Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, good evening, everybody. It is the regularly scheduled meeting of the Summerville Planning Board. It is 6.04 p.m. on February 5th, 2026. I'm Mike Capuano. I am the chairman of the planning board. With me tonight, we have our vice chair, Amelia Aboff, our clerk, Jahan Habib, our members, Lynn Richards, Michael McNeely, and Luke Schuster. We have a quorum Uh, pursuant to the chapter 2 of the acts of 2025, this meeting, the playing board is being conducted via remote participation. The video recording of these proceedings will be available in cities, uh, website, or by emailing planning board at some of the dot Gov. So, this meeting is being recorded. We have a number of items on our agenda tonight. The first one is a matter of meeting minutes from December 18, 2025. Does anybody have any suggested revisions to the draft meeting minutes of December 18? Okay. Seeing none, the Chair moves to adopt the draft meeting minutes of December 18, 2025 to make them the actual minutes, seconded by Amelia. Alvaro, can you please call the roll? Stefan Habib.

Aye.

Lynn Richards.

Aye.

Luke Schuster. Aye.

Hi.

Michael Magnilli.

Hi.

Amelia Eboff.

Hi.

Michael Capuano.

Hi. We have meeting minutes. Up next is going to be a case that has previously been opened, heard, and continued. That is 379 Somerville Avenue. So if I could have the applicant and team... 379 Somerville Avenue, as well as the relevant planner who's assigned to this case to give us an overview of where we're at.

Good evening. Hi, Attorney Andy Garrido. I'm sorry, did you want... I thought you said planning staff, so I didn't want to begin...

No, no, staff to be able to answer questions as needed.

Okay. So, appreciate we had a continuance. This is 379 Somerville Ave. This is a plan review. We had to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals back in the fall, I believe, or late summer, and we obtained four variances. And this evening, it's basically hoping to have you know, your blessing on our review in some substance. Will Chalafon's on tonight. He can kind of give you a little more scope. So I would ask, I think we'll probably need to share a screen.

Yep.

Will, do you have the permissions that you need? I need to be allowed to share.

Will, you should be all set.

Got it. Thank you. Okay. Can everyone see that? Yes. Great. Thank you. Good evening, everyone. Mr. Chair, members of the board, Will Chalfant from KDI Architects. I'll give a very brief sort of summary of why we're here. This is related to the transformer in the front of the building that deviated from the approved plans. And so what we're here to do is present something that we've worked with staff on to beautify this situation and try to make the best of it. So with that, I will go to the presentation here. Sorry. So working with staff, the decision was that the thing that was really most unfortunate about this transformer was that it took away the frontage along the entire street where we had glazing and storefront activating the street. So what we're proposing to do is extend this storefront frame in a sort of, you know, just the frame and then treat the whole area behind that as a art installation. So we presented this to staff. They were happy with this direction, and they asked us to speak with a local artist as well as a metal fabricator so that we could make sure that all of this is real, put together a package that not only has pricing associated with it, but we're ready to go and sort of take this to the next level. So we... We reached out to a local artist who we've used, Felipe Ortiz. I worked with him on the Union Square building that was formerly the subway. Now there's a cookies dispensary there next to the Independent. There are murals on either side of that building. Really been pleased working with him. It's been great. I think he has a lot of creative ideas. So we talked to him about this, and his first thought was he thought this really kind of read like an aquarium, and he sort of wanted to treat it like that. And... So it's sort of really interesting from different perspectives. But it also sort of has some sense to it. But it was also just eye catching. People are going to take a second look at this. And part of this mural is to paint the transformer itself. We have to maintain access to this. But we're going to paint all three sides and potentially the roof, the ceiling as well, although I think we're probably going to keep it at the level of the frame to sort of keep the illusion of the fish tank. But we really think that this could be successful and really interesting and a nice way to sort of make the best of an unfortunate situation with Eversource. So we have some further shop drawings here from East Bay Metal. They put this together. I will say one slight deviation here is we did have to jog this because there's a meter right here that we can't die right into. But the mural is going to extend out to that edge most likely, although that would be up to Felipe when he works on that. So these are the more technical side of things. But I did want to just show that this has been fully thought out and vetted. So we have, you know, full shop drawings of what this is going to look like, how it's going to attach. And, you know, we have some samples from the artist and there are some local examples. So you can sort of vet his work as it were. So, you know, I don't think I need to get into the finances of it yet, but we have presented that to the city as far as what those costs are. And I'll kick it back to the board for any questions.

All right.

Thanks, Will. Um, I think it's a cool idea. I like the idea of the fish tank. I could see how that works, right? I, I, this is not how my brain generally operates. I appreciate somebody with, um, some artistic vision being able to come up with, with, with that idea. Um, I think you're right. I think it does kind of make, um, the best out of a, of an unfortunate, um, situation that, um, that we find ourselves in. And so I appreciate the work that was put in and working with staff to come up with an idea that seems pretty decent. Who on the, so we've already taken testimony and opened this whole thing up a long time ago. So there's no public testimony or comment tonight. This is just discussion by and between board. Does anybody else have anything that they would like to raise with the applicant or the staff. I've got to maximize you guys because I can't see you at all. Anybody else? Lynn, yep.

Yeah, I just want to second your comments, Michael. I thought this was an incredibly creative solution to a sticky problem. Yeah, I just I thought you guys did a really great job. And I love the aquarium idea, particularly since Boston has this, you know, massive, you know, four story fish tank. Anyhow, I just wanted to echo Michael's comments on how well I thought this this was kind of imagined. and implemented.

So thank you. No other plan board members. Following public testimony, review of the submitted materials and deliberation of the required considerations outlined by the ordinance, I move to approve with the conditions outlined in the staff memorandum. the major amendment to a previously granted site plan approval and special permit to CZ20-000104 to construct an apartment building in the MR5 zoning district which required site plan approval, seconded by Amelia. Alvaro, can you please call the roll? Dr. Hanhabib?

Aye.

Lynn Richards?

Aye.

Luke Schuster?

Aye.

Michael McNeely?

Aye.

Amelia Evo.

Hi.

Michael Capuano. Hi. Congratulations. Good luck.

Thank you so much. Have a great evening, everybody.

Thank you very much. You too. And you might be staying on.

I am.

You are. Okay. Let's open up White Street, 44 White Street. So the applicant team, if they need to be Promoted. Obviously, Attorney Vigorito is here.

Yes. Jacob Simmons needs to be promoted. Narius from Calsa Designs and Steve Siragusa.

I promote all of them.

Thank you.

So we're here this evening, last year in early December, and Steve Saragusa, our traffic engineer, worked mobility to get that final approval. I don't know if you want us to talk about or do any more, you know, review the project, or if you'd rather hear from Steve, because he'll be brief. I think that was the pinpoint goal of the board. But, you know, whatever, you know, the board's pleasure is, we will take that.

Yeah, I think we're pretty close to being at the point where we would be considering this. So if there's any specific issues that needed to be raised by, by Steve. Cause I know we had waited on some review for mobility, which I believe we got back in November or December. Um, in that last meeting we had, we had a presentation on, on mobility's position on this. And I think that was kind of the last piece of the puzzle. And then based on holidays, vacations, things like that, it kept getting continued and continued, uh, till tonight. So if there's anything that you think that we need to, um, know and consider before we take this up. Now is the time.

You know, there was a final approval with the plan being compliant. So, you know, I don't know if the board wants to continue tracking and, you know, obviously Steve can chime in if there's something pertinent for him. I don't want to waste the board's precious time. I know you've got other projects and you've probably seen enough of us.

You can never see enough of all of you guys. I have some thoughts, but I'd like to hear from my board members. We've obviously discussed this project quite a bit and what I consider to be the merits of the project and the considerations about the project that I think are fairly unique to this site. So does anybody have anything they would like to add before I just say a few additional kind of recap my thoughts on this project. Okay. I will just briefly recap my thoughts on this. It has been a little while. Obviously, the thing that's kind of the sticky part here is the special permit for the parking relief. It's two additional spaces. To me, that is not a big deal. I understand that it's got a proximity to the Port of Square T-Stop, but I also understand that the considerations that I see in the merits of this project. You know, the applicant is proposing family-sized housing, which is something that we as a board have pushed for for quite a long time, and this applicant is giving us kind of what we asked for. I think two spaces that are a little bit, you know, just a little bit more than what they're obligated to do is not a huge ask. particularly where the street is not some of all the street is Cambridge, which makes the logistics of being, if you do have a car, which the plausibility is that you, that you may, that you will, where are you going to go? I don't usually hang out in Porter square, but I have found myself in Porter square lot more than usual over the last month or two for, for various reasons. And, oh, my God, I have forgotten what an absolute cluster it is, both the lot and the surrounding streets. And it made me say that these two spots are absolutely worth it because I want to attract families here. I want to give people the flexibility to have a car if they need one on Saturdays to go run errands that aren't necessarily at the, you know, stock market across the street. So... All of that kind of makes me say, were this a different project, I might feel a little bit differently. It's not. I think this applicant has worked very well with us. I think they have shown some unique aspects of this project that other projects that we've seen don't necessarily share. And so for two spaces, I'd like to see some family housing built. especially family housing built in an area close to transit, which is not always where we see it. I think there are benefits to that as well. So those are my thoughts. Does anybody have anything further they would like to add, questions of the applicant or of staff as to where we are? Okay. So, what we're going to do is we need to take 2 votes, 2, 3. How many votes do we need to get? 1, 2, 3. 1st, 1, we need to take is the special permit based on the way the logistics work. So, following public testimony review, the submitted materials and deliberation of the required considerations outlined by the ordinance and moved to approve with the conditions outlined in the staff memorandum. The request to exceed the parking maximum in the MR4 zoning district as described in the memo dated October 9, 2025. That motion is seconded by Amelia Alvaro. Can we please have a roll call?

I'm Khabib. Aye. Lynn Richards. Lynn, we didn't hear you.

Aye.

Luke Schuster.

Aye.

Michael McNeely.

Nay.

Amelia Ebert.

Aye.

Michael Capuano.

Aye. Second vote we need to take is for the use special permit following public testimony review of the submitted materials and deliberation of the required considerations outlined by the ordinance. I move to approve with the conditions outlined in the memorandum dated October 9, 2025, the request to create residential housing use in the MR4 zoning district. Second by Amelia. Alvaro, can we please have a roll call?

Jachan Habib. Aye. Lynn Richards.

Aye.

Luke Schuster.

Aye.

Michael Magnilli.

Aye.

Amelia Eber.

Aye.

Michael Capuano.

Aye.

I believe this is the last vote on this application site plan approval. Following public testimony review of the submitted materials and deliberations of the required considerations outlined by the zoning ordinance, I move to approve with the conditions outlined in the staff memorandum dated October 9, 2025, the site plan approval to develop a three-story apartment building in the MR4 zoning district. Seconded by Amelia Avaro. Can we please have a roll call? Jahan Habib.

Aye. Lynn Richards.

Nay.

Luke Schuster. Aye. Michael Mignoli.

Nay.

Amelia Abuff.

Aye.

Michael Capuano.

I believe that was three nay and two yay. Is that what I heard? What was the vote on that, please?

Yes, it was three nay and three aye.

The 3i only counts if they would, the ultimate vote in this circumstance does not count as a vote. Okay. So 3 and 8, 2a. Okay. So the site plan approval does not pass.

I'm a little confused. For site plan approval, that it doesn't pass. I've never had this happen before.

I have not seen that, I thought.

I thought it was just me. I'm like, did I miss something?

I thank the applicant for their time and working with staff in the city. And perhaps we'll see you again under different circumstances.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good night. Next, 366 Broadway, which I believe, has this already been opened? Jahan, do you recall? I believe so, Mr. Chair. Yes, it has. Yes, it has been opened, and we've heard testimony. Okay. Can we have the applicant and their team?

Hi, everyone. How are you?

Good. I'd also like to ask, get to join us to talk about the staff's position on the proposal here.

Okay. I'm sorry. I'm trying to turn my camera on, but for some reason it's not detecting it. I hope you guys can remember what I look like from last time. I'm sorry about that.

Chair Capuano, did you want me to start while Evan worked out his camera? Okay.

Evan, does it work to log out and try to rejoin or something or restart your computer or something, if that helps? Yeah, I can try. This is me being an IT guy in an office. I'll be right back. Thank you. Okay. Is there another representative from the applicants to make sure that they're still here? Or is that the only person?

I think that Evan was it, so we can wait.

Yeah, let's wait a second for Evan to rejoin, so the applicant is actually in.

We also do have Justin from the mobility department.

Okay, great. I just promoted Evan. No go.

Oh, no. I'm sorry. I just got this computer. Do you want me to start?

I'd actually love Kit to start if we need Justin to weigh in as well. Obviously, we welcome anything he has to say.

Yeah, so at the last meeting, I think the board had requested a representative from the mobility department to be here. But I also want to clarify that I think I previously understood that this application would return to the planning board as a plan revision should mobility and the applicant agree. that the loading zone would be located on Broadway instead of Thurston Street. But based on some discussions I've had since the last meeting, the physical location of the loading zone would be decided by the Traffic Commission impending that no physical changes to the building would occur as part of the loading zone change. This application would not come back to the Planning Board and would then move to the Traffic Commission for approval of the loading zone. and signage and just at this time it's the planning board's duty to determine if the condition language could be changed from building permit or prior to building permit to prior to certificate of occupancy. So I just wanted to clarify that.

Thank you.

I'm so sorry. My audio cut out for a second. Can you repeat most of what you just said?

Yeah, yeah, sure. So I think I just wanted to clarify that at the last meeting, we requested that mobility come. They are here tonight, but I think it was understood by me that the application would return to the planning board as a plan revision if mobility and the applicant were to agree that the learning zone should be on Broadway. But based on discussions internally since that meeting, The physical location of the loading zone would be decided by the traffic commission. So pending no physical changes to the building would occur as part of the loading zone change. The application would not return back to the planning board and would just move to the traffic commission for approval of the signage in the loading zone.

I'm sorry to make you repeat yourself.

Yeah, no problem.

I don't know if we see you.

Yeah, I'm sorry about that.

That's okay. Did you have anything that you wanted to add, or Justin, on mobility's perspective specifically?

No, I just, if you wanted to, I would walk over what we're going through, but everybody seems to have a good grasp of what we're discussing tonight, so I'm happy to just dive into the conversation. We do have a foundation permit. We're doing the foundations now. We just... would like to get a full building permit to go vertical. We are amenable to either location. We'll put it wherever the planning board and mobility division tell us to put it. We just want to build a building. Thank you.

Does anybody have any further discussion on this? I don't know if, Justin, you want to Well, Ian, you don't have to, but you're welcome to join the conversation.

Sure, sure. Good evening, Chair Capuano and planning board members. I guess I'm happy to answer any other questions. You know, mainly I think the ask here is to move the timing and the condition to building permit when we would more typically handle this sort of thing. And I think we are likely to recommend at that time moving the Loading Zone to Broadway, and I'm happy to answer any questions there are about that as well.

I think I'm happy to listen to what you all think is the best way to address this, and it sounds like this is the way.

I think it's mainly about Thurston being a one-way... This condition was written a number of years ago, and I think we are generally... much more skeptical about sending drivers to like a different location to park and load. Um, the address is Broadway. Drivers will arrive at Broadway. We have parking on Broadway today. Um, and I think we, in terms of drivers that are dropping off and moving on to the next destination, they're going to be really incentivized to stay on, on the main route. And, um, don't want them to see a full parking lane and decide to park in the bus lane that's there. So our preference would be to have it be located on Broadway.

The first person I saw was Michael. So I'm going to recognize Michael.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I believe a member of the public that lives nearby made some observations that I shared living or used to live right near there. And that's that there's a lot of pedestrian interactions right at this area. There's a crosswalk across Broadway right at that corner. There's the bike lane coming through. And so I do appreciate that it would be better to not create an opportunity for someone to park in a bus spot. I feel like that really falls more on enforcement as opposed to design. And so I was wondering if maybe Mr. Schreiber, you could describe a little bit more what the plans for Broadway might be, because just at first glance, you know, I personally am worried about the conflicts with pedestrians. So if there's a really good plan that just needs to be implemented, then that would make me feel a lot more comfortable about the recommendation.

Sure. I could share at this time. there is no project plan on Broadway at this time. Um, it has, I think it might've been 2024, 2023. This city did, um, a clear corners program on Broadway where we, we sort of set back the parking. There's a, there's a crosswalk right there. So there's a setback from the parking. Um, and you know, perhaps it makes sense to have the learnings or not be on that, that end of the, um, frontage of the property if we're worried about cars pulling in and out, you know, so close to where the crosswalk is. But again, there is parking here today. And I think I can appreciate not wanting to have the loading zone so close to the crosswalk. But no, you know, there's no project active project right now on Broadway. It is a part of the bike network vision. It's a part of the priority network. So that means The city will be working on a project there at some point in the not-too-distant future, but I don't have any information about scope and timeline for that this time.

Thank you, Michael. Were you all set with your contributions?

For now, I think I'd like to hear, I'm suspicious Amelia's on the same train right now. No pun intended.

Yep, go for it, Amelia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I don't mean to make this applicant the, you know, poster child for this problem or take this issue out on them, but I guess I was really dismayed to hear the description from ability via planning in our prior meeting that sort of we were going to move the loading zone to broadway despite the many competing uses for that curb space on broadway out of a sense of inevitability that a vehicle that the delivery vehicles would be pulling into that area regardless and it just raised this i think bigger question because when we're reviewing projects as a board we spend a lot of time and energy thinking about how um the proposed layouts and the proposed entrances locations are interacting with the other initiatives that the city has underway um and we think a lot about bicycle access and pedestrian access and how to like one of our primary functions is ensuring that when looking at a site plan that it is appropriate and um responsive to the conditions and i know that mobility adds an extra layer of expertise on that at the staff level review for which we're always very grateful and want to be well-informed from a mobility perspective, but is this the way that we're, is it best practice truly for the mobility department to be saying like, oh, well, this is the traffic pattern that will happen regardless and therefore let's, like prioritizing the rooting of Amazon vehicles over our bike network plan run so afoul of what I think the board's remit is supposed to be. Um, and I know that that becomes an enforcement question, not a, not a question at the planning level, but, um, and I'm sorry to drag this applicant into this conversation now, but, um, but removing this condition creates this opportunity. And I, we had something that we'd spent a lot of time, I think discussing with the applicant in the original application. So I'm, would just love to sort of better understand how we're tackling these types of problems and if there's an opportunity to improve the process, either on our beginning end or on the enforcement end, because that, yeah, thank you.

Yeah, I guess to be honest, I'm not totally seeing the connection to the bike network, Glenn. Again, there is parking here today, so I think this is, in our opinion, a better use of that parking to serve this building. And, you know, in terms of competing uses, this is one of two parcels on the block. And I think given this is a large apartment building with no parking on site, there is going to be demand for pickup and drop-off delivery. And enforcement in a bus lane is really critical. It's not something that mobility can do. It's not something the parking department can do either. It's in a moving lane. It has to be done by the police department. And enforcement, the MBTA is working on enforcement on their buses, and that could be an option in the future that they're able to issue tickets. But I think we're trying to create the conditions that don't sort of require that enforcement. And I can appreciate that we don't want to sort of cede space to the delivery aspect, but I think we are dealing with, regardless of whether or not there's parking on site, a great increase in this sort of activity on our streets, particularly on main streets like Broadway. providing a space like a loading zone is a much, much more efficient use of our public right of way than parking that vehicles can stay there for up to 48 hours.

it's it's a better use a higher and better use of the curb regardless of who's parking there because it'll turn it'll turn over constantly is it is it but that turnover constantly is exactly the conflict with the bike network plan that i'm seeing and that there are vehicles that are i think typically a little bit less attentive and having much shorter stopovers having these much more frequent weaves in and out of a area that you're trying to create as a I think a dedicated, if I recall correctly, two-way bike lane on Broadway to have it serve as this primary node.

Yeah, that is a conflict that exists. And it would be, when we do construct a bike facility on Broadway, it would be our intent that we're actually required by city ordinance to make sure it's separate from travel lanes and from parking.

How will that impact the proposed project? Loading zone, if that's constructed, I think is Amelia and Michael's concern and mine. Yeah.

Not even concerned. I honestly can't answer that question right now. We don't have a project plan or a design for Broadway, and it's certainly possible that we would have to consider relocating or revising a location of a loading zone because of that project. And we would do a comprehensive design at that time that would make sure that there wasn't this conflict. But I guess I don't see that as a reason to preemptively not allow loadings in there, given that we do have parking there today. We know there's going to be a need. And I guess just to speak to the approach question, in general, as opposed to when this was approved, we really try not to put very specific obligations around curb use in recommended conditions anymore because There's always a multi-year lag time between when a project is approved with the planning board and when it's ultimately constructed and occupied. And it's really our intent to take a look at the conditions on the ground when the building is actually ready to open and make a recommendation to the traffic commission who are ultimately the ones that are responsible for approving the curb use.

Amelia, did you have any other questions? No, thank you. Okay. So I'll say I'm split on this. I lean a particular way. Right. So I don't want to condition something on what might occur with a potential bike lane. I'm also not sure. I love the idea of taking away a bunch of parking spaces to throw a two-lane bike lane on Windy Hill anyway when we're building the – spot across the street um but that's that's not a today problem the today problem is where are these people going and we can say you are putting your people on thurston street the reality is no they're not okay so what is the you know people aren't supposed to stop in the middle of my street to run an amazon order and either and yet they do um so my question is what is the easiest way to actually deal with reality there is parking there currently which man may not be modified if some additional bike lane infrastructure is included on Broadway. It'll be dealt with at that time. So for the purpose of this applicant and this building, I kind of say, let's, in my estimation, I'd rather just accommodate what the reality is going to be. And I think Justin, I know he and I don't always see eye to eye on some things. This one I do is like, what is the reality of the use of the site? Where are people actually going to go irrespective of where you tell them to go? And unless you want to task this applicant by having an enforcement agent sitting there saying, no, no, no, you've got to move, which I don't think we're prepared to do, I'd rather just live in the likely reality of what's going to be happening on this stretch anyway at this point. Yeah, I saw Lynn.

Thank you. Thank you, Michael, for pointing out the, you know, we can tell people to park on Thurston loading, but it's still going to happen on Broadway. I just wanted to mention a little bit on the broader research. That shows when you have a chaotic situation, which it sounds like this when you have pedestrians and loading vehicles and bikers and so now you've got this chaos that actually the safest thing that you can do is to foster the chaos. and not to create very specific lanes. Taking point, any driver driving through Davis Square, pedestrians own Davis Square, and any driver going through going more than like five miles an hour is taking his or her life in their hands. It's just, that's what the research has shown over and over again, that when you create a more chaotic situation and you have greater interaction, that everybody tends to slow down and you have safer outcomes. I do think that, Justin, again, I You know, not to throw you under the bus, proverbially, but understanding how the different mobile uses are going to occur on Broadway and To me, it doesn't feel okay to say, I'm not really sure how that's all going to play out when we've got this right here. Like, coming up with, like, this is what we think is going to happen. This is how we're going to protect pedestrians. My concern is not about the vehicles. My concern is about the people getting out of the vehicles and crossing the bike lane. Because that's, as a cyclist, that's the piece that I'm always... grappling with is idiot drivers who just walk into the bike lane as though they think it is an extension of the sidewalk. So that to me feels a little bit more problematic, but going back to my original comment, create chaos in those situations, I tend to also slow down quite a bit as a cyclist. So I also feel the applicant is in the middle of construction. They're paying a note for a construction loan. We need to move through this as quickly as possible and give them direction on which way to go.

Sorry, Chair. I just wanted to add, I think I neglected just to mention a few examples where we've sort of tried this in the past and how they've worked out. The one that comes to mind most is the Cambria Hotel on Somerville Ave, which there's no parking on Somerville Ave at that location. There's just a basic painted bike lane in front of it. Um, there's a nice big sign that says, you know, please pull into our, you know, they have a drop off designated for everyone to arrive at the hotel, um, covered lit, very nice place to get dropped off. And the vast majority of, uh, if you, if you have ever biked or even driven around there, people will park just in the bike lane at the curb because it's the most convenient place for them to park. Um, and then another example where we are trying to change behavior And the board approved conditions related to is 16 to 20 Medford Street, where we are going to be posting some signage to try to direct people to their parking garage where they have a number of short-term spaces. And again, I think we're equally skeptical, but the fact that there is not a convenient place to pull over on Medford Street gives us a little bit of hope that... people do not want to stop in the middle of a travel lane to make a delivery, although they may do it anyway. Um, so I think like, like you mentioned, Lynn, I, we, we have parking there today. Um, We hope to eliminate the conflicts between bikes and pedestrians and buses, people parking in the future with a redesign. But we know that the bus lane is a convenient place to double park. We already know what happens on Winter Hill, and the project is going to create a lot more demand for that sort of thing. So we think the best solution is to add the loading zone here. Yeah.

So John, and then Luke, and Evan, I'll recognize you afterwards.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to mention that I'm going to echo some of what my fellow board members have stated. While I appreciate Mr. Schreiber's explanations, I'm not entirely convinced of the loading zone location, particularly since Broadway is, as he also correctly mentioned, a main street, a thoroughfare. There's been traffic backups. I was on Broadway earlier this afternoon. I know snow might be a fading occurrence in the greater Boston area, but we do get snowstorms. We do get other weather events and other circumstances, and it it causes additional additional challenges for pedestrians as well as bicyclists and uh i'm not quite sure what the solution here might be but i do think that we should look at some other possibilities of behavior change some of some of which mr schreiber has suggested you know i do like the ideas but um you know this is with all due respect to the applicant i think we're we're talking more about the broadway conditions on broadway rather than than the actual site itself and And the applicant has been definitely cooperative with us, but I do have my concerns as well. So that's all I wanted to share. Mr. Chair, thank you so much.

Luke.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Just a few quick thoughts. Number one is I watched the recording of the last meeting, which I missed, and signed my affidavit. So I sent that to Alvaro, so it should be all set there. I've really appreciated the back and forth. This strikes me as a tough one too. And just to reiterate, I really get the point that we shouldn't be assuming noncompliance too much and that we ought to better work on enforcement. At the same time, I do share the skepticism that enforcement will ever work at a scale to really change the behavior of the volume of delivery drivers that we do have now. So, you know, it's just real tension. The one question I have, I just want, I think I have this right, but I just want to make sure I'm tracking this. There's no infrastructure we're talking about here. It's literally just where the signs go that label loading zone. Right. And so the back end, I just want building on that and make sure that I tracked like at whatever point the, redesign of Broadway does happen to build out separated bike lanes and if it were on that side of Broadway like instead of the bus lane now or something and that really made the loading zone on Broadway unworkable if it does go there now the plan is just the signs would be moved to Thurston Street instead am I tracking that right yeah that's my understanding

Yeah, we're talking about signage on an existing parking lane. That's correct. I don't want to speak to the design of something that hasn't been designed yet. I don't know exactly what form a future project on Broadway would take. But currently, right now, yes, signs on Broadway.

So I'll just end with a final thought, which is that does help me a bit because getting nice, truly separated bi-directional bike lanes on Broadway would be great to the extent, you know, that fits with other plans. And we want to make sure whatever decision is made on this project wouldn't get in the way of that. And this seems like whichever way this goes would hopefully not get in the way of that at least.

That's all from me for now.

Evan, did you want to respond to anything that was said? Do you have thoughts?

Yeah, I don't want to muddy the waters, but I just want to give my two cents on the location itself. If I can share my screen, if you don't mind. To echo what the chair said, we all know that these Amazon vans, they really wreak havoc on the streets. They'll double park in front of open parking spaces for 10 minutes. But if there's somebody making deliveries on Broadway and they stop at Broadway and the rest of their deliveries are up towards East Broadway, they're likely not going to turn down Thurston even if there is a loading zone there. They're probably just going to stop right here, which blocks visibility across the corner anyway. So again, we're amenable to either location. I'm just throwing my two cents out there. I'm not a traffic engineer. This is just how I perceive the situation. seeing Amazon vans park wherever they want, living in the city. This is what I think they're going to do if they don't have any deliveries down Thurston. So that's just my two cents. I'm happy to discuss it further.

Obviously, the connection down at the bottom of Thurston is Medford Street, which is also a mess. Yeah. And there's no good way to get out of Thurston Street at that point, having grown up there.

And if we put the living zone on Broadway and in the future it moves to Thurston, I'll go out there myself and change the signs. We can write that into the condition.

So where are we as a board here? Because the issue that we face is just the timing condition, right? It's not actually selecting a location. It's changing timing. when something ought to occur and kind of giving more discretion, um, to, to Justin and his team. And I, I, for one, I'm, I'm in this case inclined towards doing that for the reasons that were discussed. Um, but that, you know, that may not carry, carry the day. This is obviously a modification to, to, to an existing, um, condition that was passed by the planning board. by a majority so it's going to be up to a majority of the planning board to determine whether we want to modify that existing condition. Is there any further discussion by members of the board? Seeing none following public testimony review of the submitted materials and deliberations of the required considerations and findings Outlined by the ordinance, I move to approve of the conditions outlined in the staff memorandum. The request to change a condition of a previously issued special permit, PNZ 21-175, the MR4 zoning district, seconded by Amelia. Alvaro, can you please call the roll?

Thank you. Lynn Richards?

Aye.

Luke Schuster? Aye. Michael Magnilli.

Aye.

Amelia Aiboff.

Aye.

Michael Capuano.

Aye. Congratulations.

Good luck. Thank you so much. Have a good one.

You as well. I believe those are all the items that we have on the agenda tonight. Am I missing anything, Alvaro?

No, that was all.

Okay. Wonderful. We do have a but for the members of the board and members of the public who are still around, our next meeting is February 19th. I do not anticipate, since we cleared the desk tonight, Alvaro, tell me about logistics. We don't anticipate any new cases being advertised?

Not at this time. We have no cases.

Okay. At this time, we have no cases. However, I do think the meeting should be held for the benefit of having a presentation by staff on the topic that we raised at the last meeting, which is an overview of the 4DB process and the law and the responsibilities of the planning board surrounding that process. Especially if this is going to be the only item on the agenda, I think it's beneficial to Have some extra time in case people have questions because inevitably there will be questions, right, either that staff can answer or that may need to be kicked over to the law department. And we'll work from there because it's important to see. This is now the second time that I can recall seeing a potential discussion of an application under that. statute so I think if I'm only seeing it for the second time it's probably a good opportunity to have some learning by all of us updates and clarity on roles responsibilities and what the law says so with that in mind does anybody else have anything they would like to add for the good of the meeting I see Luke and John

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'm just wondering, while we're still here and while 44 White Street has still been noticed for this meeting, is there anything for us to process, process-wise, about what happened on the vote there?

So that item has closed. The votes on that have been taken. And the time for discussion on that agenda item has passed.

Okay.

Yeah, John.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This might be a question for you and Alvaro both regarding the 40B matter. So we understand that there's going to be a presentation regarding the laws. For those of us, and I'll speak for myself here, want to just prepare and look at the landscape, not just for 40B as the law, but also the application of it across the Commonwealth, particularly with neighboring communities and other areas. other communities. Is that going to be considered out of scope when it comes to our question and answer post-presentation? Is there any room for that to be a discussion, for example, what Cambridge is doing, what other communities might be doing, and so forth? I just want to get a better sense of it before I conduct my own research.

I think that's fair because this is something that's reasonably unique. in Somerville, especially lately. I think it's fair to, we always kind of see, engage where other communities are and what they're doing and why. And I know we had that project on Broadway a few months ago that was, you know, half in Medford and working with the, you know, Medford Planning and Zoning to see how they are going to meet, you know, properties at the Somerville line, right? So I think that makes sense to see where other communities are and what they're doing. Sure.

Great. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. I'm not sure if Alvaro has anything else to add. I'd love to hear his thoughts as well, if there are any.

No, I'm just taking notes, and I'll make sure to bring it back to the team. We usually have our staff meetings on Monday, so I can bring it up as we're preparing for that, for the meeting.

Perfect. Thank you both. Appreciate it.

Yeah, actually, Jahan, that brings up another kind of question and request of Alvaro for next meeting. I don't know if you're able to get this information, but I am curious to know what type of involvement other communities' planning boards specifically take in applications, right? So the law says a couple of things, right? But the law is a shall basically invite the planning board to be a part of it, basically, if the planning board wants. And so my question is, how is that actually operationalized in other communities when issues like this come up. Because this board does have a legal obligation to be part of this process in a capacity. And I'd like to know what the extent of that in practicality is.

Yeah, Luke.

Just since we're all here, sounds like a great discussion. it's school vacation week. I'm going to be out of the country. So just a heads up. I won't be able to be there, but a hundred percent go ahead with it. And I'll, I'll look forward to watching the video.

Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it's, it's not something that would require a, you know, a voting quorum, right. It's, it's a matter of other business. Um, and watch, watch the video will not be, I can imagine the end of the discussion. Um, my guess is we're going to ask some questions that, staff is going to have to come back to us on after maybe conducting some further research or checking in with other departments that this is not going to be I think the end of the discussion I think it's the beginning of the discussion to understand really what our role is and how we want that role to be anybody else Everybody's fuel sources all hooked up and getting ready for the next couple of days again. All right. Awesome. Hey, thank you all. It's nice to see you. It's 7 o'clock on the dot. The chair moves to adjourn, seconded by Amelia Alvaro. Can you please call the roll?

I. Lynn Richards. I. Luke Schuster. I. Michael McNeely.

Aye.

Amelia Ibov.

Aye.

Michael Kaplan. Aye. Thank you all. Have a good night. I'm going to light a fire.

Thank you. Thank you so much.