Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

If I can.

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the 08/05/2025 meeting of the Cambridge Planning Board. My name is Mary Flynn, and I am the chair. Pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2025 adopted by the Massachusetts general court and approved by the governor, the city is authorized to use remote participation at meetings of the Cambridge Planning Board. All board members, applicants, and members of the public will state their name before speaking.

All votes will be taken by roll call. Members of the public will be kept on mute until it is time for public comment. I will give instructions for public comment at that time, and you can also find instructions on the city's web page for remote planning board meetings. This meeting is being video and audio recorded. There will be a transcript of the proceedings. Please note that this meeting is not being streamed live on the city of Cambridge online meeting portal and cable television channel twenty two. I'll start by asking staff to take board member attendance and verify that all members are audible.

Thank you, Mary. Jeff Roberts, community development. H Theodore Cohen, are you present and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible, audible.

Thank you, Ted. Mary Leidecker, are you present, and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible, and audible.

Thank you, Mary. Diego Macias, are you present, and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible and audible.

Thank you, Diego. Tom Sinovich, are you present, and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible and audible.

Thank you, Tom. Ashley Tan, are you present, and is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible and audible.

Thank you, Ashley. Carolyn Zurn, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible and audible.

Thank you, Carolyn. Associate members, Dan Anderson, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Jeff, I can see and hear you.

Thank you, Dan. Joy Jackson, are you present? Is the meeting visible and audible to you?

Present, visible and audible.

Thank you, Joy. And Mary Flynn, can you confirm the meeting is visible and audible to you?

Yes. It is. Both visible and audible.

Thank you, Mary. So that that is, that makes it a full house. We have seven planning board members present and two associate members.

Excellent. Very good. Well, the first update is the first item tonight is an update from the community development department. And for that, we're gonna go right back to Jeff. And, Jeff, if you would also introduce any other staff who are here with you this evening, please.

Thank you, Mary. I'm Jeff Roberts.

I'm the director of zoning and development here at this city community development department, and I'll try

to introduce everyone. We do have a lot of people here and everyone who's all staff who's present. Just flip on your camera so that I can make sure I get everybody. On my team, we have Evan Spetrini, the senior manager for zoning and development. I believe that's it from my team for today.

Swati is on vacation, vacation, so we we're used to seeing her. We have from the community planning and design team, Brian Gregory with Urban Design. We have from the city's law department, Elliot Veloso. We have we'll be talking about the and I'm sorry, Sydney Wright also from the law department, and they'll be talking to the first public hearing. We have Peter McLaughlin, the director I'm sorry, the commissioner of inspectional services.

We'll fix his name on the on the Zoom, and also James D'Angelo from the inspectional services department. And we also have from our housing department, Cassie Arnaud, and we have Christine Yu. They work in in affordable housing development, and they're here related to the second item. I think I got everybody. Just checking.

Okay. We have I think I got everybody, but there's a lot to a lot to talk about tonight. We have a public hearing to start off with just to go over just to briefly go over tonight's piece. We'll talk about this public hearing in a second. But just to note, we have we following this, we'll have a general business item, which is a design review of an affordable housing development at 28 To 30 Wendell Street.

It'll be the first of two design review sessions at the planning board advisory sessions. And so people who are tuned in for that just hang in there through the the we'll do the first public hearing first, and then we'll get to that second. Looking at the calendar coming up, we have a planning board meeting next week. There's a public hearing as well as a a minor amendment related to the moving of or the kind of reallocation of some bicycle parking along Ames Street. This is as part of the part of the mixed use development, Kendall Square area.

We'll get more details about that next week I'm sorry, two weeks. And along with that, there will be a a design update on the Center Plaza and East West Connector Roads. This is something the planning board has been seeing periodically as the design has evolved. I think the planning board has asked for it to kind of come back as it as it develops into more detail. So there'll be two two kind of main items related to that development in Kendall Square.

That is actually, it's sort of that's what we've got for upcoming meetings. I do expect we'll have more meetings later on, probably not not till September after that August 19 meeting. So the the last update I wanted to do is a city council recap. So the last night, for for those of you that like to stay up late, you might have tuned in to the city council's summer meeting, which is the the one regular meeting that they do in between the June and the September. There were two zoning items that that came up, which I had I had talked to the board about before.

The city council adopted both of them. They adopted the Marasau and all zoning petition, which is about dimensional standards for religious uses. The the planning board sent a a report with no positive or negative recommendation. The city council adopted that with some relatively minor tweaks including this was also kind of supported by the the planning board's discussion of continuing to require the the neighbor notification process for religious uses similar to to residential uses and and to to continue to have this like, maintain the same open space requirements. So that so that was adopted, and the biomed zo realty zoning petition related to development at 320 Charles Street was also adopted with a a letter of commitment outlining a a package of public benefits associated with that.

So that for for that one, the next step we we anticipate because it it involves a planning board special permit, then the next step for that zoning will be a development proposal coming for for review, by the planning board. We haven't spoken with them yet about when that'll happen, but that'll be that'll be coming back to the board at some point in the future. There so those two were adopted. Those were were two of the pending zoning petitions, but we also still have the the petition we'll be hearing about tonight. And a new zoning petition was referred at last night's city council meeting, so we'll be hearing more about that as it that makes its way back to the planning board. I'll end my update there unless there are any questions.

Yes. Ted, go ahead.

Just to clarify, Jeff, you first started saying next week was the meeting, but I think it's in two weeks.

Yes. That's, just to to make sure that's clear. August 19 will be the next planning board meeting. So we won't have a meeting next week. The the following meeting will be two weeks from now.

Thank you. Okay. Any other questions from board members? No. Okay.

And then we will move on, to our first item on the agenda, which is a public hearing on a zoning petition by the city council to amend section 4.6 to redefine short term rental, add definitions for operator occupied short term rental, owner adjacent short term rental, and booking agent, add conditions of authorized uses to comply with the state building code, fire code, sanitary code, and all other state and local habitability requirements, add requirements to provide booking information and other documentation to the city upon request, and add enforcement mechanisms for violation of the ordinance or state regulations. We're going to begin, with city staff, presenting the petition, then we will take public comment, and then the planning board will have an opportunity to discuss the petition and decide whether or not to send a recommendation to the city council. So I'm going to turn it back to Jeff, and then he will proceed to introduce other staff who are gonna be involved tonight.

Thank you. Jeff Roberts again. And I'll just briefly say this as reiterate, this is a city council zoning petition, but it's one that was developed by the inspectional services department, in collaboration with the city's law department. So with that, I'm I'm it it's been entirely in their hands, so I'm just gonna, leave it to, to, I guess, Elliot or Peter. I'm not sure who's who's gonna or or or Sydney or whoever is gonna kick it off can can present the petition.

I guess I can briefly start. Good evening, everyone. Again, I'm Ellie Pelosi. I'm deputy city solicitor for the law department. We have a PowerPoint presentation, that we can present to the planning board relative to proposed zoning amendments to section 4.6 short term rentals, and, I can I believe, James will be, going through the PowerPoint so, we can, start from there?

I'm just gonna is the PowerPoint ready?

Jeff, who's doing that tonight? In place of Swathi.

I don't believe I have the the PowerPoint. So if if either the ISD or law department has it, you should be able to share.

I can pull it up if you just give us a second.

Okay. Thank you.

Sydney, I have it up. Can you see my screen?

We can see we can see the presentation now.

Mhmm.

Is that you, Sydney, or me?

Nope. Oh. I think that's me.

Okay. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

Maybe not, though. Yeah. I think that's me.

Okay. Go ahead. Thank you.

Okay. So if we wanna move to the next slide. So this is just, a general overview of short term rentals in the city. So the city uses Granicus host compliance. We've partnered with them through a contract to help us monitor all the short term rental activity in the city.

So as a brief snapshot, so as of July 14, there are roughly 634 or 635 short term rentals in the city, of which we only have a 175 registered short term rentals. So there's roughly 460 unregistered units. One of the difficulties that we have is that on booking websites like Airbnb or Vrbo, these platforms don't list the address until after you book it. So it's kinda difficult to find exactly where these places are. So host compliance helps identify helps identify them for us.

But even with that, they can only they've only identified about 66% of all listings. And we also use host compliance to send out violation letters when we've identified a unit that doesn't have a certificate of registration through the city. And to date, we've sent roughly 480 violation letters. And this includes properties that have also become compliant either by getting a certificate of registration or removing that listing or changing it so it no longer meets the definition of a short term rental. And then just in general, there are seasonal variances in short term rentals when they advertise, and we usually see the highest number in the summer months or with graduation season.

So another brief breakdown of the of the registered units in the city. About 63% of them are operator occupied, meaning people are renting out the their own unit that they live in. Whether it's individual bedrooms or they're renting as a whole when they're away from the property. And 37% are owner adjacent. I'd say the vast majority of these properties are between single and two family houses.

Roughly about a 100 or so of the 175 are in that category. And the vast majority, up to 98% of people that have registered through the city say they use Airbnb. With the second company most popular being Vrbo with about 14% of registrations. So the next following slides are just gonna brief breakdown of the ordinance language that's changed. So one of the things that we wanted to change was the definition of a short term rental from any duration of a stay of less than thirty nights to anything of less than twenty eight nights.

One of the reasons behind this is because we want to make it clear with surrounding cities and towns to match what they have so it's not as confusing for people when they're trying to see what what's required. So a couple other cities like some of them in Boston have twenty eight days so we just wanted to make it simpler. And then there's also some people that use intermediaries to post on these booking websites. And sometimes there's issues where they set a minimum stay to a month and it goes down to twenty eight days. So I think in most cases they're trying to stay within the spirit of the ordinance, but sometimes there's a little technological problem that comes through on that, and that's why I think twenty eight days would at least get rid of some of those as well.

For the definitions that are changing, we wanted to change the definition of an operator occupied short term rental. Currently, you can rent up to three bedrooms individually under this type of registration. But if you are away from the property for more than seven consecutive days, you have to rent out the rent out the property as a whole to one party. We did wanna switch it so at any point that you are not at the property, you have to rent that as a whole so people there aren't strangers living amongst each other without an operator present. If they do want to rent out individual bedrooms, the operator would have to be there at the time of the rental.

The next changes are that we wanted to make sure that kinda like what I said that the operator must be present when renting up to the individual bedrooms and we did change sorry. He go back

to Albert.

And then we just wanted to make sure that all short term rentals comply with not only the building code but also the sanitary code, the fire code, and any other state and local requirements for occupancy. One of the restrictions we have with the current ordinance is that we can only request transaction records for owner adjacent units, which again was only about 3037% of the ones that we had and we weren't allowed to ask for any transaction records for operator occupied, which is the vast majority. So we do think that by adding this we'll be able to get more information and kinda make sure that people are following the requirements of the ordinance. We also added language that says we can Any booking agent or person that accepts a fee for a short term rental that's not eligible can be fined $300 per day and each day of the violation should be a separate violation and then inspectional services can seek an injection from a court prohibiting the offering of the short term rental. Additionally, want ISA would like the ability to provoke or prohibit any registration that has any building zoning, sanitary, or fire code violations.

Currently, there's nothing in the ordinance that would give us the ability to revoke something once it's been issued or to prohibit anything. So yeah.

It goes.

We don't think that any of these additional changes should add any restrictions to people who operate short term rentals. The main reason behind this was to give ISD more ability to enforce the ordinance and clarify the language. In doing so, we looked at several other cities and towns around Boston, such as Somerville, Boston, Springfield, and Quincy. And we also looked at other places around the country like New York City, East Providence, Rhode Island, and Key West, Florida. I think overall that these changes kinda reflect good parts of all these city ordinances and she'll help us with this enforce the safe uses of short term rentals while also providing us the ability to revoke, suspend, or prevent registration for safety violations.

I think that's it.

Okay.

Did anybody, from the team, law department, any anyone else wanna add anything before we go to public comment?

No. I don't think we have anything to add at this time. So if you wish to go to public comment, we can do public comment, and then we can

shift back to the client list. Yeah. Perfect. Okay. So as we've discussed, this is a public hearing.

Any members of the public who wish to speak should now click the button that says raise hand. If you're calling in by phone, you can raise your hand by pressing 9. As of 5PM yesterday, the board had received no comments on this petition. Written communications received after 5PM yesterday will be entered into the record. So let's just see if we have there are many, let's see, many participants on the line, but I think most of them are here for the second hearing.

Alright. I am not seeing any hands. Jeff,

are you can you

just confirm that that's correct? I

I don't see any hands either. I'll this is Jeff. I'll I'll just repeat the instructions in case somebody missed it. This is the public hearing on the short term rentals ordinance amendments. And if you would like to comment on that, this is a public hearing, and this is the public comment portion. So you should press the button on your Zoom that says raise hand if you would like to speak on this hearing. And if you're connected by phone, you can press 9 on your phone, and it'll do the same thing. And we just you only need to press it once, and then we'll see that you're that you're waiting to speak. I'll give it just a few seconds.

Mhmm. Sure.

So I'm still not seeing any hands, so I'll I'll turn it back over to the chair at this point.

Alright. Very good. So we're gonna move on from public comment portion to board discussion. Additional written comments may be submitted for the record. To begin with, do board members have questions for either, the petitioners, law department staff, or CDD? Tom, let's start with you.

Thank you, madam chair. Just simply, I wanna go back to first principles. I understand that modifications here will allow for enforcement of the ordinance as it stands. But I wanted to understand what's the problem we're trying to solve here. You know, we've all, I think, heard stories from around the world if the overuse of these sorts of rentals have destroyed cities. Right? Did you know, Reykjavik is famous for being a very, very difficult city to live in because everything is Airbnb. Do we have that kind of problem? Can somebody just quickly say, what's going on in Cambridge? Why do we need all these enforcement powers?

Sure. Peter McLaughlin, Inspectional Services. To answer the question, I think it's it's a lot it has a lot to do with safety. And, you know, we have, when when someone has a short term rental that's not registered, that means that we don't go in to make sure there's adequate egress, there's emergency situations that could come into play where they don't have smoke detectors or carbon monoxide detectors. That's one of the main reasons.

And the other one is for the community that surrounds the short term rental. If someone is renting out their unit and they're having parties and they're, you know, this bad behavior, these people out in the street being loud. Right now, we don't have any mechanism to take the short term rental away. And with the small changes we have, if if people violate certain rules and regulations, we have the ability to take away their short term rental to to save that community, to save that area. So, yeah, that's that's one of the main main reasons is is safety and the community to make sure that people aren't being disturbed.

They're not party houses. They're, you know, for people who wanna see their son or daughter graduate and they you know? And it's not to, you know, rent out a whole unit for a house party. So that's what we're trying to and not that we're having a lot of those problems, but we do have problems, that we cannot enforce because of the way the ordinance was written.

Great. Thank you. James,

yeah, you wanna add something? Go ahead.

Yeah. If I could just add on to that. The provision two to be able to find the booking agent themself, like the booking platform, I think, would help because we've, in discussions, talked about how do we disincentivize them from posting, unregistered units in the first place. I know there's some some legal challenges with it and I deferred a law department on that. But I think the ability to issue fines to those booking agents hopefully dissuades them from posting unauthorized listings and it kinda echoes again. The reason why is to for the integrity of the neighborhood, but also for safety concerns when we can't get into a unit to see what's going on in there.

Mhmm. Great. Thank you. Dan, what is your question?

Yeah. Thanks, madam chair. And I guess, it's a follow-up to Peter. It sounds you know, certainly, I have no no objection into this. It's just, similar to Tom's questioning. It seems like a fairly few number of units, and things like noise disturbances are typically Cambridge public police, not not, I don't know that we've got building inspectors going out on, you know, response calls. But it the question is really, like, is it a issue that we're needing to adjust in zoning because there's not state level because, you know, we're not, asking for people to register their rental unit for for long term stay. And the same issues arise in terms of, hey. Are there smoke detectors? Is it up to code?

Does it need sanitary? Obviously, those things come about if, you know, the tenant sees that they're, you know, in a slum condition, landlord's not taking care of it, heat and that kind of thing? Is it, you know, the owner of such a property should ultimately be responsible? So I was kind of getting a little bit of clarity again, scope and issue of the problem and, how much, again, no no real objection to, obviously, maintaining health and safety. Just trying to, again, wrap my head around what the issue is. Sure, Tom. You have, I'm I'm sorry, Dan. It's just a question that

you're right. There's not a lot of it going on. But if you live in a neighborhood where it is going on, where you have people renting out multiple units and there's parties going on a lot. And, yeah, the police do show up, and they've say, for example, they show up three, four, five times. That doesn't the police can't take away their short term rental.

Right? And then we can't take it away no matter how bad the behavior is because we don't have a mechanism to do it. When it comes to enforcement, I I would defer to the law department because there's, we do write violations, and we do try to do the best we can, but it's it's complicated. And I think the law department would be better to answer that portion of it.

Makes sense. Thank you.

Does

Elliot, do you or any members of your team wanna talk a little bit about enforcement issues?

I think, I think briefly, just to to add, I think as was noted in the presentation, there is sort of an an issue relative to the registration portion of, the issue where you as you've seen, there there is a disconnect between the number of short term rental units that are presented by these, booking websites compared to the number that at least per city records are actually registered. So I think part of the goal behind, the proposed zoning amendments is to allow for more options and more mechanisms to be in place to enable that enforcement to encourage that registration so as to, again, ensure that whatever units are being presented, by these booking agents as short term rentals, there could be an assurance that they are registered with the city, that they are compliant with, building zoning building fire codes and and other state safety codes. And that to the extent that there are violations, city has additional options relative to ensure enforcement and compliance. Sidney, I don't know if there's anything else you wanna add to that.

No? Okay. Good. Thank you. We'll move on then. Ashley?

Thank you. I think my some my question is along the same veins, but my first intuition was that why is this not regulated by, you know, say, the license commission who also regulates, lodging houses, dorms, inns, which are very kind of more in a similar category. And so I was just wondering, you know, in your research of other cities, are the other cities also regulating these using zoning, or is it license commission or some other commission? Yeah. Thank you.

Who would like to take that?

I'll defer to Cindy relative to how other municipalities sort of approach this issue, but I I think we can certainly say from the city's perspective, the short term rentals are regulated under our zoning ordinance. So because of that, this is the process that we have to follow in order to make amendments to that. So so I think at least in terms of the city's perspective, the reason we are taking this approach is because short term rental ordinances are governed under our zoning ordinance. So, and and I believe it it is similar, at least with other communities in the Commonwealth, but I know I I defer to to, Citi who's who's reached out to some of these other communities and and

k. Sydney, did you wanna add?

Thank you. Happy to answer that. This is a common construction and method that other municipalities are using to enforce the code violations through the inspectional services department. This is what Quincy does. This is what Boston does.

And Inspectional Services is the appropriate department for it as, both the commissioner and James alluded to because inspectional services can go in. They can evaluate a property, see what whether or not there are any code violations, there are any building hazards, and things along those lines. So I would say the the way that we've construed our ordinance is similar in nature to what surrounding municipalities are doing and is appropriate given the concerns that may arise from any given listing or property.

Alright. Thank you. Peter, I see you have your hands up. Did you wanna add something?

Yeah. Just, really quick. It's, it it is mandated by the state building code that short term rentals are in the state building code as, a a periodic inspection that has to be inspected every five years. So it falls under the in in the state, you know, every city and town has to obey where so that's it landed with the building code. So that's why ISD has it because of the life safety issues. So, yeah. So it's it's it's something that's required by building code.

Great. Thank you for adding to that. We have a question from Joy.

Yeah. I just have a kind of a clarifying question on process. So is it not the case that it's, like, a prerequisite to submit some sort of indication of registration before listing on the website? Just trying to get a sense of, like, how that discrepancy kind of has come to be.

Sure. I believe James could answer that better than anyone. Go ahead, James.

Yeah. When when people put these advertisements on booking websites, there's no cross verification between the the advertising and our records to make sure that something is verified. So they don't I think there is Airbnb might ask them to post a registration number but it's not verified in any way. And there's just been kinda difficulties on what we can require these platforms to do in general when it comes to somebody advertising on their website. And then, know, I don't know if the law department wants to talk more specifically on, like, the limitations of it or what we can or can't ask them to do. But

I think just to add to that, I think that's sort of one of the, motivations relative to the proposed amendments, that are being suggested that requires record keeping and and requires these short term rental units to provide additional information to the city upon request. So the idea is that this, enables, the city to gather gather information just to ensure verification, to ensure compliance, and, to ensure that what they are presenting relative, to these websites is actually accurate, in terms of our own records and our own registration.

Mhmm. Okay. Is is there anything, being proposed that's sort of unique to Cambridge? I mean, it sounds as though you referenced changes that others, you know, that we're making that other city and towns cities and towns already implement. So are we basically just, you know, ensuring that we're kinda consistent, or is there anything new in this that's that's different from what anybody else is doing?

I don't I do not believe there's anything new. What we we took in like Sydney said, we looked at other communities, and we try to to take what was working as we talk to them Yeah. What what rules and regulations that they had in their ordinance that was helping them. And I think we did we we added, but we didn't none of the changes are see if Cambridge is the only city doing it.

Doing it. Okay. Great. Thank you for that.

Yeah. And and to add to and to add to that, and and Sydney could also speak to this. There there was a close analysis as to what other communities were doing just to ensure that we we were not doing something that, say, would be novel or something that would be contrary to the law and thus could potentially be challenged. And if challenged, subject to perhaps lawsuits and overturning of our of of the ordinance. So I think that the goal was to ensure that there were additional enforcement tools and mechanisms available to ensure compliance with the ordinance, but not going so far as to be contrary to the law or, potentially, make it subject to legal challenge by Airbnb or or some of these other, short term vendors as they have challenged other laws in in in in other states and things like that.

Okay. Great. Thank you. We have another question from Dan.

Yeah. Just as a follow-up on and this is probably just a query on the legal side. But if, you know, heaven forbid, something happened to somebody in a registered unit that had been inspected, would it open the city up to some form of liability?

That's absurd. I I I think

I I hey.

I'm not an attorney. I just I'm just asking questions. So

Mhmm. Yeah. I I think, you know, every and as they say, every case is different relative to I I think I I would submit that in the event that there was an injury at a short term rental place, the nature of that injury would relate to those that were opening it up to that rental and and the persons that were injured and potentially the platform itself relative to that. I think that, again, the purpose of code enforcement is to ensure that the property is in a safe and habitable condition in keeping with state law. It isn't we have, as as, you know, municipality, a, a duty relative to our codes to ensure those standards are kept, but that, in turn, doesn't, I I would submit, subject us to any heightened sense of liability relative to, you you know, a a homeowner's responsibility to ensure that their property is is safe and habitable and and entry there.

So so I I I would submit that it is unlikely that that the city would be potentially implicated in any injury that occurs on a premises just because we are ensuring proper code enforcement and compliance with our laws. So

Great. Alright. Any other questions for the team before we move on to discussion? Okay. Seeing none.

So our our decisions this evening are to either make a recommendation that the petition be adopted, or we can recommend it not be adopted, or we could also just send comments to the the city council for their consideration. We also have the option to continue the hearing, but it seems as though given the questions and the limited scope of this that that won't be necessary. So let me just open it up for discussion and your your thoughts. Ted?

Well, it seems to me this is pretty straightforward and clear cut. Then I would strongly recommend that we make recommendations to the city council that they adopt this. It's not new. The city council, in its wisdom, adopted a registration requirement several years ago. The numbers that are coming from the law department and ISD showing the number of people who are not registering.

And this is simply to make clear what has to be registered, when it has to be registered, and in includes an enforcement mechanism so that the city can really see that what it is requiring is being followed. I also in in addition to the comments that they've already made about the why of registration, I remember when it was first discussed, one of the main issues was that neighbors, not just being concerned about parties, but concerned about people coming and go coming and going at all times without them having any knowledge of what was going on in the house or the dwelling unit. And with registration, at least the neighbors will know that this is a registered use and that people do come and go and that there's an enforcement mechanism if it's being abused. So it seems to me this is just to clarify after the experience of the past couple of years what needs to be done to make sure that the registration, requirement is complied with and has a mechanism to enforce it if there's a problem.

Thank you, Ted. Very nicely summarized. Tom, what are your thoughts?

I don't have much to add other than plea to give commissioner McLaughlin the tools that he needs to enforce the ordinance and also mister D'Angelo. So I appreciate the thoughtfulness that they've put into this. So a very strong endorsement to the city council to act on this quickly.

Okay. Do any board members have other thoughts or disagree with any of the petitions provisions? Ashley?

Thank you. I was gonna say the same thing as Tom. At first, I was a little concerned given how much, you know, detail extra granular there was in the zoning code. But, you know, if ISD is willing to take this on and, you know, it it makes sense. I I think my original thought about licensing commission was just, know, thinking about lodging houses because those also need a built certificate of occupancy from building, but I don't know when at some point, was decided that all the extra groundwater details be, regulated by another board.

So it doesn't seem like we're we're at that point yet, but if that ever becomes a concern or if, you know, ISD does not have all the resources, then just wanted to point out there is other ways to make sure we can keep an eye out on, short term rentals.

Great. Thank you for adding that. Okay. Anything else from the board? No.

Okay. I would say then that we're all in agreement that we wanna make a recommendation a strong recommendation to adopt the petition to provide inspectional services with the tools that the department needs to enforce the short term rental provisions and program. So could I have a recommendation then to adopt the petition as quickly as possible?

This is Tom. So moved.

Thank you, Tom. Is there a second, please?

Ted, second.

Alright. Very good. And this, vote will be by full board members. And, Jeff, would you give us a roll call vote, please?

On that motion, Ted Cohen? Yes. Mary Leidecker?

Yes.

Diego Macias? Yes. Tom Sinovich? Yes. Ashley Tan?

Yes.

Carolyn Zurn?

Yes.

Mary Flynn? Yes. It's all seven members voting in favor.

Great. Thank you. Thank you to all the city staff, law department, and ISD, and I hope that this really does well, that first that it does pass the city council and that it provides you the tools you need. Thanks for the great background and your good work. Appreciate it.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Alright. Sure. Thank you. Alright. We're gonna move on to, our next agenda item, and this is an advisory design consultation of case a h o eight, an affordable housing overlay project proposed by HRI thirty Wendell's LLC to construct a new eight story building to create 95 affordable rental units and amenities and 77 long term and eight short term bicycle parking spaces with a gross floor area of a 110,803 square feet at 28 To 30 Wendell Street.

We're gonna begin, with the CDD staff explaining why this is before us, then we're gonna have a presentation from the developer followed by public comment, and then the board will ask questions and discuss the proposed design. So with that, I'm gonna turn to Evan, who's going to provide the summary.

Thanks, Mary. So this is the first of two required planning board advisory consultation sessions for this AHO project. This is the same advisory review process the board is used to for these kinds of, projects, these AHO projects. But, the multifamily zoning petitions that were passed in February have repositioned this process to apply to all residential developments at least, 50,000 square feet, not just AHO projects. But it's the same same process before.

AHO projects that are less than 50,000 square feet no longer need to go through a two session, review process, but projects that exceed the height normally allowed under base zoning are required to go through one planning board advisory consultation session. But for this case, it's it's the process as the board is is used to. And just as a reminder, the AHO creates an alternative set of development standards that apply as of right for housing developments in which all units are made permanently affordable. The purpose of this design review is not for the planning board to grant or deny a permit, but to provide advisory comments on the design and its overall conformance with the city's urban design objectives and guidelines, which we've provided and summarized in memos from CDD and DBW. The planning board will issue an initial report on the proposal, and the applicant will return to the planning board for a second design review session, with an updated design that is responsive to questions and comments received prior to and up through tonight's hearing.

With that, I will turn it back to the chair.

Thank you, Evan. Our presenter this evening is Eleni Makrakis. Eleni, you will have up to thirty minutes for your presentation, though please be as concise as possible. And if you would start by, introducing your project team, please begin.

Thank you, chair. Good evening, everyone. My name is Eleni Mukrakis. I'm a project manager at HRI. I'm joined by Sarah Barkan and Kate Gilmore on my team, as well as Gabby Acheson from Icon Architecture. And Gabby will pull up the presentation. Okay. Can everyone see that and hear me okay? Yes. We can. Thank you. Okay. Great. So good evening, members of the board, city staff, and folks joining from the public. Again, my name is Aleni Makrakis, and I will be presenting HRI's twenty eight thirty Wendell project this evening alongside Gabe Gabby Acheson from ICON Architecture.

I believe most of you are familiar with HRI and ICON, but as a quick refresher, HRI is a nonprofit developer here in Cambridge. We own about 1,500 rental apartments in the city and pride ourselves on an iterative and forward looking design process with resident comfort and sustainability top of mind. ICON is a women owned architecture firm in Boston and a leader in sustainable design, specifically in the affordable housing world. Gabby Acheson is our lead architect on this project and will be presenting the building design after I speak about our project goals, community process, and group ground floor program. Whenever we start designing a building, we think about our core goals.

For 2830 Wendell, these are affordability, streetscape act streetscape activation, and sustainability. Affordability is always the top priority for HRI, and this is in line with city and state goals of creating new affordable rental homes in great neighborhoods. This building is no different and will be a 100% affordable under the affordable housing overlay. We will also be exploring various subsidy programs to include deeper affordability for our lowest income residents. The second goal, streetscape activation, is something that we have been thinking about since the start.

The Baldwin neighborhood is a very walkable neighborhood, and we want to make sure that we are designing spaces along Wendell Street that are engaging and that expand the sidewalk space. Streetscape activation extends to building design. And with that, we have the goal of creating a welcoming facade through material and color selection and ground floor features. Gabby will go into this in more detail later in the presentation. Our third project goal is sustainability.

Twenty eight thirty Wendell will be an all electric enterprise green community certified passive house building. So just a quick project overview. As I mentioned, this will be a fully income restricted affordable rental community for individuals and families. We are intending for this to be an intergenerational community of 95 apartments. 40 homes will be age restricted one bedroom apartments for older adults, and 55 will be family homes with a high percentage of two and three bedroom homes.

The building will primarily consist of spaces for residents. However, we will also have a community hub that will be available for resident and neighborhood use. Will discuss this in more detail in a few slides. Over the past year, we've had many touch points both with this community and with city staff to ensure that we are designing this building holistically. Overall, we had over 15 meetings with city staff from housing, urban design, transportation, zoning, sustainability, the Department of Public Works, and the fire department.

We will continue incorporating feedback to refine our design and program. Starting in the 2024, we hosted several on-site in person meetings and smaller group meetings with neighbors. We also launched a website for folks to find more project specific information as well as provide a platform for comments and questions. In 2024 and spring twenty twenty five, we also presented to the Baldwin Neighborhood Council and the Porter Square Neighborhood Association. In addition to the smaller scale meetings, we hosted three AHO hybrid community meetings.

At our final meeting in March, we introduced an open how open house format, which allowed us to more fully engage with community members and provided the opportunity for all attendees to provide feedback. We heard a variety of comments about Cornis design, facade patterning, window grouping, plantings, and community programming. We were also able to bring in physical material samples, and attendees voted on their preferred brick, siding material, and stone look material. Over the past year, we have heard many questions about how the building will operate and how Itri will also will make sure that things are running smoothly, both on a systems level and for residents of 2830 Wendell. On the next few slides, I will talk through the Ground Floor design, which includes spaces for operations, residential, and community programming.

The Ground Floor includes the majority of the building's operational spaces. It includes parking for building city site staff and visiting staff, like a visiting nurse, a management office staffed by a professional management company. This will include a full time property manager who will be on-site to work with residents on lease up, income certifications, and respond to apartment specific questions. Along with the management office, we will have an on-site maintenance office and full time maintenance superintendent to make sure that building systems are working efficiently, residents are comfortable in their homes, and that open spaces are kept tidy and neat. Together, the management and maintenance staff will ensure consistency in building operations.

A large bike room will have 77 indoor spots and includes a separate entrance from the side of the building. In addition to the operational side of things, we want to make sure that the residents of 2830 Wendell have a variety of community spaces. As you walk into the lobby of the building, you will see a large community room that overlooks the back courtyard. This be space will be used from for anything from a vaccine clinic to a holiday party to a community meeting. Around the corner, but also along the back courtyard, is the sunroom.

This will serve as more of a lounge space. We envision our older adult residents using this to read, enjoy the sun, and gather in small groups throughout the day. And lastly, across the hall from the community room will be two quiet rooms for individual or small group study meetings. This type of space has been very popular in our other buildings, so we want to make sure to include it here. Our community engagement staff will have access to two spaces, a meeting room at the front of the building next to the residential entrance, and a larger resident services room that can be used for group meetings or activities.

We anticipate having a full time community engagement coordinator and a part time services coordinator for our older adult residents. We are proposing a community hub space that will be available for use for the larger community. We have heard from neighbors and the larger Baldwin community that there is a desire for a space that can accommodate a variety of activities such as additional after school space, dance classes, cooking classes, wellness trainings, financial education, crafting groups, computer classes, in person neighborhood gatherings, and more. The hub will have a separate and unique entrance from Wendell Street. There will be a classroom size space and a smaller meeting room.

The hub will also include separate bathrooms and storage space. One other community space that isn't pictured here, but will be talked about a little bit later on, will be the outdoor little free library to continue the tradition of having a lending library on-site. Gabby will show you on the site design when she speaks a little bit later. I will now turn it over to Gabby to take us through the building design.

Thanks, Seleni. As the architects for this project, I will share the current building design as well as the site design. The exterior design for 28 To 30 Wendell has evolved over the course of multiple community meetings, and as Eleni mentioned, an ongoing dialogue with the city. The four images that we show here are snapshots that display the milestones in that process. In June 2024 was the first community meeting.

We presented the design shown here with a nine story main mass and seven stories on either side. With this design, we established our core project goals based on several conversations with city housing and urban design staff, And we integrated into that into the basis of design, which has been consistent through each design iteration. That includes breaking down the massing of the building into distinct zones, the use of brick to relate to the context, and grouping of windows to add visual interest. In November 2024, we presented the design shown here at our second community meeting. The most dramatic change is the updated height of the building.

It was reduced from eight from nine stories to eight at the main body and six stories on either side. This is the final height for the project. This design also had a slight increase in the amount of brick, a simplification of the front entry trellis, and we explored a more traditional base middle top design. We used warmer colors and explored groupings of windows. There was a much positive feedback from the community on the use of brick.

So in March 2025, at the third community meeting, there was a pivot in the strategy of how we were distributing the brick across the facade. In this case, we used it just at the bookends for the full height of the six stories, which is a significant increase in the overall use of brick and helps it to relate to the six story building masonry buildings in the neighborhood. We enhanced the brick through additional detailing to reinforce the datums and soften the edges. This is a more subtle base middle top strategy further articulated with the central portion, which has window groupings and accent colors. We started to focus more on the Ground Floor exterior.

We updated the entry to be flush with the building and created a welcoming canopy in lieu of a trellis. After our March community meeting and open house, we also met with housing and urban design city staff to continue to push the design forward. And we worked to integrate the city and the community comments into the current design, which is shown here, August 2024, first planning board meeting. In this iteration, the body is more regular. We removed horizontal bands, and we started to test out cornice designs given the feedback that we received at the community meeting.

There was an overwhelming majority vote for the desired brick color, and so we utilized that, and the color palette was further refined. So if we take a closer look at the current design with this enlarged elevation and axon, this version has a refined rhythm that is set by the vertical sections of siding and the bearing widths of the windows. You can start to see the soldier coursing at the First And Second Floor, which relate to the low rise buildings on the street, and the cornice at the top of the brick reinforces the six story datum and more particularly relates to the six story brick building that's further west on Wendell Street. The next couple of slides will show elevations on each face of the building and how the design transitions from Wendell Street to the sides and rear. You can see in the on the front elevation to the side, the book ends a full brick transition at the corners.

They wrap the corners. And as you transition from the sides to the rear, we have five story bays that wrap to the rear and also into the courtyard. The bays break up the massing of the building while maintaining the interior square footage that is needed for our gracious dwelling units. To take a closer look at the materials shown in the elevations previous, we have a variety of colors and textures, all that are outlined here. And the goal is really to have complementary colors that also create contrast and add some depth to the facade.

As I noted, the brick was really a favorite among the community as well as the city and development team, and there was also a favorite for the stone look siding that is at the base of the building and wraps all the way around. While those were clear favorites, we are open to exploring color and texture options for the other sidings that we are presenting here. The Ground Floor of the building has many textures, including that stone look. We're also integrating storefronts, canopies, and that brick patterning. Energy efficiency goals are incorporated into this exterior design, and we have a high level of continuous insulation for this building.

One advantage of having so much continuous insulation is that the windows can recede into the facade, so that creates shadow lines and helps to add further depth to the building. We're utilizing a dark bronze frame color to bring in warmth and relate to the storefront frame. You can see in these images, there's part of the window that has a thicker frame, and that's the operable portion of the window. We ensure that there's at least one operable window in each of the residential spaces. We're looking to group the windows thoughtfully.

So at the brick, you can see we have a stacked bond brick between two windows to help them to unite them and make them appear larger, as well as the stone lintel above them. At the siding, that translates to a transparent middle between the two windows and further relates the two sections of the building. The brick detailing that's shown on the previous slide as well as shown in this image here are possible because we're utilizing full brick instead of thin brick. So we have the stacked bond between two windows to group those as well as in some storefront areas. We also have the stacked bond adjacent to one window to help that appear larger.

You can see the, at Level 1 And 2, the soldier coursing, as well as the detailing at the corners that are a modern interpretation of coining. There's two distinct entries along Wendell Street, one for the hub that Alwyny mentioned, as well as the main entrance to the residence. They're distinct but complementary in both form and material, with the residential entry purposefully reading as the main entrance. And these are set at the same scale, so you can see how much larger the main entry is. They're further distinguished by the landscaping and site design, and both are looking to integrate signage, lighting material, which we are continuing to refine.

The most important images that we can share with you today are that of a pedestrian, how they would experience a build the building as you walk through the neighborhood. So starting from the furthest away, this is at the corner of Oxford And Wendell Street looking south. You can see how the brick bookends relate to the brick building that's across the street, and the inspiration for the corners there. If we walk further down Wendell Street, still facing south towards Mass Ave, you can start to see some of those details that I mentioned in the previous slides and how that those shadows bring depth to the facade. If we walk closer to the building in front of the hub space, you can see there's a high level of transparency on the Ground Floor, which is meant to make the spaces feel inviting.

There's a variation in setbacks along Wendell Street to help create different moments for pedestrian experiences, and we were careful to provide wider sidewalks at the entry points, which are further complemented by the landscape design. We keep walking down Wendell Street, but in this case, facing north. We are directly adjacent to that little lending library that Aleni mentioned. You can see here the brick detailing where we're protruding some of the bricks for a playful design adjacent to the library. We're looking to explore the options that Full Brick gives us.

And you can also see in this image the entry canopy and the signage and how it delineates that main entry. Shifting to the rear, this facade presents a unique and different experience, and we're looking at a lighter color pat toward lighter color palette towards the top of the building. So a lot of these spaces were seen in the renderings previously, but to take the whole full site in at once, this is the site plan where Project North is true north. So with the building shape and orientation that allows for a primary outdoor gathering space and seating at the south facing courtyard. The fact that it's facing south means it has excellent access to daylight and that the majority of the building shadows land in the street.

The outdoor spaces on the north side, which you saw in the renderings, activate that streetscape with seating, bike wrap bike racks, and the free little library, and those are listening through different plantings, hardscape, and furniture. The plantings are also used strategically to create separation. At the front, we use it between the seating areas and the sidewalk, and at the rear between our parcel and the parking to the south. We take a closer look at the areas outdoor areas along Wendell Street, starting on the west side at the Little Free Library. There's a playful concrete seating on permanent or sorry, permeable accessible surface where a pedestrian could stop and do a book swap.

Further down Wendell towards the center is the residential entry area. We have a bench under the canopy and then a area of sculphur seating and movable furniture in a more organic form. And those plants separate that from the sidewalk. There are six bike parking spaces in between the little library and the residential entry. The last space shown here is outside the hub area.

We have seat wall steps that define the plaza. This is a more geometric space to make it more distinct. And in this area, there are four bike parking spaces. Focusing on the rear, the courtyard allows for a range of activities with spaces defined by a trellis, furniture, and nature place seating. There is accessible permeable service throughout.

The seating attending intended across the site has a variety of materials, size, shape, color, and that's allowing for a range of uses, both communal and private. We're aiming to provide comfortable armchairs for older residents and also looking to engage pedestrians. The entirety of the hardscape, aside from the drive lane, will be permeable. And there's a variety of scale, colors, patterns available. We're exploring as well options for shade in the courtyard, such as the trellis that's shown here that can help further define that space.

The plantings proposed for the site are a combination of trees, shrubs, and low plantings. All of these are native, and all of them are drought and shade tolerant. Highlighting what our next steps are, we will continue to refine the design of 30 Wendell and review options for the front canopies as well as the cornice. This, in terms of the cornice, looking at how that integrates with structural and the feedback that we had from the community meeting as well as the city. For the canopy, looking to incorporate signage and lighting and materials as we further iterate.

We've collected samples of each siding that we've shown here in this presentation, and we've shared that with the community, as well as development team members and city staff, and are happy to explore variations. We were also able to review those both in sunlight and shade and see how they would work on each facade. We have started the twenty twenty the Article 22 submission, and we have submitted for recertification under FIES for passive house design. And we're going to continue to coordinate with our engineers. We look forward to the city's design feedback and have enjoyed the iterative process.

Thank you.

Thank you. So does that wrap up your presentation?

It does.

It does. Thank you very much. Okay. Then, we're gonna move to public comment. According to the zoning, we do take public comment at these design review sessions.

Let me see. I would like, to remind speakers that the board's action is not to approve or deny an application, but to provide advisory comments on the design that was presented this evening. Any members of the public who wish to speak should now click the button that says raise hand. If you are calling in by phone, you can raise your hand by pressing star nine. As of 5PM yesterday, the board had received written comments from Rachel Plummer, Sarah Block, Maria Fontelio, Ethan Frank, Itamar Turner Trowring, Ben Wurgaft, John Frank, Peter Nornberg, Theodore Liv, Brian McNabo, Kathleen Higgins, David Harris, Matt Begetodau, and Joel Bard.

Written of communications received after 5PM yesterday will be entered into the record. So let just see. Alright. It looks as though we have a few people who wish to speak. There are a lot of participants on the Zoom meeting from the public.

So I would ask anybody who's planning on speaking to raise your hand now so that we can make a determination on the length of time speakers will be permitted. Okay. Alright. At the moment, we have 10 speakers. Is anyone else planning on speaking this evening?

If so, could you please raise your hand now? Okay. It looks like we have 13 speakers. So I think I'm gonna drop the time to two and a half minutes because I just wanna be sure that there's plenty of time for a planning board discussion. So with that, I'm gonna ask staff to unmute speakers one at a time.

Please begin by stating your name and address, and staff will confirm that we can hear you. After that, you'll have up to two and a half minutes to speak before I ask you to wrap up. So, Jeff, I'm gonna turn it over to you to unmute speakers.

Thank you. This is Jeff Roberts again. I'll start that right away. Just just to note, I'm gonna read the the next speaker and then the following speaker so that the following speaker will be ready, to to know that they're up next. And, so, we'll proceed. The first speaker is Kathy Higgins who's followed by Sean Hart. So, you can unmute yourself, to begin with your name and say your name and address to start. Thanks.

Hi. My name is, Kathy Higgins. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes. Okay. I live at, 345 Norfolk Street, Cambridge. I'm just very excited that HRI has transferred this empty lot into such a vibrant, attractive design for the 95 affordable homes. I strongly support the proposed eight story building as a furthering of the city's goals for affordable housing.

I attended two out of the three of the community meetings in person. And although there was opposition from neighbors, I was heartened to hear the many voices of those who expressed a great deal of support for the plan for affordable housing at this location. One commenter that I recall vividly framed the need by sharing the plight of workers she saw at nearby lils Leslie College who at times had to sleep in their cars as they couldn't drive to their homes far away and back in time to start their next shifts. Another person who spoke was saddened that the height was reduced by HRI from nine to eight stories, as that meant 15 less families would have the opportunity to have safe, affordable housing. To try and ease the fears of those abutters who who do not like the scale of this building, many people added that they live next to or near a large affordable housing buildings, and and it was fine.

The neighborhoods neighbor would would would welcome them, and they the diverse range of neighbors that would have homes there would be welcome addition to the air their area. HRI has been very receptive to community feedback incorporating it in the design, the amenities for the site, and many addition of setbacks and more. It has been pointed out that the Baldwin neighborhood has less affordable housing than many neighborhoods in Cambridge, So this development is long overdue. Lastly, the need for this type of housing is so great. As HRI pointed out, their last affordable housing lottery for a 98 unit building resulted in over 20 2,700 applications.

Thank you for your review of this wonderful building. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker I apologize. I might have misspoke. The next speaker is Teresa Cardosi who's followed by Benjamin Wergaft. And I apologize if I mispronounce anyone's name. And if I'm say and if I'm saying the wrong name, that came up on the Zoom, please, correct me by saying your name when you start. Thank you. Teresa Cardosi is next.

Hi. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay. So my name is Teresa Cardosi. I live at 7 Woodrow Wilson Court. I just wanna say this is a great project, and it's gone through a lot of changes because of community input. And mostly, I wanna emphasize the extent that HRI took community input into consideration.

The project was originally gonna be all family size homes, but it was redesigned because of feedback to make it a combination of homes for elderly 62 and over and for families. So as it is now, there are ninety five ninety five homes, total. Originally, it was gonna be a 110 homes. So right now, it's 40 homes for 62 and over. They're all one bedroom and no studio, so that's great.

And 55 homes for families, 25 are two bedrooms and 26 are three bedrooms. And as Kathleen said also, the large bedroom homes are really in great need, and elderly on fixed incomes are also really in need. I think, combining the two generations is a good idea too. It's kinda like extended families of grandmothers and grandfathers. Anyway, another change that was made is they reduced the height from nine stories in the smaller part of seven stories to eight stories to and six stories.

And, unfortunately, because of the change, there were 15 lost homes. So that was eight one bedroom elderly people that don't have the home, three two bedroom families don't have the home, and four three bedrooms, those people don't have a home. And this is a huge loss, and it shows the commitment that HRI had to the community and their wishes by doing that. No setback is required at HRI, but they have setbacks. And they decided on the setbacks before the first h AHO meeting.

It was at a walk through way back in April 2024, and the people were interested. They wanted less they wanted no set they wanted setbacks. So HRI redesigned before they even had the meetings to do that, and that's another just example of how much they're taking into consideration, community input. Thanks for your time.

Thank you. The next speaker is Benjamin Wergaft, who's followed by Theodore LIVE.

Thank you so much. Can everybody hear me? This is Ben Wergaft speaking. Yes. Thank you so much to the planning board for your time and attention. Thank you to HRI for your presentation. To reintroduce myself, my name is Ben Wergaft. I grew up here at 35 Wendell Street. We are a butters to HRI's project. And I'm here to register my deep disquiet about this project and its scale.

Even given the stated reduction from nine to eight floors, the building relates, as was said in the presentation, to the buildings around it by dwarfing them. It's simply a colossus that completely changes the character of the street, with implications not only for those on the street already, but for those who will live in the building. It is, I believe, a nowhere. A building that could, as one commentator put it by correspondence, be a local branch headquarters of a Verizon. It is a kind of a non place, superimposed upon a place with a deep and historic character.

A brick facade does not do this. However, my deeper objection is to the way HRI has handled neighborhood feedback, changing the format of their town hall meetings to suppress the kind of resistance they were receiving from the neighborhood to their project from their second to their third meeting. I am requesting, and have done so by correspondence as well, sharing a petition that we've circulated. I'm asking the planning board to look very closely at this project and recommend amendment on the issues of height, mass, and scale. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Sorry. I had to unmute myself. The next speaker is Theodore Live, who's followed by Sean Hart.

Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. Great. My name is Theodore Liv.

I'm at 17 Wendell Street. And I I believe that the impression that HRI gives of of support from the neighborhood is misplaced. As far as I can tell, nearly everybody in the neighborhood feels the building is completely out of proportion to where it's located. I mean, it's like it seems to be a fine building, on its own, but it's just the wrong location. It's not like Finch, which is out on Concord Avenue in an appropriate location.

It's issues like setback have not been dealt with sufficiently. All the all the surrounding buildings, which are two and a half story Victorian, have setbacks of about 20 feet. And this structure would be virtually up to the sidewalk. The one the one case where HR reported having overwhelming support was for the choice of brick, which is a fairly minimal issue from the neighborhood's point of view. It's the scale of the building, the shape of it that just seems completely inappropriate to the area.

And I think I'll end my con my comments there.

Thank you. The next speaker is Sean Hart, who's followed by Matt Bagadano.

Hey. Yeah. Can you hear me? Yes. Cool. Yeah. So I'm not gonna speak for long. I just want to register my really strong support for this project. I think it's really clear from the presentation and from the various rounds of feedback that the developers here have received that they're really trying to make this work. And, I mean, gotta keep our eye on the prize here.

There's so many families, so many people that are gonna get housed here that otherwise could not. As as other speakers have said, it's unfortunate that they lowered the height by a floor, but I understand that was a decision that was made. But, really, this was the idea behind the upzoning. These these kinds of projects were what the city what we all wanted to promote, and so this this is us now getting that. And so, really, I I wanna applaud applaud the developers here and just really wanna emphasize that I support this project and that we all should. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Matt Bagadano, who's followed by Zany Alter.

Hi. Good evening. Thank you for, for, holding this meeting. Some of you may know me. Certainly, I've worked for my name is I worked the affordable housing business. I was the vice president of CWC Builders for, nearly forty years and built affordable housing quite a bit in Cambridge, including for HRI, Auburn Court, the Kennedy Biscuit Lofts. I did the rehab of Jefferson Park in the eighties amongst others. And I I won't speak. I'm I'm obviously a member of the neighborhood as well. I live in the neighborhood a few blocks up on Oxford Street.

I won't speak to the massing of the building as people have already talked about that. I see problems with this in terms of cost. I don't know what they're what they're figuring for cost right now, but I can tell you, I can guarantee it's gonna come in quite a bit what higher than what's been shown thus far. And there will be a time when real reality will have to be met in terms of dealing with the cost of this building. I I don't know who's gonna pay for the overrun now if the city will kick in money.

I have no idea. There was we had a previous meeting where I suggested that they take a look at mass timber, particularly cross laminated timber. I don't have time to go into what that is. I'm working on a transit oriented project in Dorchester, a 150 feet from the Charlotte T Stop. It happens to be a four story building. We were able to take literally in a four story building five feet off the building using that particular type of construction type. It's not cheap, but it's well worth looking into. There's other issues with infrastructure, parking. I believe it's unrealistic to feel that, there'll only be there'll be no parking for and people won't have cars in the building. They will.

They'll park in the street. It's hard to park in the neighborhood. There's also, electrical service will have to be upgraded. Sure. Sure is problematic in the neighborhood. There's all kinds of issues to be dealt with going forward. I do suspect that this building will be scaled back because of cost. That's my suspicion. Thank you.

Thanks. And you you repeat your name and address for the record just so we

can It's Matt Pagodano, and I live at 118 Oxford Street.

Thank you.

Yeah.

So the next speaker is Gabe Malseptic, who's followed by Susan Stockard.

Hi there. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Hi. This is Amy Mal Septic.

I live at 31 Wendell Street. Appreciate the time tonight and the presentation. I know you're busy. I'm one of the abutters, and I'm delighted that we have affordable housing coming into the neighborhood. Halfway down the block, we have a new Cambridge, housing authority, couple of units that are enabling folks to stabilize and and get back on their feet, which is great.

And I know it's a it's a vital linchpin for people's lives. And so I think the spirit of of the proposal is great, but in its current form factor at 90 feet, it's pretty monolithic as others have said. This neighborhood's three to six stories or about, in most most up and down the block. And so as is, it's just gonna dominate the area. Someone mentioned, there's there's no consideration for parking except for their own staff.

The the developers, very slick. They're very sophisticated. Their community engagement process is very selective. They enthusiastically raise up and coach people who agree with their designs, but give last minute sort of half baked responses to any kind of dissent, which is frustrating. And so even in tonight's renderings, you could see there was some tactful use of angles and distance from the building because it's otherwise very obvious that this thing looms large.

I'm concerned about the amount of density without parking in an area that is a vital route for first responders and school buses between Oxford Street and Mass Ave, and it also sounds like it'll be a bit of a depot for their commercial and service operations for some of their other buildings as well. We've been pretty, excited about proposing a a more reasonable six story scale. And so, you know, as far as, you know, the whole concept of nimbyism, no. We're saying yes. But just something a little more reasonable that fits into the neighborhood so that we can truly integrate and have a fresh crop of neighbors in the area. So I'll I'll yield the rest of my time, and thank you for it.

Thank you. The next speaker is Susan Stockard, who's followed by Justin Safe.

This is Jim Stockard. My wife has been kind enough to let me speak in in in this slot. We live at 141 Oxford Street, a few blocks from this development. I'm I'm very enthusiastic about this development largely because I want to think of it as families and elderly residents who will have a chance to live in our neighborhood in in appropriate place for them. We've heard a few numbers tonight about the need for affordable homes in Cambridge.

The the idea that every time a new development opens, there are 10 times as many applicants as there are apartments. And it is it is really important to me that we welcome people of all kinds. I love the multigenerational nature of this building, the fact that we'll have some older residents as well as some some families with children. We have a wonderful school in this neighborhood, and some of the kids will be able to go to that school, and their parents will be able to walk them to school. We have a a number of services in this neighborhood, which will be helpful for the elderly residents.

And and I'm I'm I I I want us to think about families and not about units. And and I think there's plenty of room for these for these families. And I I I want us to compare the need of those families to be in a safe, permanent, warm place that they can afford, in many cases, near to some other critical resource they need, and and make that the highest of our priorities in Cambridge. And and and let the height of the building, the amount of setback from the street fall into place behind that important goal. So I hope the planning board will give a favorable response to what I think has been a thoughtful and careful process by HRI and and one which is worthy of the citizens of our neighborhood and the citizens of our city.

Thank you all for your service on the planning board.

Thank you. The next speaker is Justin Safe, who's followed by James I'm sorry. Justin Saif who's followed by James Zahl.

Hi. Justin Safe. 259 Harley Street. I wanna express my strong support for the proposed affordable housing building at 28 Wendell Street. I think the latest design looks great and will fit into the neighborhood well.

I think it relates well to other buildings nearby, you know, some of the Leslie buildings as well as other buildings in the vicinity. It is, of course, you know, on the first block off Mass Ave. One of the concepts that the city has been exploring as it looks to meet the numbers for both affordable housing and all housing in order to bring down rents, but also meet our envisioned goals as thickening corridors. So as part of that concept, would be to allow the first block off of major corridors to be taller. And, obviously, this comports with the requirements of the affordable housing overlay, which were were necessary in order to make it possible to build affordable housing.

And, you know, even with that reformed zoning, it's still basically a miracle that any affordable housing ever gets built given the challenges to finance it. Turning this lot into affordable housing will greatly improve the neighborhood, and study after study shows that reducing parking spots reduces carbon producing traffic, and it's gonna be an environmentally friendly, green, sustainable, resilient building consistent with Cambridge's high climate sustainability and resiliency goals. The location, you know, as was said, is very near a school. Now it'll be great for the many families who will come to call this place home. And there's many other local neighborhood amenities that, you know, will benefit from having additional patrons and also the foot traffic.

And I wanna thank you all for your consideration.

Thank you. The next speaker is James who's followed by Louis Wergaft.

Thank you. This is James Zall. 203 Pemberton Street. I hope the concert that my neighbors are having next door isn't coming through, but if case it is, I apologize. I am I'm pleased and pleasantly surprised by the result that HRI and ICON Architects managed to come up with in spite of a a very long and intense community engagement process.

I think this is a great building. I think it adds to the character of the neighborhood, which is largely residential as is this. I am impressed by the efforts involved in in designing something that would be appropriate for seniors as well as families with children. I attended two out of the three community meetings, and I've attended many meetings on the AHO over many years. And I hold my breath each time the AHO process brings forth another another bears fruit in another way.

This one survived, and I'd like to thank the the city for passing the AHO and enabling this kind of building to happen. I also regret that the process involves so many community meetings, which despite HRI's best efforts tend to bring out the worst in people. I also regret the loss of 15 homes when the need in the city is measured by far more digits than that. All in all, it's a great job. I'm happy that it came through unscathed more than unscathed.

It, I think, is going to, in time, be a great addition to the neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Louis Wergaft, who's followed by Zany Alter. You can begin by unmuting yourself and giving your name and address, please.

Okay. I I think so. Can you hear me at this point?

Yes.

Oh, okay. I'm my name is Lou Wergaft at 35 Wendell Street, in Cambridge. As one of the abutters, the shadow that would be cast by this building will fall more heavily on us and particularly on the garden that my wife has been cultivating for the last twenty five years or so. But the concern about this project is not just with the butters, but with a large number of community members who have signed our petition or over 300 signatures on it as has been submitted to the to the planning board. And I want to, first say that as a community, we welcome affordable housing.

And, our opposition has been entirely to the scale and the scope of the building that HRI would like to would like to construct. It's completely out of scale with the existing surrounding buildings and, it does not fit in. I'd also like to address the the appearance that there's been a really cooperative relationship between HRI and the community in planning these bill in in planning this building. It's true that HRI has been responsive to issues of relatively small scale, but they have completely ignored the growing feeling in the neighborhood itself that this is an inappropriate, building. That feeling reached its crescendo in the second November meeting of the the board.

And HRI cunningly eliminated open public comment on the project in their third build in in the third building. So there's a lot of unhappiness, appropriate unhappiness about the scale of this building, and, I'll have to conclude, I guess, with that.

Thank you. The next speaker is Zanny Alter, and who is followed by Joel Bard.

Hi, everyone. My name is Annie Alter. I live at 35 Pemberton Street, and I would like to speak to my real appreciation and gratitude for this project. I've been really impressed over the past few months with how HRI has both listened to the community and adapted their project to, follow what the community has specified even though others on this call don't feel that way. I work with young people from the city of Cambridge who go to college at Bunker Hill Community College.

I've lived in the city my entire life, and it is so important to have more spaces where students who graduate low income students who graduate from CRLS can continue to live with their families, and I'm really looking forward to having more spaces in Cambridge like that, especially in the Baldwin neighborhood, in this Mid Cambridge area where we need more affordable housing. And this design, I think, is really beautiful. And seeing the the three d mock ups, I thought was really exciting. And I'm so happy to have a partner like HRI building this with the city and really hope that the planning board gives its strong recommendation to the city council or to the city, however this process works exactly, to support the work that HRI has done. And I actually thought that the third meeting was a really wonderful way to integrate voices of folks who came to see the work that the the folks who have been working on this project have done and give interactive feedback instead of just having so many voices shout over each other.

And so I was really appreciative of that. And I will just thank everyone for all of their hard work on this and commend everyone who is helping to create more spaces for low income folks to live and stay living in Cambridge. Thank you.

Thank you. And I feel like I I may have taken you out of order, so I apologize for that. The next speaker is Joel Bard, who's followed by Rachel Plummer.

I thank you. Yes. This is Joel Bart. I live at 51 Wendell Street. And Sandy, it's a pleasure to speak after you even though we don't agree on this project. So I do live on Wendell Street. I'm fortunate to live across Oxford Street, so I won't be affected directly by the shadows as some of the neighbors you've heard from will be. But I should say at the outset, that the neighborhood has always welcomed affordable housing, social services housing, housing for the formerly unhoused, which we welcomed within the last year. And there's lots of section eight housing in the neighborhood. Yes.

We are smaller scale, but there are a lot of affordable housing units around the neighborhood. The concern really is scale. And I have to say to the architects, I'm really disappointed in the presentation. I believe there were three slides of the front of the building. Not one of them showed any of the buildings that represent the scale of the neighborhood.

In the background was always the one brick building, a fabulous roughly 100 year old building at the corner of Oxford And Wendell. It's about five stories high, a lot of units there, and it's it's perfect for the neighborhood. Good location, good scale, good design. But I think your slideshow needs to be more honest. It needs to show the proposed building in the context of the the wood framed older structures.

And the issue, obviously, of scale is less of a concern for neighbors who live four, five blocks away than elsewhere in the city, of course. The and I should add as well that the neighborhood is warm and we will absolutely welcome all new residents. The issue again is really the scale of the building. So planning board members, I hope you'll look very closely at the context, the scale. Clearly, that's something that you're very good about, and we certainly are gonna look forward to and appreciate your thoughtful review and comments. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Rachel Plummer, who's followed. It says, Justin Safe. We're we're only just as a note, we're only everyone will only speak once. I'm just I'll I'll check to see if that's another speaker under the same account. I'm sorry. Rachel Plummer, you can go ahead.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. My name is Rachel Plummer. I'm resident at 10 Wendell Street, just down the street for where this proposed development will be going. And I'm here to express my wholehearted support for the development as it's proposed.

I really appreciated the process that HRI undertook for this development over the course of many months despite extreme tensions within the neighborhood. I think that the most recent community meeting reflected a need to make more space for more voices to be heard. I frequently give public comment at meetings like this at city council, and I was frightened to give public comment in the first and the second community meeting. I was heckled at one of them. And so I think that voices of people who support this project were not uplifted, or heard among neighbors who, were viciously opposed to the project.

And I think that this may be uncomfortable for the neighborhood, for me included. It'll make parking more difficult. It'll be a larger structure in our neighborhood, and I think that, being a little bit uncomfortable, is necessary in situations like this where housing needs are so dire. Thank you.

Thank you. The next oh, so I've seen some hands go up and down. The next speaker is Esther Hayning. There are no other hands raised. So if you were intending to speak, and you didn't speak already, you can push the raise hand button, or star nine. If you're connected by phone, you only need to press it once. If you just press it once, the hand will stay up, and you'll be in the queue, and we'll know that you wanna speak. So while this last speaker is speaking, just if if you if you haven't spoken yet and you wanna speak, now is the time to to push that button. I'd ask you to do that. So, we'll go to Esther Hoenig next.

Hi. My name is Esther Hoenig. I live at 136 Pine Street Number 2, and I'm very, very happy to be able to express my strong support for the 2830 Wendell Street project. As a longtime resident of the port, I know the joys of having a diverse neighborhood. I'm very pleased that the Baldwin neighborhood residents will be able to also enjoy intergenerational neighbors from varying economic backgrounds.

I applaud the addition of 95 new new badly needed affordable affordable homes given the incredibly pressing need that we've already heard about many times for affordable housing. And having served on the board of CNAHS for many years, I know and deeply respect the array of very critical resident services that HR staff provides. I also want to commend HRI for what I consider to be a very well designed building. Not only is it aesthetically pleasing, but it also picks up on the architecture of nearby buildings. I also like the recessed height at street level and the very attractive streetscape being presented.

I hope that all of you planning board members will share my deep enthusiasm for this project. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. And we have, and one more speaker, Lucy Engels. You can unmute yourself and begin with your name and address, please.

Hello. My name is Lucy Engels. I live at 47 Wendell Street. I am here to express my strong support of the project. While I do understand and appreciate my neighbors' concerns about scale, I it will make it it will have a strong impact on the neighborhood.

However, as as someone who has grown up in Cambridge and who is hoping to be able to continue to live in Cambridge following my graduation for college, this this project is very, very important, and it does matter that it is in the Baldwin neighborhood. The ball I I love our neighborhood. I am so glad I have had the opportunity to live here, and I think it is very important that more families have the opportunity to live in this neighborhood. And so while it is and so while it is not this project is not without flaws, it is going to make a big impact on the neighborhood and change a lot of people's lives, and I hope they would as it did for my life and my family. And that is why I am very strongly in support of this project.

Thank you. So, that is the list of speakers. I'll turn it back over to the chair.

Okay. Thank you, Jeff, and, thank you to, everyone who spoke or, wrote into the board. And as was mentioned earlier, you can still submit written comments after a meeting. So we're now gonna move from public comment to board discussion. Do board members have any questions? We can start with questions and then move to to discussion. Who would like to begin? Diego.

Hi. I have a question for the, proponents, the applicants. And I was kind of thinking about the, slide where you showed the community meetings and the development of the design. I'm wondering, if at any point there was consideration to go narrower and step, like, towards the the center a little bit in in the massing sense to step higher and then narrower to sort of blend into the neighborhood context a little bit more. I think I think that's just my only question that ever came up.

Alright. Thanks, Diego. Who on the project team? Eleni, did you wanna

Yeah. I can, it's an interesting question. So you mean, instead of having a a building that's across the site, have it more in the center and higher up?

Yeah. So sort of like, there was a multifamily, design guidelines, and there was this diagram that I really loved, which was, like, you have the neighboring context and then the the massing of the building sort of steps up so that it sort of blends into the neighborhood context more. So, yeah, it would step up, say, like, four, five, six stories, and then go to, like, eight stories in the center or 12 stories, however however tall it needs to be, like, satisfy the unit requirement that you have right now, for example.

Yeah. It's definitely an interesting idea because we have large family units that definitely restricts us in how we design our floor plates. We like to stack our floor plates, you know, very efficiently. It also you know, the higher the the taller the building, the shadows would cast in different ways. Right now, we're actually casting pretty minimal shadows across the street, mostly in the winter. And but it really does come down to how we design the floor plate, the elevators, and then the added cost to go higher than eight stories, when you kinda get into that even higher, high rise. Gabby, if you have anything to add, you can chime in.

No. I just think that with the changing landscape of the AHO provisions, we were also further limited when we started schematic design on how high we could go.

Thank you. Mhmm.

Ashley. Thank you. I had a question about the, if there are any, you know, transportation demand measures just given I I was looking at a map, and according to Google, I don't know how accurate it is, but it looks like the site is about 0.6 or 0.7 miles away from the closest train stop, which is, you know, kind of a walk. And so given there is an elderly population, was just wondering, you know, what types of transportation might be planned. And particularly, for example, if there is, you know, say, for example, like, paratransit van, like, the ride or door to door that needs to park, Does that park in building, or does that park on the side of the sidewalk?

You know, what are the plans for that? Thank you.

Yeah. Great questions. In terms of transportation, like, connecting to other public transit, there are a couple bus lines on Mass Ave that connect to Harvard and to Porter Square. So I would imagine that if someone doesn't want to walk to the red line, they'd be able to hop on the the bus there. We do have a robust bike room, that will be, you know, for all residents.

In terms of people who need to visit the site or need to pick someone up, they'd be able to pull into the the small garage that we have or even the driveway so that they could pick someone up just like, you know, any kind of ride would do, on a residential street. But we are working closely with city staff on transportation demand management, and we would look to, offer some kind of move in, Charlie card, you know, fully kind of funded passes for folks to start using, and then also connect folks to various low income programs that there are out there with the city. We have a really robust resident services program with HRI, and we have we'll have an on-site person who'll be able to connect folks to support. So we we're not expecting residents to just move in and not have any kind of connection to resources. They would have someone who'd help them figure out those resources.

And as we get to know our residents and do our surveys that we do, right, when people move in, we'd be able to better, you know, figure out what they might need.

Great. Thank you. Ted, let's go to you next.

Yeah. I'm just wondering if there's anyone present today on the proponents who have samples of the materials that you're proposing for the building that we can see? And as another question is relating to materials is also plans for the garage door, which is unfortunately, you know, smack dab and right next to the entry or next to the the library and right on the street.

Debbie, do you wanna take

the garage door, and I'll get the samples prepared?

Sure. Yes. To be clear, Ted, did you wanna see the samples live here, or were you asking to see them set up a meeting to see see them in person?

Well, I'd love to see them in person at some time, but I was hoping you might have them today that we could see them.

Yeah. Yeah. Aleni has

that meeting been together. You know, I think there's an awful lot gray on the building, but you've indicated that you are open to Mhmm. Further discussions about the the color scheme. And so I was wondering, you know, rather than looking at a a a drawing, whether you actually have them present.

Yeah. Aline will gather them. I can I can speak to the garage door? So the garage door location is at the current curb cut on the site, so it's pretty limited in width. And the building is set back from the property line by eight feet on that side, so there's a little bit of space for someone to pull in. And then we're working with HRI on how that access would work with the with the door the garage door itself. It's a an overhead door that we're working to have security, but a kind of a remote switch for who whoever would need it so that they could pull in.

Well, I'm also thank you for that information, but I'm also interested in the aesthetics of the garage door

Got it.

And what it's going to look like right on Wendell Street.

Sure. We are still specifying the exact door to be used, but we're definitely open to comment on on how you might want to see that. Right now, it's just a pink color that kinda matches the adjacent brick. So it's not meant to be prominent, but, you know, still working through that design as well.

Mhmm. Thank you.

K. I have some samples, but I will warn you that I'm

not

under outdoor light lighting. So I think if we did want to schedule a time to see them in person, that's probably the best way to see. Okay. So this was the brick. Mhmm. So it does have some variation. You can see that when I change it, it really changes in color. So I recommend us to, schedule a time to meet in person. So that's the brick. This is the main color, which actually reads greener in person. But

Okay.

So in in the sunlight and even in shadow outside, it reads very green.

That's the granite for the First Floor?

No. That's the main body above.

Oh, that's the main body above. Is that is that what's listed as Willow Gray, I think?

Or Yep.

Yep. Willow Gray.

Uh-huh.

And then you asked about the base. So this is the base. It has a lot of texture as you can see.

Yeah.

Mhmm. And it feels it has kind of a grainy texture. And then these are the various accent colors.

And yeah.

But I'd be happy to schedule a time. We actually did do this with the urban design team. We we had a time, where we met up in person and viewed these outside in shade and in sunlight, which I thought was very helpful. So if if members of the board would like to schedule a time with with us, I'd be happy to do that.

Well well, thank you. Thanks for showing them, and then I'll I'll talk to staff and see if whether that's a a possibility or feasible.

I think we also may have some photos from when we had them all outside, and I can share that.

Okay. Thank you. Madam chair, that's my questions right now.

Thank you, Ted. Appreciate it. Dan, let's go to you.

Thank you, madam chair. Just a couple of questions about sort of heightened massing and and setbacks. When this project was a nine story building, was the differentiation more of a five story and then four story above? Just sort of thinking about the five sir, currently six story brick bookends, so to speak, and whether they've been consistently at that height. And then you just had another Sixth Floor sorry, ninth floor above of the, piece setback, just in terms of the the studies.

I I appreciated seeing several of the sequences of the change in design. So that's one question just in terms of the of the proportioning. And the other is, in terms of the setbacks. When I first looked at this, I was kind of hoping that there was a bigger forecourt. And, obviously, you've got south facing and some landscape in the back.

But was there had there been conversations about increasing the front yard setback and decreasing the rear yard setback? I know that, particularly for the scale of this, it feels proportionally taller the closer it is to the sidewalk. So, just two questions, at the moment for sort of proportionate at at height and setbacks.

Gabby, do you wanna pull up the presentation with those the evolution of the design? That'd be helpful.

Yeah. So you can see here your question around whether the bookends were always six stories. They were always two stories below the top. So when we reduced from nine to eight stories, the bookends went from seven to six stories.

So no discussion of keeping the bookends shorter and going taller just with this the, more setback portion?

We had looked at offsetting doing a five and a five seven eight variation. We also have some limitations with the the structural system and having two stories at the top that stacked and then all all the floors below that that were the same lended itself better to the the unit layouts.

And just to clarify in the June iteration, those the bookends, that those are seven stories, full seven stories. So there wasn't a step back in the bookend itself.

Got it. Just a change of material. Mhmm.

Yes. Sorry. Thank thank you for clarifying that, Melanie. Yes. This this was just a change of material.

Okay. And in terms of the setbacks?

So the four court is 19 feet, which is aligning with the other mansions, and, properties along Wendell Street that are in, like, the 20 foot setback range. The rear, stood at 15 feet as part of the previous age show stipulation, and it allows for us to have a usable space back there for the residents, as well as some back of house elements.

So one one thing that's probably not I don't think was clear on the site design is that, the condensers that's right, Gabby. Right? The condensers, are in that right next to the building in the setback, so they won't be visible to anyone on the street. And that was, you know, very intentional. We didn't we wanted them to be out of the way. We wanted them to stay, you know, safe so that they don't get messed with, but also so that they're not kind of disrupting anyone's experience of the street.

Yeah. So there'll be about 10, like, suitcase size condensers for the hot water system back there completely shielded by the the fencing there as well as the planting.

So can can you just point out exactly where that is? Is that where Yeah.

It's my cursor

right here. There.

Okay. Yeah. Thank you.

Mhmm. Yeah. Okay. And so so the rear yard setback was stipulated, as a given from the beginning?

Yeah.

Yeah. Great. Thank

you. Okay. Caroline. Oh, you have to unmute yourself.

Thank you very much, and

thank you, manager. Sure. No worries. We've all done it more than once.

I appreciate that. I I appreciate the proponents' dedication to the affordable housing for both families and for seniors and the commitment to passive house and the smaller window to wall ratio that that requires. And I I I I really like the soldier course and the kind of visual interest that comes with that. I'm I I am would encourage you maybe to play around a little bit more with window sills and lentils on those first and second story windows just to kind of emphasize the windows as much as possible. I had a question about the Trent next to the garage door, which has come up, the transformer and the fire command, and if they need to be on Wendell Street or if that space can be activated maybe with the quiet rooms or some other kind of interactive space.

I don't know if if the utility is requiring that the transformer be in that location, but, hopefully, it's not. I'm curious about, how the roof there it seems like there's a fair amount of unused roof space given that the condensers are on the Ground Floor. So curious about if there's any thought on kind of some additional sustainability efforts or anything else on the roof. And a quick question for city staff, if I can throw this in there. Just for my own education, I suppose, is that Cambridge fire department do they review all large scale development projects, both for kind of ability to kind of put out fires in the back of the building and things like traffic any traffic concerns that might come up.

So wholesome of questions. Apologies for throwing them all up.

No. No.

That's that's fine. Why don't we start, first with the proponent on the transformer ish, suggestion and then also the unused roof space, your thoughts on that or previous discussions that have been held. If you could just inform us on that.

Yeah. So the transformer, has to be in a three hour vault and be accessible for any maintenance, with the street. We're not finalized with Eversource. As you can guess, it's a process, but that's through our discussions with them on the location. The fire command center, similarly, we had tried to put further into the building. The the fire department, had requested a door directly to the exterior so that they don't coincide with people egressing from the front, and so that that was per their request.

Can you clarify how that it's not obvious to me from looking at the plans how how that is that spandrel glass that you have on those spaces? What do you have at the Ground Floor on those spaces?

For the transformer and the fire command center, specifically, there's no openings other than the doors there. That's where the little library is and the, like, recessed brick detailing there.

Okay. And have you talked through roof?

Oh, yes. So we're planning for PV solar on the roof. Has engaged with a couple of solar consultants to to figure out the capacity there.

Great.

And, Jeff, I don't know if if you can shed light on the where the fire department fits in on the review. I mean, obviously, they've been involved because we're talking about their suggestions for where that command center should be located. But

I can I can also say that HRI, because, you know, we've been working in the city for so long, we always engage this the fire department very early on because we want to make sure that they're comfortable with the building and that, of course, we're also designing a building that they agree is, you know, safe and and to code just like we use our code consultants to do the same thing with our architect? So we've already spoken with them once. We we met with them, I think, back in early March, and we would likely meet with them again, in the fall as we advance the designs. Thank you.

And the answer to your question is yes. They the fire department has review of all building permits.

Okay. So they they they can comment earlier, but they definitely have review at the end.

Okay.

Yes.

Thank you. Tom, let's go to you.

Thank you, madam chair. I have three comments three questions, not comments. So you've been at this a long time. And in fact, such a long time, the zoning code has changed to the middle of it. And in fact, I can't tell you how much I appreciate the fact that even though as of right, you could go much higher, you chose not to.

And quite the reverse, actually, your presentation tonight and the materials you submitted in support of the application revealed a process by which you lowered the building. And if you could just quickly summarize why you think this is the correct height to land at given those circumstances. That's question one. Question two is, do you have a model and a model in context? When we used to in the olden days, when we used to meet in person, that was part of what was required was a physical model.

And I think a lot of the questions that arose in public comment tonight around the height and massing could be judged and discussed more precisely with the model. But maybe in this format, you must have a digital model that's in context that we might be able to, at the next hearing, have a chance to assess some of those those comments. That's question two. And question three is, I don't know if it's for staff or for you, but I'd like to hear for the proponent, the timing of this particular hearing. Obviously, the design is well advanced, and so comments that the planning board might make are are coming up against decisions that have been cemented over time.

You know, as many of you know, I'm an architect, and the process by which we do designs goes through phases. The earlier phases, it's easier to make adjustments. They're not as devastating in terms of the work or the financial implications that they are when you're further along. The question around into some of where the utilities might be or the details of where the fire department may enter or exit the building are things that can be discussed and manipulated earlier in the design, but are really, really difficult, if not impossible, at this point in the design. So I I was wondering, you know, how did we choose to review the design at this point of its evolution, which is fairly far along.

So those are my three questions.

Can I can start, and then Gabby and Kate can jump in? In terms of the size of the building, I believe that was your first question. So as you noted, we did start with nine stories, which was what was permitted under the AHO when we started this process. We lowered it to eight. But for a variety of reasons, we feel that that's the right height.

You know, we have a mandate to create affordable units from the city. It's our own mission as a nonprofit. We care deeply about low income residents of this of this city, and this is a great these two parcels, give us the opportunity to build a significant number of units in a really great neighborhood that's, highly accessible, and does not have a lot of affordable housing to start with. So that was a really unique opportunity. There are, you know, costs that come into play, financial modeling that we do to make sure that the project is feasible.

Land in Cambridge is expensive. And so even though we bought it from Leslie, you know, they had financial commitments on their end, and so we paid what we did. And in order to make it, an a calculation of of, you know, per unit cost, we had to decide what that kind of limit was, in terms of of the number of total apartments that we could, do. We did also change the unit mix. We usually do fam all family housing in our projects, and we decide to do this intergenerational piece, which we felt was the right move after some conversations we had in the neighborhood.

It also meant that we have 40 apartments for older adults, which also reduces the demand on cars in the neighborhood, which we've seen in the rest of our developments across the city. So there's a lot of a lot of factors at play, but we felt that this was really the the sweet spot. So, yes, nine stories would have been more more apartments, but we did hear that pushback from the neighborhood, and we wanted to honor But we do feel that eight is really where we need to land.

Yes. I agree with any everything Eleni said. And the only thing I'd add is directly related to the slide that you see in front of you, which due to the the scale that we're able to achieve here, we have the on-site management office that is specific for this building and our on-site maintenance office, which are two, we believe, critical components to having a successful community. So we think holistically whenever we're working on a project, and we, as a team, but also in close coordination and through a series of conversations, big and small, feels confident in what we've put forth as our massing.

Thank you. Do you have a model?

Yeah. Like, a physical model? Is that the Yeah.

Either physical well, in this format, probably, digital works better, you know, but if we could get together, I would appreciate a physical model. I don't know about others. But yeah.

Yes. We we are fortunate enough to to work in Cambridge, which has their own city model digitally, which is extremely And so we we use that, obviously, as the basis and built up around that and added our our own layers and landscaping, and we can definitely share more of that to to show how it it lands in the context.

And then lastly, my process question. Do you how do how do you time what what what advice were you given to say this is the right moment to get the cranky planning board's input?

You know, great question. I think it's really hard to have the right timing for every group involved. So it you know, this is you might feel that the project is at a point where it's in its development, too hard to make decisions. But, you know, we wanted to make sure the community was involved in a lot of those design design decisions as well as the city staff. And so I think there is a little bit of push and pull there.

We wanted to present something to the planning board that we felt really confident with and that we felt proud of. We didn't want to come to you with an unfinished, you know, design, and that's why we wanted to show you the iterative process that we went through explaining why we made those changes over time. So, you know, I think there is still there is still space for for changes. You know, we've we're still working on the cornices, on the on the materials. I think as you've seen between March and now, most of those changes were material changes, and they make a big difference in in what the design how the design is seen.

So you might feel differently in terms of kind of the wiggle room of design, but we did want come to you with something that we felt very proud of and that we, you know, felt comfortable presenting to you.

Great. Thank you.

Okay. So I think we've gotten through everyone's questions. I do just wanna reiterate the need for seeing, you know, the three d I mean, the, you know, the digital model, whatever. It would be very, very helpful because I think, you know, what is lacking is this a sense of a broader context on this on the street. And I noted that one of the one of the members of the public did notice that there was note that there was a three d mock up that had been presented that was very, very helpful in the public discussion.

So I think it would be very useful for the the planning board as well. So with that, board members, comments on the proposed designed recommendations for changes, adjustments, things you like, things you don't like, who would like to be in. Mary.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So so first, I wanna say the the public input was really helpful on this one. I I wanna commend the applicant on clearly engaging with the community, listening, and having a dialogue. Obviously, there are different points of view, and and we understand that's the nature of of any project. But I appreciate how much effort you all put into to that, and thank you also to the public for sharing those thoughts. I'm gonna uncharacteristically start with some architecture thoughts.

I'm a landscape architect, so it usually goes the other way. So I think one thing is, I think relative to what Tom just described, but also, I think some of the questions that Diego had about massing up or Dan had about pushing it back, I would just reiterate that if there had been a chance to be at all part of, those kind of more massing, conversations, I would just maybe urge the city to think about how these are sequenced so that, we can weigh into it because that those are really interesting. But I think to Tom's point, I also recognize when a project is at a certain stage where it's past that. Now my second comment is the over the course of the design, it feels like you've ended up with a bit more of, like, a solid facade with two bookends. I feel like I've lost the base of the building.

And one suggestion to think about is if you're using this this full depth brick as you described and you're able to do kind of an interesting texture detail with it, kinda what you did at the little library, for example, it feels like that's a kinda minor insertion of it that could actually bear to have, like, more of a consistent patterning or texture all the way across that base. But whatever you do, it it almost just struck me that because it was so one note at this one moment, it called out that that base really wasn't articulated as well as it could. So maybe just relooking at that base and the facade onto Wendell Street, particularly also relative to some other of my colleague's comments about the the garage door and the fire command. So just knowing that that's gonna be a tough area, making sure that, the the base feels articulated. Interested in the corners, that that kind of corner brick detailing?

Not sure about it yet. So I'll leave that to other colleagues or or you to keep thinking about. And then now I I and oh, and the last one relative to some of Ted's comments is, especially the rear of the building, reads as really gray in tone. So to Ted's point, I I don't know if in light it would feel different, but it did feel like it was lending itself towards lots of grays. And because I had lost the base of the building a bit, it felt very strong.

So I think continuing to explore those material options and color options, especially with the city with an eye to that. Okay. Now switching over to the landscape. So in in contrast to Tom's comment, I would almost say the landscape feels to me like it's not that far along in design, and there is a lot of opportunity to improve and enhance it. It looks so okay.

One of your the challenges of this project, right, is is stitching into a community. Right? And it's challenging, right, because of the scale, contrast. And it feels very piecemeal the way the landscape is designed around the building. In some areas, for example, the the low walkable planting feel like maybe they're oriented towards you have some doors or maintenance, but they don't feel they feel like they're gonna be a weed alley in the longer term.

The back of the building in particular, it looks like this recreation space in one drawing. It looks like maybe it's artificial turf. In another, it's granular stabilized pavement, but there's no planting in this little kind of area between the sunroom and the the room for residents. So I just feel like vegetation within that little area will also be important, whether that's planters that are engaged to the building or, you know, just something in there. And along the backside of the the fence line, there's especially this strolling path and seating, this right opposite maintenance doors.

It just doesn't feel like a very appealing place to be. And so I would encourage the applicants to really, dig in again how the landscape works all the way around the building. And then the last piece on that, my last comment is the fence is gonna be important in this project, obviously, to make your neighbors feel, you know, comfortable and that and that you're doing everything to to buffer them if they desire that. It looks like you have a solid wood fence. I would be interested to see more details or approach to the fence so that it doesn't read that that it reads appropriate to the scale of the building, the the nature of the building.

So just encouraging you to look at that fence selection and detailing to make sure that you're creating that, you know, beautiful edge condition for the residents, but also for the the neighbors. So those are my comments. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. Appreciate it. Tom, let's go to you next.

Thank you. And I'll see if I can organize my thought here my thoughts here. So the Wendell Street First Floor window system was referred to as a storefront in the presentation. And that made me think or reinforced this notion that I have when I was looking at the drawings that it looked commercial. And I really would question whether store is the right character to have on the First Floor Of Wendell Street in the middle of the block.

I know there are institutional buildings around, but I think there's another way to think about that those thresholds, right, and the that wall so that light doesn't spill out inadvertently on a late fall night so that it it looks like a commercial front when I think that's not really the character of Wendell Street. I would say I know this was picked up by the staff in their memo around urban design, and you've alluded to some flexibility in terms of how you detail the cornice. And I think it makes a huge difference in terms of the way that you understand the height of the building, what your impression is of the building. And it was made extremely apparent when you compare the north and the south elevations. The south elevation has a two story expression in a lighter color.

And in fact, some of the precedent photographs and the materials submitted in support of the application were looking at these beautiful buildings on Mass Ave, the one that has marathon sports in it on the First Floor, where the top floor or floors are considered a kind of an attic space. And I'm not saying that you lower the ceiling and make it hot and and and and and store things up there. But it just in terms of it being a a wider top, you think about the top being maybe one story or two stories. It's expressed as two stories on the back of the building. There's a way to rather than put that corner at the very height, the very top of the building, to drop it down, and you can dramatically change the impression of the height and bulk of the building, which is the central issue in the community as far as I one of the central issues in the community that I heard.

So that architectural adjustment, those details, I'm sure you got a very skilled architectural team here, can play with that and figure out how you can affect that reading. One of the other comments tonight was about character. And rather kind of devastating and searing comments, I thought, maybe unfair. But this coupled with the this the library, which you called in the presentation, the library was called something that was playful. And it may be playful, but that's not the way I think about it because it's it's actually very serious.

It's a it's something that recognizes a community asset that's been here near the site for a long time that's very real. It's not playful. It's actually sincere and real. And I think about all the other things in the community that are are place making and real and full of character, you know, over on Sacramento Street, that funny hand painted sign on the high about high energy metaphysics. It makes me laugh out loud every time I drive by there.

Or the Maude Morgan Art Center that has a big part in not only displaying art, but promoting art amongst the community, which is amazing. That's just a block away. And then I think about what used to occupy the site, which was well, I don't wanna talk about it in the past tense. It's still very much alive, Lesley University, but that's an institution with a remarkable history. Right?

But which started out as a institution that supported early childcare, kind of invented early childcare as a discipline. It has a a history of supporting people with developmental disabilities to mainstream them into into to life really fantastic thing. If there was some way that the design could recognize that history or even the fact that that school wrote back to the arts was one of the first places to invent art therapy to help people who are suffering. So there's ways in which there's real history around this place that I think through some details in the building could begin to make this building have some recognition of where it's from and where it's sitting. Lastly, well, the real brick, think that's fantastic.

It's wonderful. I critique often these buildings at how how thin and unsubstantial they are. And I really look forward to the way that you'll avail yourself of that up that opportunity to use that material. You were talking about the window details and the reentered corners and stuff. I have to get this this sort of substantial and carefully thought out detail will make a huge difference in terms of the presence of this building on the street. So I look forward to the evolution of those details and also seeing the model, although, as Mary alluded to, it might be a hearing too late to be looking at massing. So thank you.

Dan, what are your comments?

Thank you, madam chair. So couple comments and and some requests. I certainly very much appreciate and and echo both Mary and and Tom's comments. I think, I'll try and organize my thoughts a little bit as well, but, I'd almost like to see more landscape in the rear and less in the front. I almost wanna suggest hardscape.

The views, particularly looking back down Wendell towards Oxford, make that sidewalk look extraordinarily narrow, and I think accentuates the the height rather than than, allow you to be kind of feeling like there's some a little bit of breathing room. But that that may be, just my interpretation. Wanna back up a little bit and just sort of say that, you know, it's it's a really challenging piece to be, responding to and looking to, public comments and and responsibility for managing scale and mass and heights. Right? And, clearly, we're in new territory with, buildings of this scale into residential neighborhoods.

And, you know, I think great if we can have a little bit earlier, input, but, you know, our our our job is to sort of celebrate the, the ability to get more affordable housing, to have more neighbors, but then also to, to make sure that these buildings fit as best they can. So I think to please take take these comments for for what they're worth. I would like to see, much as Tom mentioned, a little bit more care rather than storefront and perhaps a little bit of different distribution. I I think, the storefront material and and larger glazing feels more appropriate to the the taller portion and less so to the sort of hub and, and brick portion. I'd almost wanna see different character to those.

Programmatically, I'm assuming the hub is a community meeting room. I would rather see it more engaged internally than being a separate outdoor space. I think there's an opportunity for really engaging both the residents and the community internally rather than having those be, be separable. I know that there's an interior connector, but I think it might be more effective if it was, accessed internally and you had the opportunity to engage, with the, with the residents. In that light, I would I don't know if it's, too late here, but it doesn't change the massing.

But I don't know if it was a consideration to protect perhaps move the offices, and switch it with the hub and have that hub and lobby and vestibule all part of a larger, more social gathering space. If there's an opportunity to shift around some interior program, this late in the in the game, I think that that might be, very beneficial, might lend itself to more of that open gloom glazing. I I also am skeptical about the vestibule location and the entry. It feels really jammed up against the brick there as I looked at the the renderings. It helps to have the little that entry canopy extend out.

But, proportionally, I think that it would make architecturally more sense if it was shifted one bay over towards the east and looked at some potential reconfiguration of that of that lobby space. The courtyard at the rear, it's I know that you're working with unit sizes, but even for a south facing courtyard, it feels tight. And I think that it given that you can't really shift that much, I don't know if you've considered, actually having, the common room and perhaps sunrooms opening out directly, whether they're sliding glass or other doors, that could open and activate that space a little bit more, perhaps be, more, you know, three season, four season in good weather. Obviously, great to have those spaces have some sunlight in the winter. And so just looking for ways for this building maybe to breathe and engage with the outside a little bit more and and, in particular, maybe engage the neighborhood a little bit more.

If there was that forecourt was a little less planted and more, forecourt and and, permeable to the outside rather than backing up against offices, I'd love to to see that. And I guess then the, the request would be, not only a model, but I I'm assuming you guys have done a sun sun shadow study. I'd love to see the daylight and shadow impact on the neighborhood. And I I do feel like this drawing set and presentation really, didn't show context very well, either through the the renderings or even site plan. So I have a hard time sort of understanding this in the context and in scale and in impact to the other buildings.

So I feel like, when this comes back, that's my strong request is that we have a a much more robust sense about the environmental and scale impacts of the, of this building. Hope you take my comments as they're, intended, which is I'm hoping we can make this continue to make this better. You guys are doing a great job. It's gonna be great to have affordable housing for elderly and families. So thank you.

Thanks, Dan. Ashley, let's hear from you next.

Thank you. First of all, I really appreciate that there is senior housings proposed for this site as well as larger family size units. I think that's very important for especially this neighborhood. I love the idea of a sunroom and the different community rooms given how cold our winters get, how extreme our win our, you know, weather is becoming these days. And, similar to what Dan was suggesting earlier, one of the thoughts I you know, looking at the plans itself, it felt that the open space facing south seems, you know, cramp or very deep.

And so, you know, if there is a way to flow into the sunroom or even that resident room on the side or even the common area, I think that'd be great just to, like, open up more space, give it more flexibility, or also just make it more fun and a place that people do wanna spend time in, I think that'd be great. And what was I going to say? For better or for worse, looking at the earlier iterations of the building, there were some, you know, I think it was like variation in color or texture, which I think Mary alluded to earlier, you know, just like that variation that creates the sense of more depth and decreases the building bulk a bit. I think that is great, you know, something to think about if there's a way to incorporate just a little more texture, changes to break down what is now a more monotonous building into more parts. And I I like Eric's comment.

I think it was one of the first few comments in the, urban design memo about he was, like, thinking about the cornice line on the a four, so that the it doesn't emphasize how high the building is, which clearly is a concern of the community. And so, otherwise, excited to see, you know, this building proceed, and, yeah, think it'll be a great addition to the neighborhood.

Great. Thank you, Ashley. Any other thoughts from planning board members? Ted.

Thank you, chair. I I really like the building. I am especially pleased that we're getting, you know, 95 units of affordable housing, in this location, replacing two very undistinguished building and a pretty awful tennis court. And, you know, the the the need for the housing is so drastic, that the city has adopted the AHO and, the multifamily. And we all we all have to go up higher because that's the only way we're going to get more housing.

And, I was very pleased, to to see this proposal. And I'm even more pleased at my colleague's comments about it because there are things that I had not thought about, but I think would be great improvements to it. I I do like the brick. I think that really helps break down the size of it. I do like the cornice lines too, and especially when you compare it to some of the early iterations that did not have the cornices.

They just looked like, you know, just square or rectangular buildings. But, you know, what my colleagues have suggested and what urban design people have suggested that maybe there are different ways to use the cornices. I don't know that I personally, know, see the cornices as trying to mitigate the height. It is a building of eight stories, and it's always gonna be a building of eight stories. And, you know, we're just gonna have to get used to things being taller in this city, to to reach the the goals we'd we'd really like.

I am concerned about how gray it looks in the drawings. A little surprised when you showed the the the actual material. I thought it had a bluish tint in the drawings, and you're indicating it has a greenish tint. So I I hope that you give a lot more thought to the color scheme. And I hope you can do something more with the garage door.

I mean, it's right there on the front of the building. And, I understand that it's there because that's where the current curb cut is, and there probably is no other way of having an access into the building other than right off of Wendell Street. But, just having a gray garage door, is is not going to add anything to the appearance of the building. And if there are other alternatives or, you know, some sort of decor on the building to to make it to make on the garage door to make it more appealing, I think that would be a good thing to do. Other than that, you know, I I applaud my colleagues' comments and hope that you take them all to heart.

It can, you know, you know, do something with all of them. Thank you.

Thank you, Ted. Let's see. Before we go back to you, Dan, I just wanna check and see. We haven't heard from Joy, and that's fine if you but if you'd like to say something, I'll get you in before before Dan. But if you don't want to, that's fine too, or you can let me know. And Diego yeah. Let me let me go to Diego.

I'll be short. I I I could sign, like, the inter intergenerational component to the building that that was added. I think that's a really successful, you know, call for affordable housing in just a community. I I actually just like the design the way it is. I like the little some of the little quirks that you had, like the little library and the brick that was alternating next to it to give some three dimensionality.

I like the bookends with the brick being full height. I think it matches the neighboring brick building, but it also sort of breaks up as you go taller and towards the middle of the building. I agree with the, you know, rest of the planning board members. I think I think they brought up some really good points. I guess the one thing I'll I'll say is the bike storage, maybe three feet in between the, posts seems a little small for someone who has a cargo bike like myself.

So maybe just think about having a little bit of wider spots for that. But, yeah, I think, I think it looks good. I'd look forward to the next review. Personally, I like three d models. So if you do provide a digital model that I could, like, orbit around, I think that would be awesome. But thank you.

Great. Thanks. Yeah. Let me just start with a few of my comments, and then we'll go to Dan. I I agree with a lot of what's been said tonight.

I think people have had great great ideas. I particularly like the idea of opening up the the rooms in the in the back of the building to be able to go out into that courtyard. I think that's gonna make a very, very big difference. I do think there's something about the building that just seems really flat to me, and it it just I'd like actually, I like the March 2025 version better, and maybe it's because the coloring was different or the way the material was applied. I I'm not really sure because I haven't looked at it enough.

But right now, I feel as though, you know, not only does it have, like, this office feel to it, but it just feels dull. And and it doesn't feel residential to me. I mean, I know apartment buildings, it's hard sometimes to make them feel like they're unique and special. But to me, this feels much more like a Leslie dormitory or something. So I don't know.

I mean, I think Tom's right. And then you need to kind of honor the sense of place and and, you know, Leslie, I I agree with his comments about that, but I don't think I don't think we need for it to look as dorm like as it as it does, in my opinion. Now take it with a grain of salt because I'm not an architect, so I'm just telling you what I see as a as an observer. But, I mean, in general, having 95 units of housing is gonna make a big difference. And I I do like the mix of the family units and the elderly units or the senior housing.

I think that's actually a benefit to the neighborhood because I think it will help with the the parking situation. I think, you know, had it all been family, you would have had many more cars. Let me think. And I I do think it is important for us to to see it more in context because I agree with what some of the speakers have said and what, like, some of the planning board members have have alluded to as well that we've what was presented showed a very narrow view of the site and didn't really give us the sense of, you know, looking a little further down the street. The building probably fits in better with the Oxford Street end of Wendell than it does with the the middle of Wendell going up towards Mass Ave.

But and so I think, you know, that's that's kind of one of the views we really need to to take a look at. Again, as though as other people have said, it's kind of late in the process. So, you know, I realized we we don't have the ability to make major changes at this point, but I think that's really unfortunate. So I think, you know, going forward, I would recommend to staff that they they encourage proponents to come in a little bit earlier than than where we are today. I guess that's it for me.

Okay. So I think we've covered a lot. They there are some comments. I don't know, Brian, you're here representing the urban design team. Did you wanna say anything about the comments in your memo or add anything to this the discussion tonight?

I don't believe so, but thank you. Hopefully, they're they're pretty clear. And, actually, I I think I've learned a lot too. It's always really beneficial for us as staff to have the insights to the planning board to add to to our review, so I I really appreciate that. But nothing directly to add. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks. Okay. So any other final comments from board members? If not, we need to take a motion to conclude the design con this design consultation session and submit an initial report with our comments to the developer. This motion, again, is for full board members. So would someone like to make that motion?

Sorry.

Ted's so moved. Ted? Okay. Is there a second?

Tom, second.

Thank you. Jeff, could we have a roll call vote, please?

Yes. On that motion, Ted Cohen?

Yes.

Mary Leidecker?

Yes.

Diego Macias? Yes. Tom Sinovich? Yes. Ashley Tan?

Yes.

Carolyn Zurn?

Yes.

Mary Flynn? Yes. It's all seven members voting in favor.

Great. So thank you to the project team for all of your work and and your presentation tonight. Also, thanks to all of the members of the public who who joined in and gave us good comments for us to consider. That concludes the business on tonight's agenda. So if there are any other additional comments from staff or planning board members, now is the time. No? Alright. So

a lot easier with Swathi. So I'm I'm thankful she'll be back the next meeting.

Yeah. Yes. I can understand that. Logistics on Zoom are a little difficult. But you did great, Jeff. Thank you. So alright. That concludes our meeting then. The meeting is adjourned. See you in two weeks.

Good night.

Good night, everybody. Thank

you, everyone.