Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. It is 6.03 p.m. on the 20th of August, 2026. This is a regularly scheduled meeting of the Summable Planning Board. I'm Mike Capuano. I'm the chairman of the planning board. With me tonight is our vice chair, Amelia Aboff, our clerk, Jahan Habib, and our members, Lynn Richards, Luke Schuster, and Coralie Cooper. We have a quorum to Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, this meeting with the Planning Board is being conducted via remote participation. The video recording of these proceedings is going to be available on the City's Meetings and Events page or by emailing planningboard at summerboardma.gov. This meeting is being recorded. We have a number of items on our agenda this evening. And we will go through that agenda thusly. 222 Broadway has requested to continue to September 3rd, 2026. The chair moves to continue that agenda item. Seconded by Amelia. Roll call, please.

Johan Habib. Aye. Lynn Richards.

Aye.

Luke Schuster.

Aye.

Coralie Cooper.

Aye.

Amelia Abel.

Aye.

Michael Capuano. Aye.

The agenda item is continued. 6 Wheatland Street has requested a continuance to September 3rd. Chair moved to continue that agenda item. Seconded by Amelia. Roll call, please.

Jahan Habib. Aye. Lynn Richards. Aye. Luke Schuster.

Aye.

Carly Cooper.

Aye.

Amelia Abel.

Aye.

Michael Kaplan. Aye.

Hi, agenda item is continued. Next up, Chair moves to, we'll be taking certain things out of order to try to make this meeting as efficient as humanly possible, as is my ability. I'm going to take up 32 to 40 White Street, which is a case that we have opened, heard, had various discussions with the applicant and their team, and have gone back and forth for a number of months. And we shall take them up this evening. I see Jahan, who has raised his both Simpsons hand and regular hand. By the way, Jahan, you're going to love this one with the Simpsons head. In a meeting the other day, I got to bring up Yvonne Etniage, just completely out of nowhere, and somebody actually got the Simpsons reference from 1994. It was awesome.

That is great. That is great, Mr. Chair. The reason why I had my Simpsons hand up was because for the record, I would like to state that I had missed the August 6th planning board meeting. However, I have reviewed the recording and also submitted the affidavit to planning staff. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And it's a wonderful reference that you made. I don't even know how it came up.

It was just like it fit the bill at the time. Yeah, Lynn.

Like Jahan, I missed the August 6th meeting, reviewed the tape, and signed the affidavit as well. So I'm up to speed.

Excellent. Thank you. Okay. So what I'd like to do is invite the applicant team up to talk about where we are at. since we last met a few weeks ago if they could please raise their hand be unmuted be shared whatever is necessary for the purpose of this meeting tonight

All right.

Hello, everyone. David Swanson here with Kibari Capital. I'm not sure if Ryan Wittig is on as well.

I don't see him.

I did send him a text. We weren't expecting to be on right around six.

I'm sorry.

I think he's wrapping up in the office. Give me one second.

Mr. Chair, should we make a change from our normal preference for applicants to be on video in this case where the applicant is actively driving?

In the efforts of staving off a ticket here for our applicant, I might say just throw yourself on audio.

Um...

I may be wrapping up another call so I can start.

I was going to say, was your team aware that this planning board starts at 6 o'clock and that the planning board has the ability to move things out of order as necessary? Yes.

When I left, Ryan was on another call. If he jumps on, if someone could tag him in. We are going to request for... continuance to september 3rd we were hoping to have some more information uh earlier this afternoon that would allow us to present our latest plans but we're still working through the proper channels to make sure that we can find ways to make this project feasible for us and we have made progress but it's it's still been uh we're still gathering information so we wanted to on it.

It's just at least I'm here, David.

Okay, there he is.

Hello, my apologies, board. We Yeah, we were not based on where we're at in the agenda. We were not expecting to be on this early.

Sincerely apologize.

Yes, as David said, we were waiting for some guidance, clarity, discussions dialogue with the city on how we could continue to make this a viable project by including the three-bedroom plan as discussed with the board and we've yet to receive the clarity guidance dialogue that we need and we will hope to have that for you in two weeks okay with uh with the understanding that I appreciate you looking to um

kind of work with what the board is looking to do, I'm happy to grant you the continuance. With both of you on the phone in the car, it just makes me think of the 1975 song Convoy. You guys can certainly create one of those. So that's fine. I appreciate the update and I appreciate the willingness to try to see what you can do to meet us where I think we are. And so I'm happy to move to continue you guys for another few weeks. Seconded by Amelia. Can I have a roll call, please?

Ann Habib. Aye. Lynn Richards.

Aye.

Luke Schuster.

Aye.

Coralie Cooper.

Aye.

Amelia Aboff.

Aye.

Michael Capolano. Aye. Thank you very much. See you in a couple of weeks and see where we're at.

In a few weeks and hopefully we're in a better place. Thank you all. Okay.

A better place and hopefully stationary.

Okay.

That was interesting. What I'd like to do is invite the applicant and team and council for 120 Middlesex Avenue to join the planning board meeting. So whoever might need to be unmuted and shared the purpose of this, I would appreciate them to join us.

Good evening, Mr. Chair and honorable members of the planning board. How are you?

Bernie Gallucci, nice to see you.

I was going to run and get my sport jacket, and I saw your shirt, and Chairman Capuano, I said, you know what? I don't want to make the chair uncomfortable by being overdressed, so I'm going to stay with this.

You never would. The previous applicant team was in trucker hats driving a convoy down... You know, Route 66, so.

I'm at my law office, but I'm going to stay in this outfit. That was getting close to being some sort of TikTok, but we'll move on. Are you ready? Thank you.

We are more than ready.

I will start and then turn it over to our team leader, development leader, Nicole Labossiere. But thank you for having us tonight and working through the summer. We appreciate it. We think that this application is in great shape. We were... We did accept continuances five times to continue to work with various departments. So we're at a level of technical updates that we're really proud of. And as you know, Mr. Chair, just quick background, Divco bought a permitted site that was approved for roughly the same square footage in 2020. And then on technical issues, really went forward with major amendment, which allowed the board to participate again. We started the site plan approval about eight months ago. As you have seen from the memo, all the departments are in support. We've worked very hard over the summer and through the spring with mobility and PSAF. Economic Development Covenant continues. We think this is a great amenity for Assembly as it introduces research to Assembly as you come down Middlesex. I do want to just say on behalf of the legal team, Darren Baird from Goulston, Brian Dugdale, and myself, we do support and have no issue with the conditions that are set forth So I just wanted to get that out of the way right away. So with that, I'll turn it over to Nicole. Oh, I do, Mr. Chair, just the housekeeping. The planning board memo references... Councilor Jesse Klingen and the, it should say Ward 1 Councilor Matt McLaughlin, who attended and hosted the neighborhood meetings. I just caught that on a reread. So just for the record, it's Alderman McLaughlin and he's been great hosting all the community meetings.

He's been a busy man for the last couple of months.

That's, that's right.

Thanks very much, Anthony, and thank you to the board. My name is Nicole Labossiere, and I'm Senior Director of Development at Divco West. Along with my legal team tonight, I have Jeff Kim, Project Architect with Perkins & Will, and Sean Sanger, Landscape Architect with Copley-Wolf. It's been a long time in the making, but we really are excited to finally be here and present our proposed design for a new commercial lab building at 120 Middlesex Ave. A key building that will become what we've been referring to as the gateway to assembly's life science corridor. A development that aims to revitalize and transform an underutilized area. Next slide, Joe. Next slide. While our permitting journey has been challenging and costly, the past five years have resulted in an even better building in sight. thanks due to city staff involvement and their vision along the way. We've collaborated most closely with planning, mobility, and urban forestry to accommodate requests such as relocating parking off of Cumming Street, pulling the corner of our building back, adding a 12-foot wide multi-use path, and revising our Cumming Street streetscapes for the future of a one-way road. We appreciate all the thoughtful ideas and guidance to get us here tonight. Tonight's presentation was informed by staff comments and that process, so we're hopeful that you can keep that in mind while you listen to and share our goal of a fully entitled project. While things may appear slow on the surface, having an approved project to offer will allow us to compete in what is truly a competitive environment. So with that, I'd like to turn it over to Jeff Kim, lead architect with Perkins & Will. Jeff.

Let me unmute myself. Good evening. My name is Jeff Kim from Perkins and Well. I'm very excited to introduce what will be a new northern gateway to the growing life science neighborhood and a workplace that will further invigorate the larger mixed-use assembly district. The project will bring improvement to the Middlesex Avenue streetscape for pedestrians and cyclists, continuing the strategy that was implemented at 74 Middlesex. And here are some facts and statistics for the project. The building is 19 floors with 16 occupiable floors. Zoning height is at 259 feet and 6 inches. It's zoning for 596,000 GFA commercial lab and office space. And our floor plates about 35,000 GFA. all our floors are capable of being a lab space. We also have five and a half levels.

Can I interrupt you for a second? Because I have a question on that very point that you just kind of raised here. You said capability for lab on all floors. One of the things that I've been asking, not your team, but Previous applicants who are looking to develop lab space is, as this board knows, and we've talked about a number of times in our. kind of experience in history of permitting lab space, it's been very, very slow to be able to tenant. And so one of the questions that I've asked, and I think my colleagues have as well, is what happens if you can't get a lab tenant? Can you transform it to a different commercial use? And it sounds like what you just said is this building will be able to accommodate both types of tenants. Is that how I'm understanding what you're saying? Nicole, you want to?

Yeah, it is designed for lab and office currently. So the existing building as it's presented to you tonight could swing to all office. But on the flip side, like Jeff said, it is capable of all lab too.

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

Any other questions?

Not yet. I'm sure you will kind of at the end. I just wanted to catch on that one because it caught my attention because this is something that the board has discussed quite a bit.

Definitely. Just continuing down the stats, we have five and a half levels of low-grade parking that can accommodate about 520 spaces. And then the building will be lead plenum certifiable. This is a view of the project looking south with the courthouse in the foreground on the right. As you enter the district from the Fairsway onto Middlesex Avenue, the project will establish a new gateway to this growing new life science cluster in the larger mixed-use district. Now you're looking north along Middlesex Avenue to help orient you. 74 Middlesex is on the left, which has recently been completed. Together, these two projects will begin to significantly improve the pedestrian experience along the street. There are a few features I would like to point out in this view. The proposed facade combines glass and metal panels in a layered pattern. That composition extends over the first mechanical penthouse level, helping to reduce the perceived work of the two-story mechanical penthouse that we currently have. The facade also sweeps around the corner at Cummings in one continuous gesture, responding to the oblique geometry of the intersection. And finally, the balconies at both north and south. South ends are a unique feature of the building and will provide a desired outdoor amenity for all the tenants. This is a view from 93 North. Here, 74-meter sex is in the foreground on the right, close to the highway. 120-meter sex is the center. And set further back from the highway with the Lakunta on the left. Another view, this one is from 93 North looking south. You can see the north and south balconies. And these help establish a more human scale at the ends of the building with also providing tenants with exciting views towards Boston skyline as well as the river. Here is the selected building envelope option after our discussion with the Urban Design Commission. The design established a clear distinction between the base, middle, and top of the building as prescribed in the zoning guidelines. The purple areas represent the glass and metal panel composition at the south and east facades, and the cyan color represents all glass facades on the north and west. This slide takes a closer look at the composition of the two facade types. Type one is overlapping composition of the glass and metal panels articulated with two-story vertical fins, and type two is all glass facades using overlapping clear and spangler glass. also articulated with the two story buildings. And here are the building elevations showing both Type 1 and Type 2. Type 1 on the south and east facades and Type 2 on the north and west facades. And this time Sean will

Thanks, Jeff. Yeah, I'm Sean Sanger with Copley Wolf Design Group. We're excited to be here. Thank you for holding us. Kind of just starting out with a diagram here. This is one of the early kind of concept sketches. And I just wanted to kind of bring this back just so everybody's kind of up to speed. As Nicole mentioned early on in the process, we had a lot of really productive conversations with city staff. And certainly one of the key pieces that came out of that was the connectivity and the pedestrian kind of priorities you're seeing through that kind of hatched zone that would be along our building, which is in the upper kind of right corner of this diagram. And what we did as a part of this conversation, once again, trying to get those desire lines, visual connections for circulation, primarily for bikes and pads, is we did pull back the corner of the building and it originally projected out much further. And you definitely had a chance to see that as a part of the elevations that Jeff just discussed. But once again, just kind of looking at this at the macro level. And then what we'll do is kind of zoom in on the next slide and we'll talk a little bit more about our site and the context around it. We've been working very hard with mobility and been able to get all of the alignment along Middlesex to make sure that it's both vehicular bicycles, pads, the alignments, the dimensions, the layout have all been really worked through with mobility. So we feel like we're in a really good spot there. But just to be brief description, Middlesex, we will have the travel lanes as you're seeing right below the word Middlesex that will be headed to page left, excuse me, page right. We will have parking, parallel parking along the curb line. With a drop off kind of a loading space for the right at the entry. If you were to kind of take that flared piece of kind of beige concrete color that will be our front door and directly in front of that is labeled the essentially the drop off zone there. And then kind of building upon that and the multi-mobility, if you will, we do have a street curb there with a raised protected bike lane. So we will have a permeable paver strip, and that's what you're kind of reading in that dark gray zone next to the curb line and the cars. Just beyond that, we will have our bike lane. Once again, it's elevated and protected from that car edge. And then as you start to move it closer into the site, it's going to be a little difficult here, but we'll definitely show these more in larger building perspectives at the street level. But what you're starting to see really is a lane or a line, excuse me, of canopy trees along this edge. We'll be working with a mix of native diverse species. We've been working with urban forestry on those tree selections. We'll continue to have those conversations and finalize that, but we have submitted landscape architecture drawings for their review. As of most recently, just this week, we had some additional comments come in and we have responded to those. But kind of in the big picture, as far as the space, we do have the canopy trees, as I mentioned, below that, which is a little hard to see, we will have eight foot wide planting beds. Those plant beds will really be consistent of plant material that will be more kind of experience from the pedestrian streetscape level. So you can imagine those being a lot more color, texture, fragrance, seasonality. We will have kind of a higher zone in the middle for a little more visual protection from the street. And then those were to taper off in height as you get to the edges. And then along the sidewalk side or the building side, once again, you'll see these more in the perspectives that shortly to follow. We do have linear benches that will be precast in a wood combination, trying to obviously make those very comfortable and hospital and inviting along the street edge, along with trash receptacles, which have been recently added at the request of Urban Space. So that's a new ad here as over the last week. And then likewise, we do have visitor bike parking along the edge and streetlights, with those streetlights being obviously located such that we won't have any conflicts with the street trees. So those spacings and locations have all been coordinated. And then finally, as you get closer to the building, that kind of darker gray tone is a specialty paving zone. The white columns that you're seeing out there, the white boxes, excuse me, are actually part of the supporting, more like an arcade feel for the street level. So those kind of seating node areas will all be recessed underneath that arcade, which will give us some really some nice variety of seating, whether you're out in the sun or out in the shade of the trees or likewise underneath the building and having that furniture. There will be a variety of spaces that hopefully will be active and be able to really kind of function, whether it's inclement weather or you're looking for some shade along that street edge. And then as you wrap around the corner onto Cummings, this is another piece that has been coordinated really well with mobility, with the introduction of the multi-use path, as Nicole mentioned. So that's kind of running most of the pedestrian width along there, and it will be multimodal in a sense. It will be bikes as well as pedestrians. And then continuing along the line with the kind of the reconfiguration of Cummings Street, we had the introduction of canopy trees along there. Once again, another good conversation with public space and urban forestry, really trying to get that canopy size to help us mitigate the urban heat outlet effect, both along Middlesex and Cummings Street as well. We will continue that same understory planting below the trees. And then likewise, the introduction of benches and trash receptacles along the street there as well. As you can see kind of in the perspective, or excuse me, in the plan, the blue ribbon, we will have our blue bike station located in that particular area. And then if you continue page south a little bit, you'll see a lot more of our visitor bike racks down there as well. And those are actually very close. We will have a connection coming out of the building that is basically an interior bike room as well. So you've kind of got those adjacencies being set up right there. And then I'm going to bounce up just for a second, bear with me, up along Middlesex. We do have the existing tree that will be remaining on the left-hand side of our loading zone that is running north-south on this plan on the left-hand side. I really want to kind of talk just briefly about the pedestrian experience as you're walking along Middlesex here as well. We're holding the sidewalk up at sidewalk level, so there will be a transition from street level up. But for the pedestrians using the sidewalk coming from the courthouse or continuing to the right down towards 74 Middlesex, they will all be at a consistent level, consistent material. It'll be concrete, fully accessible. So there'll be the continuity. You won't have to deal with curb ramps kind of going up and down, up and down along that sidewalk. We are looking to kind of pinch down the throat there. So we've introduced a planting island at that upper left-hand corner of the building as well to really kind of, kind of, As I said, simplify and reduce the width there of the amount of paving. So we will have easy access into the ramp that you're seeing. We'll go into the lower levels of parking that Jeff mentioned. And that dark line you're reading, there will be a fence and a gate at that particular location that will separate the loading zone from the general public. And then finally, along the southern edge of the building, we will have a nice planted green buffer, kind of helping us mitigate the scale height of the building down to the pedestrian level. So there will be more of an upright tree along those edges. Once again, it'll fall into our native species selection. kind of once again giving us a softer, greener edge there along that buffer along or separator, excuse me, of the 2023 Cummings Street. And then, Jeff, we can go to the next slide. We can look at a couple of sections. Hopefully this starts to help clarify this a little bit more. So the Middlesex is there on the left. So you've got our parallel parking. As I mentioned, we've got our elevated and protected bike lane. And the permeable paver zone is actually in the zone between the parking space and the bike lane. We've got our planting. We will continue with structural soil below the sidewalks. Once again, we want these street trees to really thrive and grow as opposed to merely survive. Look into, again, the large canopy scale, both for the sidewalk as well as the urban heat island effect minimization there. We have our sidewalk kind of running through the center with the benches and the seating along the street side. And then you can start to see the arcade underneath there on the right. And then likewise, this really came out of a really good conversation with mobility as well as the public open space and urban forestry. The introduction of larger canopy trees along Cummings, once again, to kind of help with that heat island effect mitigation. We do have planting below that. We do have seeding along here. And then we've got the 12-foot multi-use path, as Nicole mentioned. And then we do still have a very comfortable kind of buffer between that path and the edge of the building. So I'm going to pass this back over to Jeff and we can talk a little bit more about some of those perspectives, if you will, that will help kind of illustrate some of those spaces three-dimensionally.

Thank you, Sean. So we'd like to share some views from the ground level. So the first image is the elevation perspective from the Middlesex Avenue, looking at the streetscape. As Sean mentioned, you can see the layering of the planters and canopy trees, along with the two-story base of the building, which establishes a more comfortable pedestrian experience. The two-story lobby is framed by the sculptural structural base on the left, creating a strong and visible entry from Middlesex. Zooming into the sidewalk level, the main entry is to the left, and the bench planters and canopy trees to the right. This view gives you a good sense of the two-story base and the one-story arcade, which is framed by the building columns. Here is a view from Cumming Street showing the square off intersection of the property. and a crosswalk, along with planters and bike racks. You can, again, see the two-story base, as well as the clear view through the corner of the property for the pedestrian path beyond. This is a view of the main entry. It's a grand and transparent entry, accentuated by the structural bracing, creating a clear and strong gesture along Middlesex Avenue. And finally, here's an aerial view. It gives you the sense of the future Assembly Square District and how the project fits into a larger context. Thank you.

Thank you very much for the presentation. Does anybody outside of my question earlier, does anybody in the planning board have any questions that they'd like to ask the applicant before I open this up to public testimony?

Okay.

So what I would like to do now is thank the applicant for the presentation and open this up to public testimony for anybody that wants to speak in support of the application if you'd like to do that please hit the raised hand button and i'll call you in the order in which i see you once going twice Seeing none, I will close that portion of the public hearing and open it up to anybody that wants to speak in opposition to the application or otherwise express concern. Please raise your hand. Once or twice. Seeing none, I will close that portion of public hearing and bring it back to the planning board for discussion and questions for the applicant, their team, or of our planning staff. Yeah, Amelia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have other questions which I'm happy to field after my colleagues have raised theirs, but just administratively, I'm having a hard time finding the lead questionnaire in the application. It's referenced a number of times in the narrative as in Section 9, but I don't think we have a copy of Section 9 as far as I can tell. That might be a staff issue or it might be an applicant issue, but I'd love the opportunity to review that before our next conversation with you, if possible.

Okay, I know that we have submitted that scorecard times through city staff pre-submittal meetings master plan special permit major amendment and what I thought through this application as well so I am more than happy to re-forward that directly to whomever you suggest would be the right mechanism to get that to you

Alvaro, do we have that?

Let me double check. I've seen the materials, but if not, it can be sent to the case planner and we will make sure to send it to the board prior to the next hearing.

Thanks so much.

You want to keep going, Amelia, or do you want to come back for round two?

I'm happy to let others know.

Okay. Who's next?

Good. Good.

Thanks, Michael. I want to kind of circle back around to the issue that you raised around building lab space. So the Boston Globe, as you know, has written a number of articles over the last 12 months that the Boston area, not just the city, but the area has about 30 to 35 percent um empty lab space um that's quite a lot of capacity now i know in the development world a project like this is probably going to take anywhere from three to seven years to to finish right because you're just at the initial and wayne gretzky of course says you know you need to shoot the puck to where it's going not where it is now so i understand all these dynamics but i don't But I'm still concerned that we may have too much lab space. And so I know you answered Michael's question of like, we can convert it to office. But can you talk a little bit more about what your market research is saying on this, number one? And number two, how quickly could you pivot? Because the last thing that I want to see happen is that we've got this building that's sitting vacant, and then now the city needs to make a deal. and provide all sorts of tax incentives, et cetera, et cetera, to get a tenant in there, which is just what happened with a building right next to it. So I'd like to understand a little bit more around your market research on this, on a 19-story lab building in an area that's got 30% capacity.

Mr. Chair, could I start and then ask Nicole to jump in?

Absolutely. However you think is best to respond to the question.

No, no, it's a great question. Look, I think the good news about it taking six years to permit is, and I'm not being facetious, but it's important, I think, for the board to know that Other than the five continuances for site plan approval, it took a couple years just to get through major amendment because we were told first that it may be an administrative relief. And so we could write a book on the permitting experience. Now, the positive on that is... we didn't build a core and shell building that's sitting vacant right so the upside of a very challenging permitting process an expensive one it was about a million and a half dollars just in permitting we won't have an empty building and i think linda or uh member richard sorry the the the the days of building to spec are over for the foreseeable future right so you know, my early days doing R and D everyone, you know, people were building to speculatively, uh, to be the first ready to say to tenants, our buildings ready core and shell. Now we just have to fit it out. Um, I'll let Nicole speak, but that's investors would never allow that given the data that you you've shared that said, um, We still believe this is a lab site. We hope that the market comes back. And until you're entitled, you aren't in play at all. There's nothing to market. Especially given the capacity that's out there. So the first step is getting your entitlements. And being able to say to a tenant, look, we have our legal entitlements to build. Now, can we accommodate what you're looking for? But that's, again, the interesting part about the drag in terms of permitting is not having an empty building. And that's not going to... I can't... Mr. Chair, you've been through cycles. I can't imagine that level of activity where people are throwing up buildings without tenants coming back, you know, for 10 years. But the market, we're still optimistic that Lab is going to come back. There could be variations of it. There could be... Different hybrids. Right. And I think you've seen some of that already. But, you know, we have we remain cautiously optimistic and getting this entitlement is critical if that changes. And there are other ideas or the prognosis gets pushed back further and further. We would come. You know, we would if Divco is willing to invest more money, we would come back to the. to the board. But this is a critical entitlement. And I just do want to say to the planning board, I can't stress enough how lengthy this is. I think we had three or four project managers. As you know, the department's had a lot of transition. It's been very challenging to get entitled. Which again, I remind DivCo all the time, you should thank the city because at least you didn't get construction loans and have an empty building. But that's where we are. Nicole, do you want to...

No, I appreciate all those. Anthony and I have been talking about this for the same amount of time that it's taken to get here. Like I said at the beginning, I echo Anthony. For us to be able to move or pivot quickly, we first need to have a totally entitled project to be able to do that. We are We are monitoring the market on a daily basis. And in order to be able to play and react quickly, we need that fully approved project to be able to be at the ready when we do believe things will change. We'll be able to change quickly with them. So appreciate everybody's help in getting us to here tonight.

Thank you. Thank you for that amplification. I really, really appreciate it.

Do you have any more questions right now?

I probably do. I think this I'll have multiple rounds. But for the moment, Amelia has her hand up. So I'm going to pass and then I'll come back. I do have some questions around the design. I need to formulate that. But thank you.

Back around to you.

Mr. Chair, is that to me?

Yeah, it is. Kicking it off.

Thank you. Just wanted to follow up on Lynn's very well framed question. So talk to us a little bit more about sort of the flexibility here between the lab and office uses. If you'd already constructed this as a lab, I know you could sort of still lease it as office with just different fit-outs, but obviously there are several million dollars of costs associated with a lab construction that you might choose not to invest in if you expected to have this primarily leased as office. What will the remainder of your very long permitting process look like if you get this fully leased in advance to an office tenant and don't need that interstitial mechanical floor and have, you know, a different set of mechanical requirements. Is that something that will be done by, like, I'm not familiar with whether that's a change that can be made administratively or whether that will be another major amendment. Can you just talk to us about how you're thinking about that sort of turning point?

Yeah, I can start and then maybe I can flip over to Jeff from Perkins and Will if he has, you know, anything to add. But obviously, as it's designed as, you know, 60-40 split of lab and office, obviously ideal for a lab tenant, we could, you know, accommodate an office tenant and look at redesigning or reengineering the lab equipment systems to accommodate a office user only within the footprint, within the mechanical penthouse spaces. But that would be more of a design effort on our end to see how we could accommodate that within this design. So, yes, you know, more costs, more time, more engineering if if that, you know, was a path that we could go down if we knew it was specifically an office tenant and that's what they were asking for. and didn't want to just come in and take the full blown, you know, um, lab design, um, with air systems, et cetera. Um, that's it, you know, that's it in a nutshell, it would be more on our end and the design and re-engineering, um, of mechanical systems to convert to just an office.

Okay. So if you had a, an office-only user that you were building this building for, you would leave it to their discretion whether to build the plans as they are with the lab capacity or whether to redesign to meet an office standard?

Yes, correct. High level, yes.

And are there tenants in the market that you are talking to that are a worm where you feel like you have some kind of a sense of where this could go? Or are we still in a not building on spec, but in a speculative stage of trying to get through entitlements before you're able to go have those conversations?

Yeah, we're at the point where we need the fully entitled building to be able to articulate the space that we do have available, what we have available, and what we have to offer to be able to have those discussions with various types of tenants.

Just to add from the design of the building, I mean, obviously the rooftop mechanical penthouses, you can't really do much with it, but the interstitial mechanical floor is designed as any other floors. So we do have mechanical equipment on the floor, but we are putting all glass to match the facade type of all the other buildings. I'm assuming that if the office tenant would come, it would be easy to convert that into a mid-mechanical level floor to a tenant space without much redo of the design.

Thank you. And again, just in terms of differentiation between this and other lab buildings that are fully permitted and unbuilt in the market, I would just love to hear your assessment of sort of how Assembly is looking for a flagship tenant, which is, I assume, what you're sort of looking for here compared to the rest of the Camberville would-be lab market.

Objection to the term Camberville. They're two different cities.

Somebody stole that already. Can I just... So I don't want to... violate confidentiality with other clients. So nothing I'm going to refer to is short of public. But I think what you've seen just in assembly, right, buildings that were already built, those landlords, owners, investors have, as you know, Amelia, obligations to And loans. So they're they're eager to get space either sold or leased. You saw one that was actually sold that was not a traditional lab use, but some some iteration in assembly. And then you have another building that's built out that was built out core and shell. And I asked the question you asked, like what what happens if. It's not exactly traditional R&D and they said they won't utilize all the capacity that we've built in, but that's fine. The other thing that I think that this is just my observations is. We, owners were getting a little spoiled trying to get, you know, full campus space leased out, full buildings leased out. We at Cambridge Crossing, we had one tenant lease two buildings and I've, I've, Our biggest challenge was getting a connection between the buildings. What a good problem that was, like selling that to the Cambridge Planning Board. Now you're seeing owners lease out two floors, three floors, right? Like just... changing the way they look at trying to get, getting buildings activated. But so I, like you've seen some of it already at Assembly where it's not the traditional big biotech, but something tells me there's going to be other iterations before it's said and done that we haven't thought about, but sorry, Nicole.

This has no reflection on your project. I'm just thinking about it from the board's perspective and a lot of the conversations that we'd had about the master planning for assembly five or six years ago, when I think there was this big push that like co-locating a bunch of lab buildings here would be greater than the sum of its parts in terms of that cluster effect. And I'm just sort of curious whether that's still the sentiment or whether we feel like the market has changed so much that that's less applicable at this moment in time.

Can I just say, so I ask this all the time. I love assembly. I mean, I just, I'm a big fan. I was part of it going back to when I was in legislative office, helping get some of the money kickstarted. I still think that when things return and, you know, the capacity that's out there is going to be a better deal, right? It's going to, that probably gets leased first. But man, I still think assembly is a super interesting, great cluster of research space. I think you got it right. The question is, how long do you hold out? And how long can folks afford to hold out? And like I said, is there a hybrid in iterations of what we're used to that sort of change? I don't know. I still, I still am a big believer in assembly. Nicole, I hope.

Yeah, no, that's, that was our excitement for, you know, moving, moving and focusing on the area and being able to create that cluster that you're talking about, um, and be a part of that cluster. Um, Yeah, it's timing. We're down to timing now. Like Anthony said, we're hopeful and things will change. When will they change? We just have to be ready and we all are being adaptable and being able to pivot and listen to prospective tenants and their ideas and what these new ways of occupying space may be. So we're along for the ride. So want to be ready to continue to be a part of it.

Thank you.

So I think where we're at is I think generally we're supportive of this project, or it seems like. I think we just need to ruminate a little bit on whether this is the best way to move forward on their site. I appreciate some of the Responses that you were giving about the opportunity to move into non non lab if that's. Where are you going to be? Because I hate to be tied down onto something that's not going to be able to be tentative. And it sounds to me, and I need to. Kind of review this meeting before next is it sounds like that's. not outside the scope of feasibility and reality if that's where we're at. But so what I want to do is I want to have the board think on this for a couple of weeks and leave the written comment open. And hopefully have you guys join us in September and see where we're at as a board, unless I'm missing somebody's questions or comments. Right now. Oh, I see Amelia.

Mr. Chair, I just wanted to acknowledge Lynn had mentioned earlier she might have some additional questions. I don't know if she's ready to voice them this evening or not.

No, I'm still pondering.

Okay.

Mr. Chair, can I ask just one question for future and all those questions are thoughtful. We put an inordinate amount of time and cost into altering, changing, including, you know, adding land so that Cummings could become a one way. I mean, it's been a robust process and staff has changed and so forth. But I just want to. it has never been raised in any way, shape or form that the city leadership had any questions or even, you know, so I just, I know staff's not here, but I just, I do want to make sure that, my client gets full credit for a significant investment in the plan and changes to the plan. And again, I think all your questions are great. I hope you fall, you know, I hope you join us in some optimism and giving this a chance because if it's not entitled, we'll never, we'll never know. And one thing I do have said to folks at Somerville at the, administrative level that have asked me, the worst thing that can happen during this, call it a downturn, is companies like DivCo walk away. Because as you know, I don't need to say this, when you have teams that invest the kind of money that they do in the sustainability consultants and the architecture and just the capacity to bring a state-of-the-art competitive building that can compete with Kendall Square and other places, that's like the pinnacle of where Assembly ended up. And if if those companies decide, you know, to walk away, you end up with disparate ownership back to, you know, sort of one time developer folks who just I don't think they will invest the kind of money that folks like Divco have invested. And so the good news is the big names are still there. hanging in there at assembly. And, you know, we think DivCo is one of them. So I just wanted to say that because we were hoping to have staff give a sort of resounding representation of how thorough and responsive DivCo was over the last, you know, really four or five years. And that didn't happen. But I know you've read the mail. I know you all know that, but it's important.

I appreciate that. And where I'm hoping to go in the next couple of weeks is I, I look at this positively. Um, it is something that is, as you've, uh, you know, kind of reiterated, it's been a very long process. I think another two weeks, particularly such that, um, you know, Amelia can have some of her questions about the, um, the lead document, um, that, that, that, that, that hasn't reached where it needs to reach. Um, I think it's going to put us in a much better place to be able to hopefully move forward in a positive way with this application. As one member, I'm pretty pleased with the responses that you've given. I think we need some rumination over the next couple of weeks. But I would like to be hopefully optimistic based on all of the work that you and the team have done. to get us to this place and kind of been responsive to the inquiries of the board and it seems like of staff. But that's kind of where I think the board is at at this point. And I very much look forward to seeing you all in a couple of weeks and seeing where we go.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

We look forward to it too. Thank you.

So with that in mind, I'm going to leave the written. Comment open to playing board at some of the dot Gov until 9 a.m. on Friday, the 28th. And continue this agenda item to September 3rd. 2nd, by Amelia, can I have a roll call please?

I. Lynn Richards. Luke Schuster. Coralie Cooper. Thank you all.

See you in a few weeks.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, members.

Thank you. Up next, but not quite last, is Medford Street, 8 Medford Street. So we can have the clerk please read into the record the notice of public hearing for that um 120 had been previously read in and continued and continuing to take it absolutely mr chair i'm just restarting my adobe acrobat here

8 Medford Street. Oops, sorry, I lost it. Let me bring that back up. Apologies.

Adobe has been a problem for me lately too.

Thank you. 8 Medford Street. The Law Offices of Richard G. D. Girolamo, on behalf of Medford Properties LLC, proposes to develop a general building in the mid-rise for MR4 zoning district, which requires a special permit, ZP24-000091. The Law Offices of Richard G. D. Girolamo, on behalf of Medford Properties LLC, proposes to develop a general building in the mid-rise for MR4 zoning district, which requires a site plan approval, ZP24-000092. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Welcome to the team and Attorney Vigorito. If you could all please just introduce yourselves for the record.

Absolutely. Attorney Anne Vigorito, 424 Broadway, Somerville, Massachusetts. Also, I'm not sure if our architect, Narius Bliss from Khalsa Design, has promoted as a panelist, as well as Steve Saragusa, our traffic engineer, Katia Posada from Burdent, our landscape architect. We do have members, the actual developer, but we don't need to promote them as panelists. They can speak if necessary. But I would just request that those people all be promoted as we do have a brief slideshow. All right, so that I will begin. So we're here this evening to discuss 8th Medford Street. Medford Properties LLC, it's the applicant. It's in an MR4 zoning district. We're proposing a four-story general building. It'll be mixed use, 18 residential units. Those will be a mixture of like one and two bedrooms. First level will have commercial space. It's on a pedestrian street. So obviously any potential tenants will have to comply with the requirements of a pedestrian street. At this time, the developer doesn't really have any clear indication who a tenant would be for that site. One of the more important things here is there's no parking on this site. As I stated, there'll be 18 residential units. Also 3.6 of those will be for affordable use as well. Mobility is supportive of our request to not have parking on the site. And they're more of a, they're supportive of our proposal to have a loading zone in the front of the building. Because if I lived at that building, Amazon would be there every single day. So I think we all know in the world of delivery trucks and just for moving trucks, you know, people move in, move out, you know, the loading zone will be extremely helpful and, you know, help and ease, I think, the neighborhood's ease. We did have several neighborhood meetings. Our first one was back in October of 2021. All of our neighborhood meetings were hosted by Ward 2 City Councilor J.T. Scott. You know, at the first meeting, traffic was a question. Our second meeting, which was on June 27th of 2022, We actually discussed the traffic study. So that's why Steve Saragusa is here tonight, because there could be some questions on that one.

Can I interrupt you and ask?

Of course.

At the first meeting, were you planning to have parking at all outside of the loading zone or was it just still the loading zone? Has this developed over time?

It has. It has. It definitely developed. I apologize. I was going to leave more of that to Mr. Saragusa. He puts everything in such an eloquent manner. But we returned for a neighborhood meeting on March 13th of 2023, and that was more to discuss the UDC recommendations. We did have three meetings with the udc so it is customary to go over those with uh the neighborhood since that time they and i don't want to misspeak because you know when i say i haven't heard any complaints there could be people here this evening but we have not i know uh nelson oliveira who is part of medford properties llc he's the major developer here he's very good with neighbors when we had some issues or we heard about concerns at the first neighborhood meeting he did go out and walk the neighborhood and talk to you know neighbors with those concerns uh So at this time, I would ask that Narius, turn over to Narius and have him go through the slides so that he can, you know, show you the plans and renderings and things of that nature. I appreciate your time. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Anne. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Nevis Bognalis from KDI, Ocalsa Design, in Somerville. So I'm going to start with the first slide, which a lot of was covered by Attorney Vigorito. It's a general building, so I'm just going to sort of orient. And I have to mention that we went, obviously, through UDC meetings, through neighborhood meetings. We got feedback. We addressed, you know, design on other issues raised so for a quickly zoning map it's sort of small i can zoom in if needed but uh you know it shows her that we are very pretty adjacent to the transit zone as well as pedestrian uh street map which is uh met for street is a pedestrian street in this case um our residential entry and residential program sort of uh So from Warren Street, you know, residential entry, trash is also underground below Great Transformer Vault. And then going towards the corner of Medford and Warren Streets, we have commercial entries that are along Medford Street. And there's some, like, bike room access and everything. and the emergency exit access on the sort of train tracks, which crosses the Medford Street. And that leads directly to the bike path, which is on Medford Street. So for the next couple of slides, I'm going to hand it in to Katja Posiadlo from Verdant, just to touch base on landscape design, and I'll get back after.

Thank you, Nerys. My name is Katya Posadlo. I'm principal at Verdant Landscape Architecture in Brookline. I have just a few slides to share this evening. This is our overall at-grade landscape plan. I also have a green roof plan and a slide about the green score that I'll share in a moment. But first, our landscape at-grade here, or overall, the whole site, goals. There are two main goals, essentially. Number one, to enhance the pedestrian experience in the public realm on the two streetscapes that we have bought, Warren Street and Medford Street. And then secondly, to support the proposed residential living on this site by designing a patio and greenscape in the roof area, which I'll show in a moment. But first, starting with the streetscapes, you can see here, well, if you zoomed in, I don't know if that's possible, Nereus, to zoom into the plan a little bit more. If not, that's okay. You maybe can see the details in packages that have been sent forward. But the building facades facing the streets are set back from the property line, about five and a half feet back from the Medford Street property line, and between six feet and eight feet back from the property line on Warren Street, giving over that full width of setback to the public for a total of a minimum 12 foot wide streetscape area from the curb line to the building facade so as a result of those setbacks we're able to plant where right now there's just narrow sidewalks and no street trees at all we'll we're able to plant four new shade trees you can see there with green circles obviously along the curb lines we're also proposing four bike racks for short-term bike parking for eight bikes along that furnishing zone And we're able to incorporate permeable unit pavers in that furnishing zone as well to help infiltrate stormwater and support the street tree plantings. This design incorporates all of the city's streetscape design elements and dimensions that are required, including things like structural soil around all of the trees underneath the pavements, tree guard fencing, like the little knee rails around the trees, open area wells, the correct open square footage for those tree wells. A new concrete paved pedestrian sidewalk will be built that will be wider and safer as it will be set back from the curb line behind those trees. And it will be a minimum of eight feet wide for both streetscapes. Currently, there are two curb cuts that come into the site, one from Warren and one from Medford. With the reconstruction of the sidewalks, these curb cuts will be closed and eliminated, making it much safer for pedestrians. Along the rear and the side in the green spaces, we've incorporated native shade tolerant and climate resilient plantings to help enhance biodiversity. And at the very rear in the slightly enlarged green space, there's a rain garden, so we're proposing wet tolerant style plantings which will also help mitigate stormwater. The imagery, if you zoom back out, Nerys, thank you, you can see in the imagery there some of the materials, soil materials we're proposing, fencing, bike racks, unit paving, and some of the plant species which are native. If you could go to the next slide, please. So here we're hopping up to the roof level. The blue rectangle is the elevator head house and stairs head house. Um, we've located the patio deck area. Um, well, because it's located on the north side of that head house, um, it affords a little bit of shade from the structure to, to itself. So a little bit of shade will be cast onto the deck area. Um, and surrounding the deck is a minimum six inch depth, extensive vegetated green roof. Um, we've also included some lightweight planters to help divide up the deck to several zones so that, you know, several people can come out at the same time and sit separately if they want. And then the final slide that I have to share, if you go to the next slide, just the graphics for the green score in the diagrams, which illustrate that we do achieve the required green score with the design proposed. Also, in the appendix, if you wanted to see, we have tree plan, tree removal protection plan, as well as landscape details in case anyone is interested. Right back to you, Nereus.

Yeah, thank you. So continuing forward, just quickly run through the area plans. So the gross area of the building shown here, which includes the basement, is approximately 20,500 square feet. moving to the unit areas as well as commercial areas, square footages. I mean, we can... talk about it if needed it but you know quickly as previously mentioned we have six studio units and three types of units one beds two beds and studios we have six studios nine one bedroom and three two bedroom units three bedroom approximately 750 square feet one bedroom between 590 and 650 square feet and studios 370 to 380 square feet We have three affordable units that are marked in red on those plans. On the top left corner, we show sort of in gray, there's the residential program. with mechanical for the building, storage for units, and then circulation areas, elevator and stairs. And then we have commercial area, storage area. On the upper floor, we have commercial space on the corner of the two streets. And then the rest, sort of on the right side of Warren Street, towards the back, alongside said back line, we have circulation. on the floors above. of the floor second to fourth stacking so unit layout is pretty much the same and this is basically just color and the color indicates different type of units and the roof deck itself for as a tenant amenity space is around 700 I believe about 750 square feet and then some mechanical on the roof level I think I covered most on the area plans, but if needed, we can zoom in on the floor plans during the discussion section. And then I'm going to jump right directly into the renderings and materiality. we were able to infuse a little bit life into renderings from those that we submitted, I believe, last week. So in terms of materiality, we proposed a masonry brick sort of mix of grays and then lap siding and then some accent, you know, cornices and accent details and sort of fiber cement bronze color. bronze color accents. So in terms of massing, we propose three first stories. So we have heavier material and full masonry, upper floor, lighter material and lap siding, and then sort of slicing the rest of the facades with overhanging base of the lighter material with bronze accents. with sort of grounding base with masonry pilasters, if you will, just for architectural look. First floor, it's a higher elevation compared to the floors above just because of the as per zoning requirements. So this particular view is the corner of And then you see that building across the train track is part of Cambridge. Each bay is... On the base of each bay, we show overhanging canopies with cable rods. Awesome. Awesome shade. This is... The next slide is the view from Medford Street looking from the train track where you see... commercial space and then this is the other side, the backside of residential entry and bike room. Towards the back we see this rain garden. And then this is 16 Medford Street building in the background here. Previously mentioned trees with the planter base. There are a couple more views of the buildings. This is the view from the train track. Again, looking at that bike room entry. And then I can touch base on the shadow studies top line. On the top, it is the existing condition. And on the bottom is the proposed condition for each summer solstice and then each basically time Time of the day, we see most of the shadows in the summer falling towards the Warren Street. And then in the spring, obviously, getting longer and longer shadows where we get to the winter. Most of shadows falling almost on the Medford Street side. And then I have elevations that I believe if needed it, we can touch base during the comment period. Building section sort of got through the stairs just to show, you know, shows the height of the building, the height according to zoning was 47 feet and then height with the, you know, with the stair head houses as well as elevator head house and that probably concludes my presentation for the architectural portion thank you very much um all from from your side of the table that is okay um

I don't have any comments or questions yet. I will wait until after we take some testimony. But does anybody have anything they would like to add now? Seeing none. I'm going to open up to public testimony for anybody that wants to speak in support of the application. Please click the raised hand button and I'll call. Once. Going twice. Seeing none, I will close that portion of the hearing. I'll open up to anybody that wants to speak in opposition or otherwise express concern. Please raise your hand. I see Mark Truant. Good. Yep. Good. Mark Truant, please be unmuted and be allowed to speak within the two minutes.

Hi. My name is Mark Truant, and I live on Lawrence.

I'm sorry. Just as a reminder, not just to you, but to everybody, if you could please introduce yourself with your name and your address as well.

Certainly. My name is Mark Truant. I live at 32 Warren Street in Cambridge, which is just a few doors down from the site, and I live on the same side of that street. And since this project was first brought up, I've been asking in community meetings and so forth, expressing how important the end of Warren Street is in terms of commuter traffic and that at busy times during the day, it's very important that there's two lanes at the very end of Warren Street where it goes on to Medford Street because you need people to be able to take a right-hand turn without waiting for people who are trying to move into across traffic and take a left-hand turn to head up into, um, uh, several towards union square. And, um, I just was never able to get, I wrote, I wrote emails, I sent photographs and, um, I don't think any traffic studies that have been done are really, um, I mean, there are times when the traffic backs up onto Cambridge street at the other end of Warren street. And, um, I'm not, you know, I'm not opposed to development per se. I think the project that just got done across the street from this project was well done, but it doesn't have a loading dock area on Warren Street where people are going to be stopping making deliveries or have Uber pickups on Warren Street. And I am very much opposed to that. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else? Only once, only twice. I will close that portion of the public hearing. I'm going to open it up to members of the planning board. Could I ask a couple of questions on this just to clarify based on what this last gentleman was concerned about? This is As I recall within the walk shed to transit, right? So we're, um. We are able to condition and I believe maybe condition that they would not be entitled to. Residential park mistake is that right? Is that correct?

Uh. Chairman Capuano, Steve Saragusa, our traffic engineer, he did a very thorough study of this. And, you know, we looked into what the gentleman said and want to answer your question. I don't believe we're in a transit walkshed.

But are we still able to condition the fact that people wouldn't be able to get residential stickers online? I think you might be, but I see Kit who's got her hand raised, so hopefully she might be able to weigh in.

Hi, this is Kit. The last time I spoke to Mobility about these very conditions, The residents of this building would be eligible for residential parking permits as they're outside the transit area and the traffic commission regulation would not be applicable to this development. They are not in the transit walk shed.

How many, so I guess talking about that while we're on. Warrant street 1 street splits the city line. How much availability. is there for on-street parking for people who would be eligible for stickers on this residential street versus not? Maybe Mr. Serger has that data.

Steve, are you able to give that information?

Good evening. My name is Steven Sergusa, the traffic engineer. I authored the transportation access plan that was submitted for this site. Yeah, this Cambridge line is kind of just around the bend. It actually might even be, yeah, just around the bend of Warren Street there, right on the backside as you see that city line. So currently as there is with signage, there's maybe space for three parking spaces there it's maybe 40 to 60 feet um worth of worth of space uh along the surrounding streets i know there's a lot of stuff going on on bedford street right now um in terms of construction but along warren street there's really not much opportunity for for on-street parking

So what's the expectation? Not putting you to a total answer. Where are people going to go? Where are people going to park? Because they're not going to park on Warren Street. Two people will. Are they going to go on South Street? I'm looking at the map here and I'm trying to figure out where is the line? Where are people going to go?

I think... through the chair, attorney Vigorito, there is a belief because this particular developer has seen quite a bit of renters that do not have vehicles. Hence why there's, you know, 19 bicycle parking spaces, long-term, and then I think there's four short-term parking spaces for bicycles. So, you know, this would be a building more geared towards people who don't have motor vehicles. Not to say, and I've seen this in other boards in this city where, you know, you don't know if someone's lifestyle changes where they don't have a car when they move in, but, you know, a year later they decide to get some sort of a motor vehicle. Right. you know, most renters that we see, uh, renting within Somerville, they're, they're smart. They're educated. They, they'll look, if there's no parking on site, they're going to take, you know, they're going to walk that neighborhood for, you know, before they decide to sign a lease, they're going to, they're going to understand the nuts and bolts of what happens there. You know, they're not going to be blindsided that they're not going to find a parking space.

So I guess my question to you is, is, is this then, um, So I'm thinking about the condos literally built on the street from me on the intersection of High Street and Route 16. I'm about a mile away from both the Green Line and the Red Line. And so I'm not within a walkshed. I'm one of the few areas in the city that is outside that walkshed. Everybody on my street has a car because of that. And there were condos built at the bottom of my street that have a little bit of parking, for sure. It is very tight. They haven't sold since the place was built a number of years ago. So I don't know if that's dispositive of what's making it not saleable. If it's oversold, who knows? But my only concern with this... It's not a crazy concern because you are close enough to other modes of transportation that I'm not, right? So you're close enough to Twin City, you're close enough to McGrath Highway. My concern only is less so the loading zone and the Uber and whatever drop-off. There's like 18 units. It's not that big of a deal to me. is if these 18 units all have cars where are they going to go and if it's not going to be warren street um where is it going to be and is there an option uh is there availability for the for the potential need and i i i think steve has answered the question um but i just want to make sure before we kind of move ahead Because, Ann, you've represented an applicant right next to a T-stop who put in several parking spaces, which is kind of the contrary argument to what you're making here.

Well, and that one, the units were much larger, too. Yes. These are smaller. They're one and two beds. And these are also going to be rentals. Just to be clear, those other units were not going to be rentals. They were condominiums. So, you know, We've seen it before, and that may be why the project Not Far From You is in selling because when you're buying, that's a huge commitment. In a rental, you may have a year lease. After a year, if you're like, gee, this isn't working out because I do want to get a car, and the parking might be a couple of blocks away, and I don't want to trudge through the snow. They're not committed. I have to now sell this unit. They're in a rental and they can look elsewhere. So that's kind of that ration.

So I've got a question for you then. Okay. Not that I'm going to force it, but are you guys willing to look at a condition based on the gentleman who was speaking about parking and traffic concerns? If you don't think people are going to necessarily have cars at this property as they're renters and things like that. And as they're looking at the market, would you be willing to agree to a condition that you would otherwise be exempt from residential parking tickets in the area?

I mean, that's something I would have to ask the client about because those are the very things I don't make decisions on. And part of it would be to, you know, it might be that, you know, like I said previously, someone may move in and they don't have a car and they realize for whatever reasons that they want to get one. And they technically are not in the transit walk shed, so it's a balancing act.

But I would want to confer with the developer on what his position was and maybe even have some... Before I ask you to do that, let me just make sure I'm not the only member of the board with this question.

Of course, of course.

If I'm the only one, I'll let it go. But it is something that kind of raised my My antenna when that was brought up by and confirmed by Kit. Amelia, yeah.

I don't want to wade too far into this because I have a conflict of interest around the Boynton Yards development and have done my best to learn as little as possible about it.

You're not conflicted from this one, are you?

No, but I'm going to raise a question just about how this district is meant to operate. I thought that in Union Square and Boynton and some of the other master plan districts, we were including underground parking and parking in general in those developments in part to be accessible to the neighborhood. I know our ordinance requires that parking to be unbundled. And I thought one of the rationales for that was to create opportunities to have other developments not require parking and to lease that parking at commercial rates. So I just want to, I guess, general question to my colleagues or to staff of whether that sounds correct in terms of the intention and whether, you know, if parking on site isn't an option, but there's a concern about parking availability, might there not be long-term leases available for parking to support that need?

Yeah.

Kit, I'd love to have you in.

I think that personally I would need to go and look a bit deeper into that. I don't think I have a good answer for that this evening, but I'm happy to do some research and look at that.

Thank you. Normally when I say things like this, I think I am coming from a place of of knowledge. And in this, I want to be very clear that I'm coming from a place of intentionally having learned very little. So definitely not my usual. No, certainly that that's a good point.

I can definitely look at, look into that if, if, uh, if that's the wish.

All right.

Um, I'm just going to say a couple more things about the project. I'm generally very supportive of the application. I think it's a good project. I think we have some lingering questions that need some answers, which is pretty usual and certainly not anything that's disparaging of the application in my eyes. I love the way the building looks, so I want to give a... A lot of kudos to some of the bronze features that came in. I kind of like the way that the rendering showed it in fall instead of just, you know, everything's blooming. I thought it was very nice. And we don't always see something in my estimation that looks particularly interesting on the first go around. And I thought this one did. So I want to give you guys some props for that. So what I'd like to do is continue this one for another couple of weeks, just so we can get some responses from staff on some of the questions that we had on our end. Yeah.

I just want to ask if the applicant would be okay with continuing this one to the second meeting in September, which would be 9-17. I'm out of the office all next week, so I just want to make sure that I have time to look into that and prepare any staff materials.

No, that's fine. I like to converse with Kit, and she's extremely helpful, so... You know, when you're back, then we can converse in that way. The team can, you know, talk and, you know, we can have a meaningful discussion, you know, before the September 17th meeting.

Sounds awesome. Thank you, everybody, for kind of being on the same page. I see Amelia once more.

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to follow up on the design point before we close out. It looks like there might have been one facade of the building that did not match the others going around, like perhaps it was all the lap siding without the masonry detail. I didn't get a good look at it, and I don't think I have this plan set uploaded yet. So I'm not sure if you can bring that back up, but I'd love to just... ask if we could revisit that either today or on the 17th. I think often the planning board has an interest in ensuring that buildings sort of feel complete around all three dimensions if there's not something immediately abutting there. And I'm having trouble with the exact context mapping of this rendering because it's the first time i'm seeing it live in the meeting to the neighborhood but to the extent those facades are going to be visible um i'd love to discuss whether having them a little bit more aligned with the primary facade design is um something that anyone else on the board would hope to see thank you mr chair

You wouldn't get the renderings.

Okay. So, I think we have some. Questions that we'd like some responses and maybe some. Follow up on on the next meeting. So I would. I see Lynn's hand before we continue.

Thanks, Michael. I'm going back to something you asked a bit ago, which is do any other planning board members are concerned about the parking? I, for one, think that it's important that we offer choice. to residents of Somerville. Understanding that parking may be tight, to artificially say, okay, well, so this is outside of the transit zone. It's one of the 15% of the buildings that are kind of outside the transit zone. So now we're going to say, no, you can't get a parking, you know, a residential parking sticker without providing some other relief, such as there's a parking built, such as what Amelia had suggested, that there's a parking garage here, there's district parking over here, et cetera, et cetera. So I, for one, don't share the concern that you have. I don't think it's necessary that somebody parks right in front of their building. And if it's absolutely vital for them that they park so close and they see what the issues are, then They can make the choice not to live there. But for us to artificially kind of impose this no parking residential parking sticker on, you know, the small percentage on this particular building, I'm not particularly comfortable with that. You asked about what other planning members?

No, no, no. And that's kind of why I asked, like, okay, so if nothing's going to be presented, where are people going to go? And if not, what are the other opportunities that people will have, whether it's a centralized area or not? So I'm kind of happy to engage in this discussion. I'm not stuck on that particular condition if it just doesn't seem to make sense on this project. especially because it's outside the transit zone. But I'm generally supportive of it, and I just want to make sure we're doing everything that we can to answer the questions that we have.

You know, this issue has come up quite a bit. And I know that we asked staff to set aside time for us to have a broader conversation around housing unit mix. And I'm wondering if it would behoove us to set up some time to talk more broadly around parking options within the city of Somerville. I love that. Pardon?

I love that.

I think we should. I think I fear and, you know, I'm a bicycle advocate. Right. So but I fear that if we don't kind of get ahead of this on on providing and this would be city led, like providing options for, you know, parking garages, district parking. There's a lot of different options. options out there that there's going to be some significant pushback at some point in the city so I would love to have that conversation and include Dan in it as well as let's do Dan let's do some people from mobility let's pull up and talk about this generally so it's not project by project but that we're setting up some bigger picture kind of goals for ourselves

That's a good idea. I appreciate that. I like having these thoughtful, broad-based discussions. I think we should certainly put that on the calendar at some point, hopefully before the end of the year.

Yeah, perfect. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Michael.

Yeah, for sure. We have some questions we have some ideas that we'd like kicked around with with staff and. Get your plan on this 1 too, right?

Yes.

Okay, so so we're looking at another couple of weeks. We're looking at the end of September. Is that right?

Yes, that meeting is September 17th, I believe. Okay.

Let me just look at the, yeah, that looks right. Okay, so what I want to do is I want to leave the written comment open until 9 a.m. on the 11th, September 11th, planning board at sumwellma.gov, just to make sure that we have everything that we need and give you the opportunity to have your vacation and people to be able to confer. And I see Coralie as well.

Yeah, and I thought Luke had his hand up.

Does he still? Did you?

No.

I was raising it because Lynn had hers up and it was camouflaged with her background. Okay.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Are you a good girl or do you have your own?

Oh, no, I do have a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, and I wonder if when we continue this discussion on the 17th, if the applicant, it sounded like there were some examples where there are possibly apartment buildings that don't have parking and maybe they don't even have permits where people are willing to rent under those conditions and are only on a bus line, for example, like this building would be. So if my request is that the applicant knows of some examples, could they come back on the 17th with those for us to think about? Thank you.

Sorry, Coralie, I think you amassed me. Do you mean for buildings that are outside of transit zones that this one similarly would be?

Yeah, like, this is a little far from the green line. There are a couple of bus lines, but something similar to this.

Okay, I get all in on getting some additional information. Okay, nothing else before the planning board on this particular agenda item. The chain moves to continue this to the 17th of September. 2nd, my Amelia going to get a roll call please.

Hi, Lynn Richards.

Hi.

Luke Schuster. Hi. Carly Cooper.

Hi.

Emily. Michael.

Hi, agenda item is continued. It is 751. here's what I'm going to do. We have 1 more agenda item. It's going to. Be a matter of other business. on a potential amendment to our ordinance related to jurisdiction of the planning board. I would like to do the following. Let me see who's still in attendance, both in the audience and in the panelists. Attorney Vigorito is still here. I would like to invite her as well as anybody else who's in the audience, um, to stick around for our discussion on this potential agenda, a potential amendment to our ordinance, because I would like to hear what some of the public thinks of it. Um, and the reason I'm asking attorney Vigorito specifically is because she's got a long history of practicing before, uh, both the ZBA and the planning board. So it would inform, um, me and the way I look at it by hearing about her experience, kind of maneuvering both processes. But before we do that, I do want to take a very brief five-minute recess and reconvene at 7.52. That's kind of silly. Let's do a three-minute recess and reconvene at 7.55. How's that? Thank you all very much. And I'll ask Attorney Vigorito to weigh in as well as any other members of the public who are here.

And when it was up past her bedtime, because she was so excited about this amendment.

Oh, my God. She's so adorable. You didn't know any more.

It's on the record, technically. I'm not going to ask about the off the record before.

Oh, Amelia, what's your name? She's so cute. Her name is Edith. Aww.

Wanna say hi? I don't mean to distract us. Sorry.

I can't believe she's a year old.

I can't believe she's a year old either. Breaking all kinds of records for youngest planning board attendance until MacNeilian sees me.

You can also get my brother's new dog in. You can get Danny.

I don't see her.

She's downstairs. I can... She's probably asleep.

You should be asleep. I can tell she has a transportation interest.

Deeply. She's a kid in a sidecar.

Amelia, is she becoming a ginger? Is she a little ginger?

All right. Back to the matters at hand, I think.

We are at 757. Planning Board is back in session. Let's do this. Kit, are you with us?

Yes, I am.

You are the presenter of this particular amendment. Just so everybody's aware. I see Luke's hand. What's up, Luke?

I'm really sorry. I'm juggling stuff here. If I drop from the meeting right now, you're still going to be okay with Quorum, hopefully?

Oh, yeah. This is other business.

And we're not? Okay. I'm really sorry. Amelia's one-upping me by continuing with the baby. Nope.

We're good.

Okay. Bye, everybody. Thanks.

Godspeed. 7.58 p.m., the planning board is back. I'm Mike Capuano. I'm the chairman of the planning board. We have Amelia Convey-Bey. We have Jahan. We have Lynn. We have Coralie. And we have a quorum. So we can continue with our meeting. And we have, for a matter of other business... A proposed amendment related to the planning boards jurisdiction. Before I go ham, I'd like a quick presentation.

Okay, let me share my slides here. Okay. So again, I'm Kit Lester. I'm a planner with the planning division and I'll be presenting this amendment for permit streamlining board jurisdiction. I do just want to note for you all that you will be, I believe you will be hearing this with the land use committee as well. But since this is directly correlated to your board, we wanted to give you a heads up before that hearing as well. And I will be doing the same thing for the zoning board at their next meeting as well. Um, the real reason for, or part of the reason for this amendment was the mayor's budget goal for fiscal year 2027, which is permit streamlining. Um, we believe that this is in line with the budgeting goal and we are proposing the zoning amendment to consolidate the review of site plan approval and special permits. I also want to bring. your attention generally to some changes from state law on the variance criteria and variances generally. So in the past, as I'm sure you know, there were three statutory criteria that a zoning board would need to weigh a hardship variance by related to soil conditions, shape and topography of a lot, whether a hardship exists financial or otherwise, and whether the requested relief would substantially derogate or paraphrasing, or be a detriment to the public good. Now there is one test and it is the practical difficulty test. So now the zoning board must consider whether the variance provides benefits to the appellant or to the petitioner. and to the public interest, including the interest in supporting the production of housing against the detriment to the public health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood. The zoning board may also consider the soil conditions, shape, topography of a lot, the financial hardship, or whether the practical difficulty was self-created as part of that test. We're also just generally, I know this isn't your purview, but we are also working to update all the variance applications, instructions, submittal requirements, memos and decisions, training materials, and the zoning board's rules of policy and procedure for their next meeting so they can start to implement this change. Use variances for residential housing can also be obtained. In a district where residential housing was previously not permitted, Someone could apply for a residential use variance and they may be issued that variance as long as the zoning board finds that the variance is in the public interest. Also, variances are now valid for two years instead of one. That's some context for part of this amendment. Also, some changes coming to state law regarding site plan approval. Site plan approval or site plan review in other municipalities. I know your board is very familiar with site plan approval. Um, but it's a permitting process created by cities and held valid by the Supreme judicial court in Massachusetts. Um, but this year, the fiscal year, 2027 economic development bond bill included language to, or includes language to establish uniform rules for site plan approval and review across the Commonwealth. Um, but both the house and Senate have passed different versions of that bill. So it's still being deliberated and we're not a hundred percent sure of the outcome, but there could be some changes. coming down soon.

I might be asking a question that you don't necessarily know. Do either versions of the bill instruct on a particular permit granting authority holding jurisdiction over site plan approval or site plan review?

No, I'll touch on that in a second. Hopefully it like half answers your question. But again, this proposed zoning amendment will support the mayor's 2027 permit streamlining budget priority for preparing summary bills, granting authorities to specialize on different specific permit types and the corresponding different timelines, finance criteria and decision requirements of mass general law. Again, just a quick overview of the Zoning Board of Appeals purview. So, according to Mass General Law 40A, Section 14, a municipality zoning board must be the permit granting authority for the following permits, which are variances, comprehensive permits, and administrative appeals. The authority to delegate any special permits to a zoning board is left up to each municipality. A Massachusetts general law does not currently regulate site plan approval, so it doesn't say who has to be the granting authority for those. I will say it is uncommon in other cities and towns for the zoning board to review site plan approvals. Special permits, less so, I would say, but site plan approvals more so. I think it was maybe Malden, whose zoning board did not do either. Chelsea... Their zoning board did no site plan approvals, but a few special permits. And I need to look at my list again.

What I'll ask you as we move forward, and I'll ask you during the joint hearing, I'm certain, is the number of those particular applications that are presented before the various boards in our peer communities.

Sure. Yeah, we can look at that. In Somerville, the zoning board has additional responsibilities and is the permit granting authority for site plan approvals and special permits for these districts, neighborhood residents, urban residents, commercial business, commercial industry, tufts, and floodplain overlay. And then you all, of course, know that you are the permit granting authority for all the mid-rise districts, high-rise, fabrication, commercial core districts. R&D, and then our special districts, which are the Civic, Powderhouse School, and Assembly Square mixed-use special districts. So this proposed zoning amendment would enable the planning board to be responsible for site plan approval and special permits across all of the zoning districts in Somerville and enable the zoning board of appeals purview to be more in line with the permits that they are required to to here under Mass General Law 40A and just some quick statistics from the last two fiscal years. Development in especially the NR and UR districts is largely by right anyways. So there aren't a ton of site plan approvals, especially in either of those districts. But in the last fiscal year, the zoning board heard 25 variances, six special permits, and three administrative appeals. Some of these special permits also included plan revisions and section six findings. And in fiscal year 2025, the zoning board heard 31 variances, 11 special permits, again, including plan revisions, six administrative appeals, and one site plan approval. I just wanted to note for you that if these changes were to be adopted by city council, any site plan approval or special permit that was previously issued by the zoning board who was pursuing a plan revision, they would still go back to that previous board who they were permitted under originally for review. These are the affected ordinance sections under this proposed amendment. And again, pending any amendment, both boards, RPPs, rules of policy and procedure, but also needed to be updated just as a general note. I think that's everything. And if you have any questions, but also, you will be hearing this. I don't know exactly when, but probably soon.

This is something that I'll reiterate during our joint hearing. At some point, this is why I asked Attorney Figueredo to stick around, because she practices before both boards and has done so for quite a long time. No, no, no ages. I've been doing the same. Back in the day, and by the day, I want to say something like pre-2013 or so, the planning board acted as an advisory board to the ZBA. Okay. whereby permits for which the ZBA was the permit granting authority would go before the planning board first, in addition to its own agenda, to have a public meeting, not a public hearing. And the planning board would take those items up and have a public meeting whereby the way it ran at the time was effectively effectively a public hearing a presentation by the applicant, a discussion by in between and comments by the neighborhood discussion by in between members of the planning board, where we would then ask the applicant. to go back and make some sometimes revisions to work with the neighborhood concerns and our concerns. And they came back and hopefully everything was copacetic and we could make a referral to the ZBA. By that point, all of the contentious issues or most of the contentious issues were resolved. by dint of the work of the planning board. And then it went to the ZBA, and the ZBA could say, oh, we have a recommendation from the planning board. We're going to hold a public hearing, but nobody's going to speak at the public hearing because everybody's satisfied already and we're just going to go on our merry way. That took up a massive amount of time because most of these things were minor issues Special permits in the neighborhood residential at the time was residents a residence B zones for donors and windows and porches and all these little piddly things that, um. now we're a matter of of right in a lot of ways but it took up a good portion of our docket and it was double review it put everybody through their paces the planning board's own work got sidelined by things that a different board had the permit granting authority to do um And it made everybody on this side of the table annoyed that we had to go through these things when we had our own work to do. Since then, we changed the process, and this is why I called you in, 2012, 13, 14 or so, to eliminate the double review, where everything now goes to the ZBA. Okay. In my experience, and this is the question that I had for Alvaro, the planning board's agenda and work on its own docket has exploded over the last probably five to eight years through a variety of different ways. One is the increase in joint hearings with the Land Use Committee. Prior to COVID, I think I probably had two a year, and now we probably have six, seven, eight a year on various things, which takes away from the planning board's other agenda items and time. Planning Board has also seen in the last five to ten years a significant increase in more complicated development in areas where it already is the permit-granting authority. Assembly Square, Boynton Yard, Union Square, other mid-rise zones, Davis Square. We're at 8.12 tonight. This meeting has been going on for two hours and 12 minutes, and we've only talked about our own things. I'm concerned that by the idea of streamlining the process and putting on the ZBA only what they are statutorily required to handle, which are variances. You're weighing the planning board significantly heavier on our own agenda and our time and what we have going on than what the ZPA has. Because right now, a number of years ago, the planning board changed its policies and procedures to have five agenda items to be heard per night. and nothing new after 9 o'clock because our meetings were running until 11 o'clock and 12 o'clock at night.

You start tacking on.

Now, you just showed me two calendars. You only showed me 2026, which we're only eight months in. Two years of what the ZBA has going on when it relates to some of the items that we might be What you're talking about is an additional 15 to 20 at least agenda items that we're going to have to work through with everything else we've got going on. Our meetings last hours already. Regularly, people need to be continued because we cannot satisfy everybody in one, two, or three-hour meeting. This process works because you have multiple boards handling various items. You can divide the work into people who are experts in different things. Planning board has always been constituted to handle more complicated, broader planning initiatives and developments in planning. more economically impactful areas because those are complicated projects, those are thoughtful projects, and they take us weeks and months to get through in certain circumstances. If you start tacking on windows and dormers and porches and all the ticky tack crap that goes on in the neighborhood residential areas, we are never going to get through the substantive economic issues that the city has. We've been through this before. We changed it for a reason. The fact that people happen not to have been around for that, except for me and Anne, is not my problem. Learn. History actually matters. The reason we changed things was because it took everybody so long to get through everything because the planning board was the vetting process for every single person in the city. We were meeting until 1130 or 12 o'clock at night. Nothing was getting done. We were exhausted. We were not productive. The applicants were pissed. The neighbors were pissed. And if somebody thinks this is an idea of streamlining the process, my question is streamlining for whom? If you're doubling our workload, we're effectively volunteers here. How many of us are going to leave because I can't stay until 11 o'clock at night every night because somebody wants to change the dimensions of their window? I'm not yelling at you, Kit. You're the presenter. You just happen to be here tonight. I happen to have the benefit of being on this board since 2007. I've seen where we were. I know why we changed what we changed. Somebody's idea of bright idea of streamlining has been done before. It didn't work.

Hmm. Chairman Capuano, you just gave me PTSD. I remember those. They were midnight meetings. And, you know, and I have to say, I practiced before my wife almost left me thrice. I had younger kids back then, and it was like...

Your kids have diaper blowouts as we're going into the conversation from pre-meeting.

And they may make the option that, oh, everything's virtual now. It makes no difference. You're not going anywhere.

It makes no difference.

You know, it's honestly, it's even more so. I think, you know, I was before the ZBA last night and Kit was there.

And by the way, I see Amelia's hand and I will recognize you in a second. But this is exactly why I asked you to come.

But the DBA, you know, they've been handling this stuff for quite a long time now. And they get right to business. Just like the planning board. Like when I have different cases, you know, when I say to the client, you know, the developer, you know, the planning board, these are the things they're going to be looking for. And this is what we're going to put in our presentation. And let me tell you, if you're trying to present something at 830, I'll look at the agenda. And I know you folks can't open anything after 9. If I see I'm the last case, I prepare the client and I say, you know, we may not make it tonight because I like the fact that you don't open anything new after 9. I think at that point, you folks have worked all day. Now you're here. You have to go to work tomorrow. You have families. You have young children. You have a wife. And you know what? It just... I think for me as an attorney and for my client, the developer, it's lessening, it's taking away from what we're trying to present. I don't think you get anywhere like, you know, I could take the easy way out and just say, well, I'm going to echo what Mike Capuano said, but you hit it right on the head. And I don't know, you know, whose idea are these, you know, permit streaming, permit streamlining. It's not. Right. There are other ways to streamline the permits. I mean, you know, whoever's thinking of this stuff, they need to talk to, you know, the chair people. Like Sue Fontano is the chairwoman at the CBA. I think she's been there as long as you, Chairman Capuano.

If not, if no longer. I mean.

Yes. I mean, so you both know what happened.

Yeah.

You know, you folks know, you remember. Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you, Anne, for weighing in on your experience.

I know, Amelia, you had your hand up and we went a little off kilter. This is not a public hearing. This is a other business. So let's get on business.

I certainly respect you and Anne being in the trenches through round one of this and how poor a system that was. I do not have that experience to draw on, so I am more open-minded about this. I think there's, and I have some questions to help inform the discussion, which is, I certainly agree that there are a zillion ticky tacky things that are in front of the ZBA that we want nothing to do with, but I for one would appreciate if, like, Kit, I don't know if you guys could direct us to a handful of what you think of as like representative site plan approval projects. Cause I've just during this time, like skimmed through a couple of recent ZBA minutes and everything I'm seeing is variances. So if you could give us a snapshot of like, what do you think is a typical NR site plan approval? Because I'm still thinking of the conversation that we had about the lot splits and the like way overbuilt ADUs from a couple of months ago. And to the extent there are like slightly more significant and impactful things being done in the NR district or in some of these special districts that the DBA currently has jurisdiction for, I'm not automatically opposed to the planning board having some role in some of those. But I think that to Mike and Anne's point, it would be good to be judicious about bringing the planning board in for only the projects where the planning board is the right set of expertise to, to pine. And so trying to figure out exactly where that line is in my mind, it might be like in, in the powder house area, but not the NR district or like there, there might be some slightly different set of criteria from the initial proposal that might split the difference. Um, so I just love to understand better, um, the types of things we would expect to see in those various districts that we're talking about changing the jurisdiction for personally.

Thank you. Yeah, I have that. I have the numbers in the presentation, but I don't have them tied directly to what the board is actually reviewing, but I can definitely find that and send it out to all of you.

I don't want to create too much homework for you, but to the extent that in recent memory, there were like a couple of representative things. It's just peeling through the minutes. It's hard to figure out which ones are going to be relevant.

Yeah, I can absolutely get that information for you. Thank you.

John, you came in just as we started ramping up these joint hearings that we seem to have every month or so.

Right, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to echo some of your key comments, whether it's the joint hearings that we've had with Land Use Committee or just speaking in terms of the complexity of the applications that have been on the docket. It's just been a progressive increase in those areas. And I'm glad that we have instituted certain rules around no new cases after 9 p.m. and keeping the agenda to five cases on the docket. I'm also very, very concerned about our ability to continue to conduct business that is What I'll call exclusive to the planning board while. The notion of being being involved is being involved with the activities is. helpful. I do fear in terms of the practical aspect of it, especially as we head into the fall season with perhaps additional activity. We certainly have a number of cases that have been continued from this meeting, and we want to necessarily do attention to every single applicant and applicant team. And we also want to be thoughtful in preparing for these planning board meetings. So I share your concerns, and I'm glad that you've highlighted the history that that existed beyond, you know, beyond my time on the board. But yes, I share your concern. And, you know, I would love to express that during the, you know, the joint meeting with the land use committee as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate that, John. Thank you. So, I want to take note of the fact that there are a number of people who are in attendance from members of the public. And I had invited attorney Vigorito to join us as a member of the public, as somebody who had experience practicing before both boards. What I'd like to do, this is not something that I think anybody necessarily expected to speak on, but I would like to welcome as public comment, um, members from the public who might have something to say. Acknowledging that there will be another opportunity to present public testimony. We've been talking and came in and spoke about her experience. And if anybody from the public would like to speak on their thoughts at this point, I'd like to invite them to join the conversation.

Okay.

I think we're in a place, Kit, where you can take some of the sentiments that this board and at least one person who's practiced before both boards has back to whomever has asked you to present this to us, because I'd like to have them speak to us, too. I won't be nice. That's okay. It's okay. I didn't mean to be mean to you, and I feel bad if I yelled. It's not your fault.

No, that is okay. I will bring this back to the team, and this will not be the last time that you guys... Are able to provide feedback about this.

Um, good. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Okay, does anybody else have anything they would like to add for the good of the meeting before I go and try to eat something at 830 tonight? Because we might have like, you know, 5 dormer amendments coming up next.

Mike, it could be worse. It could be town meeting.

I don't do that either. I don't do that either. I live in Sunwell for a reason. With nothing else before the planning board at 8.27 p.m., the chair moves to adjourn, seconded by Amelia Rocco.

Jahan Khabib. Aye. Lynn Richards.

Aye.

Luke Schuster. Oh, sorry. Carly Cooper. Aye. Amelia Aiboff.

Aye.

Michael Kaplan.

Good night, everybody. See you in a couple of weeks.

Good night. Good night. Take care.