, >> because they had they bought it. They they didn't own it to start with. They the whatchamacallit family did the
>> symbolism. I know. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um, so now with all this new zoning and changes, is the MBTA and the trains going to still keep on honking the horns or >> So John has said that that has been
something the city's been working on for I don't know how long, like a while. And I think the issue is to get the train from blowing the horn, like to stop it from blowing the horn, you need to have more safety measures implemented to
prevent cars or people crossing the tracks when that's happening. And I think it's a matter of like cost like, you know, money, funding for it. Um, we can definitely resurface that conversation and I think it actually has maybe been resurfaced somewhat recently
by either DPW or even HCD. Um, but I mean the trade will still blow its horn currently, but we can definitely start bringing that conversation back up, but I think it's more of a funding issue to get the proper like >> I don't know what those >> the gates. >> Thank you. Yes. I couldn't think of a
word. Yeah. >> Yeah. You know, if you just want to put more housing around there and then that you know that horn blows and you're like what the hell did I just pay for? >> You know, that's like like you know, you could hear it actually in re you could hear it all the way. >> Yeah, it's loud. >> You know, it's loud, right? So if you're
living right there, like I've been to Mass General and it's loud. It's like I would never want to live here, right? >> So, right. So, we talk about quality of life and all this stuff. >> Yeah. >> Um I think the one ones are great. >> Okay. >> Because so often, and I'm for sure going to take you up on that for sure.
>> All right. Great. >> Yeah. because to talk through the variances in the special permit criteria on uh on the cases would would definitely help me in in moving through the the meeting um and and feeling more confident in what I need to do. >> All right.
>> Yeah, great to hear. >> Yes, because I got all these ideas running through my head. So in terms of I agree with author because it's even worse and when we talk about environmental justice and and
development and the comprehensive plan really should consider those horn blowing because it is noise pollution and it affects >> people in the surrounding area which I live there and it depends on who the conductor is on how much that horn is
blown. >> Um so That's definitely something that La Palante of Onward or the comprehensive plan really need to consider um adjusting because for years we've been hearing it has to be like four-way signals or something has to be
fixed. If we keep saying that and just keep accepting that then right there's no progress there in terms of a comprehensive plan per se. And just in parking, I just wanted to add that I think that on some of the streets, we really need to consider parking on both
sides. And I know it's a the fire engines and things like that, but there's many cities that have like the parking on both sides. Yeah. To alleviate the issue. So on some of the wider streets just to consider that. That's might not be the meeting for that, but thought I'd throw that out. Comprehend.
>> No. Thank I I mean I think the parking requirement process is going to spur a lot of conversations because that would be something through like traffic and parking commission. Um and I'm yeah I I think it's going to unearth a lot. [laughter] So in some ways I'm excited
for it. [clears throat] >> One of the things I get concerned about no matter where I drive nowadays are the electric scooters and bikes. And unfortunately, the young lady that
worked at the state house there was killed recently by it. >> Uh, and I see them and they go up on the sidewalk and then they come down and uh I don't think there's any uh licensing
or training for those licenses. Sorry. Oh. >> Oh my gosh. >> So, I mean that that I think should be part of it because I mean you go down Broadway and it's the bike lane and the
bus lane. Okay, just stay there. But then they're going up and down. I always say unfortunately until somebody dies, they're not going to do anything. >> Yeah. I mean the uh citizen planners
training collaborative conference, the CPTC conference that we went to earlier this year. I went to like a micromobility session and I know the state is like trying to work on some regulations. I know they had like a working group put together stuff. So that's definitely on the minds of folks.
Um, and we can kind of look into that a bit more around how to make things cuz it it's a helpful way for people to get around, but we also want to ensure that not only are folks riding the scooters safe, but like that the roads are like properly, you know, created to allow for
all these different types of >> And it's not Yeah. I mean, it's it's not it's the little the like the little we what do we used to call those little, you know, >> the mopeds and stuff. I mean, but the little like >> the little things that look like long skinny, you know, whatever. I guess are
those scooters? Scooters I think of as bikes, >> but I'm talking about the things that look like um like a like a push. We used to call them electric bikes or >> No, [laughter] >> I think they're still called the electric scooters. Basically, they have
>> the ones you just stand on and you like ones you just stand on it. >> They're just called electric scooters. They're just electric scooters. Those are the ones I think are the craziest because they do all kinds of nut things with those. >> You should see Hector on the street with his. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I've >> Well, the the other thing too is you
have now [clears throat] all these delivery services. Yeah. >> And they have the pack on the back. A lot of them I think do a good job. But the other day there I saw on a scooter. It looked like a mom and her five or six
year old right in front of her. And I said to myself, "No helmet, no nothing. That kid I mean, they hit a bump, kid." >> Yeah. No. Yeah. There's definitely I know the state is thinking about regulations. I don't know how far along
they are in terms of passing anything, but I know that there is some efforts and some work done on like looking into this. Um, so we can definitely think about it in like a local context. Um, I know housing and community development, um, that department does a lot of work along with DPW on like improving, uh,
road safety. Uh, Adam was actually part of like a vision zero effort. Um, I don't know if you want to speak on that a little bit, but um, >> yeah, we I know we're getting late, [laughter] so uh, but anyways, efforts are underway and we are working on these things, but I appreciate all these ideas and I'm glad we were able to kind of
open it up. And what and one of the things I did suggest to them is that we would I think these conversations on a quarterly basis are great as long as it's not one of those days we're going to have the meeting that's going to go on for hours and hours. So we have to be conscious of when we have these kinds of things just practically.
Okay. Done. Do we have a motion to adjurnn? >> I make a motion to adjurnn. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I 7:14 p.m.