Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, good evening everyone and welcome to the Wednesday, January 7th, 202526 meeting of the city of Worcester Planning Board. My name is Albert Levali. I'll chair tonight's meeting. Uh before we begin, a couple of brief announcements concerning how our meeting will proceed tonight. First, all our meetings are in a hybrid format. You can participate either in person here at city hall or online by going to worcestermath.zoomv.comj. zoomggov.com/j1617314979 or by calling in at 669-254-5252 and entering access code 161731-4979 followed by the pound sign to manage remote participation during our hybrid meetings and prevent disruptions. All participants are automatically blocked from unmuting themselves uh or turning on their video or sending chat messages. For remote participants who would like to comment on an item on our agenda, we ask that you use the raise your hand feature in Zoom during the discussion on that item. If you're joined by phone, you can raise your hand by pressing star9. Staff will then call on members of the public one at a time and give them permission to unmute themselves when that time comes. If you're joined by phone, you will be able to unmute yourself by pressing star six. Uh, next I note this is a public meeting that is both being broadcast and recorded. Minutes will also be published at a later date. To help with that process, we ask all speakers participating in person to use a microphone to please clearly identify yourself each time you speak. And the first time you speak, please also state your city or town of residents for the record. To help maintain an orderly meeting, please address all comments and questions through the chair rather than directly to any of the other speakers or applicants. Uh there are a number of items on our agenda tonight that will be continued or postponed. I'll read through those shortly. If you're here on one of those items, please note that no additional notice will be sent to you before the next meeting. The best thing to do is to call the planning department either the

day of or the day prior to that meeting to confirm if the item will be heard or postponed that night. It is not uncommon for items to be postponed multiple times before they're heard by this board. Once an item is called, there will be a brief presentation of the item, followed by any additional comments and clarifications from members of the city staff, then an opportunity for anyone from the public to speak on that item before we proceed to board discussion and action. Finally, all applicants should be aware that approvals are generally conditional. Decisions are generally signed by the board at the next meeting and where appropriate filed with the city clerk the following day, which is what begins any appeals periods. Decisions are typically not released to the applicant until all conditions of approval have been satisfactorily addressed. It is the applicant's responsibility to address conditions of approval and a lack of doing so may result in delays or enforcements. Applicants with questions on that are asked to please call the planning division. All right, into our agenda start with postponements. Item number one, zero Chester Street is a definitive site plan. The request is to continue the public meeting to January 28-26 and extend the constructive grant deadline to February 1926. Item 20 Fington Street, a definitive site plan and MGL81G private street improvement. The request is to continue the public meeting to February 1826 and con extend the constructive grant deadline to March 1226. Item number four, 149 Malden Street and zero Morgan Street, a definitive site plan and definitive subdivision plan. The request is to continue the public meeting to January 28 26 and extend the constructive grant deadline to February 1926. Item number 50 274 and 300 Salsbury Street, a definitive site plan and definitive subdivision plan request to continue the public meeting to January 28 26 and extend the constructive grant deadline to February 1926. And finally, item number three, one Ledgewood Lane, uh which was a

definitive subdivision plan amendment request leave withdrawal. Do the chair before you take a vote. Um I just want to reer u share a request from the applicant requesting to withdraw for one ledgewood lane. Um the applicants formally requested a fee refund for their application fee since they're withdrawing. Um staff just asked that if you choose to approve the fee refund uh that you would withhold the cost of the legal advertisement um and return the remainder of their fee. and through the chair. Just to clarify, in terms of the purpose of the withdrawal, um staff had previously advised the applicant uh that it was necessary to submit the petition and then subsequent to receipt of guidance from the law department, it was determined that that was no longer necessary. So, it's sort of on um staff guidance that the applicant made the application. We sort of changed our minds.

Okay. If there's no objections, I'd entertain a motion uh for the continuences, postponements, and leave to withdrawal with waving the fee as requested. I would make a motion to continue item one, postpone items 2, four, and five, and uh leave to withdraw item three um giving the application fee back less the legal advertisement fee. Second on the motion, Mr. McCormack, yes. Mr. King, yes. Mr. Delera, yes. Mr. Tumi. Yes.

I vote yes. Motion passes 5 to zero. Uh and into new business. First item will even chairman, members of the board. Uh for the record, my name is Haley Palazola of GFI Partners located at 133 Pearl Street in Boston. We're here this evening on behalf of Copage Drive property owner LLC and affiliate of GFI Partners. Our application this evening is regarding 15 Cottage Drive, an approximate 12 acre property with an existing 87,000 foot warehouse and manufacturing facility. The building is located along Copage Drive Industrial Park adjacent to the Worcester Regional Airport within the airport district um where manufacturing and industrial is allowed by right. Um we're here this evening proposing an 18,800 ft warehouse expansion um to the existing structure um that will allow for the current tenant to expand their operations. The building is fully leased to Triricab USA who is a leading manufacturer of flexible power cable for the industrial energy infrastructure applications heavily focused in the marine industry. Then the pro proposed expansion will allow them to consolidate an existing operation in another community and allow them to grow their presence in the city of Worcester where they've been for approximately 13 years. allowing the growth will also strengthen the city's industrial tax base and support the local employment. Um, we are subject to site plan approval due to the disturbance of slopes exceeding 15%. We have also filed a notice of intent with the Worcester Conservation Commission under the local bylaw and received Monday evening the approval for the

order of conditions. [clears throat] We believe that we've addressed all the staff comments um here this evening and we appreciate the opportunity. I'm going to turn it over to Chris Anderson of Hanigan Engineering to go over the technical portions of the site plan. Um he's our engineer of record. Thank you.

Uh for the record again, Chris Anderson with Hanigan Engineering out of Lester, Mass. Uh so as Haley had iterated, we have an existing 87,000 square foot building looking to uh add an addition to the norly side of the building. Uh currently the property is accessed by three separate paved uh entryways. Uh the two southerntherly ones uh one located on the southerntherly line and one around the midline of the property um provide access to the building's parking areas as well as loading areas um and effectively extend along the southerntherly and westerly sides of the building. Uh the northerly entrance uh leads to an existing uh parking field um along the north side of the building which is uh rarely used. Um, as part of the project, uh, proposing to construct the, uh, addition along the northerly side, uh, located within portions of that existing paved parking lot area, uh, the building would extend into a steep slope along the westerly side of the property. Um, the intent of the construction is to raise the foundation uh, wall of the proposed addition as it meets the grade. Uh, so we're holding back the land in that area. Um, as part of construction, that third entryway upon the completion of construction will be removed and lommed and seated with additional landscape trees placed in the general vicinity uh to return that area to more green space, if you will. Uh, storm water management uh will utilize a drip strip along the norly side of the building to capture portions of the roof runoff and direct that towards the existing infrastructure within Copage Drive. In addition to that, u based upon our reviews with conservation, we've also incorporated additional water quality units at the southernly driveway entrance in order to capture portions of the improved parking area um in order to meet compliance with the zoning ordinances parking uh which is 91

spaces. Uh we're proposing to add a new parking area uh between the um the loop driveway and between the road uh to provide that extra space. Uh require 91 spaces. We're providing 91 as well as uh 14 14 sorry uh EV capable spaces. So 15% of the total parking count as uh part of the project. Um and with that being said, uh this the general overview of the project. So if there's any questions from the board, we'll more happy to answer them. Thank you. Uh additional comments from city staff

through the chair. This is Rose Russell in the planning division. So before you tonight is a site plan application for a building addition at 15 copage drive. Um this was on our agenda for last um the last planning board meeting and it was postponed. Um and in that time the applicants addressed much of our staff comments. So you can see our recommended conditions are a little late tonight. Um the project includes an 18,800 foot addition along the right or northernmost portion of the site. Uh today there's an existing curb cut that goes in that will be removed. Um and then there's a small parking facility up there that's also being removed. Um much of those spaces are being reallocated in the southern portion of the site. Some of the existing southerntherly most um parking area driveway uh it exists today um but just isn't striped. So some of those parking spaces um aren't including additional impervious area um but they're just going extending the driveway a little bit. So in total they're going to have 91 parking spaces. Um, in total they're losing four spaces overall to accommodate the addition. There's going to be 14 EV ready spaces. Um, and then they'll have bike parking for 12 bicycles on site. Um, as part of this proposal, um, one of the major points of discussion we had with this applicant was their proposed stockpiling and construction area. You can see, um, here it's located, it's um, landscaped today and includes some pretty mature trees. It's in like a hatched area um between the building and the streets. Um and so they're proposing to you remove a um excuse [clears throat] me, they're proposing to remove some trees to stockpile during construction. Um we just had concerns because we want to see those mature trees be saved. Um and so that's our only remaining condition in the memo. Through updates they've made to the plan. They are proposing a total of 16 new trees and there's about eight trees in that area today which would be

removed. So, they're prop proposing uh almost double the amount that they're removing. Um and later today, we did share um an email that the applicant provided describing um their intention to provide alternatives um that they had evaluated other locations and that they don't expect that the parking area will be fully utilized on a daily basis. Um so, there may be opportunities during construction um to site some of the stockpiling materials there. And so um we hope that they will be able to limit some of the clearing in those sites. Um so the condition reads reflect a new location for the construction staging area or if deemed unfeasible provide evidence that they had evaluated other locations um and that this is the only feasible one which I feel that they've addressed uh in their memo today. So I would feel comfortable striking condition 1A. Um it's at the board's discretion if you feel strongly that they're um that they should find an alternate location for staging on site. Um but I think we're comfortable with the offset entries they are providing um and that and the description they provided. Um other than that, they did receive conservation approval for their notice of intent on Monday. Um they provided an erosion control plan. Uh, and just one other thing I wanted to note, um, from the last iteration of the plan, and I'm not sure it's totally clear on this one here, but they have added a walkway today. There's a walkway from the building to the street, which you can, or not to the street, to the parking area. Um, and they've extended that walkway all the way down, so folks won't be having to circulate through the parking area, but there'll be a dedicated pedestrian walkway at least within the site. Uh, and we hope in the future the applicant can extend that pedestrian walkway out to the street, but we're uh, happy to see it be continued on site to provide the pedestrian connectivity. So, I'll leave it there and I'm happy to answer any questions from the board.

Thank you, Miss Russell. Other comments from city staff? Mr. Chairman, Andy Truman, director of engineering. Uh, no, we have no further comments. Thank you. Anyone else hearing? None. Members of the public, uh, is there anyone in the room wishing to speak tonight? Seeing none, anyone online?

All right, hearing none. Board members. Um, hi, this is Connor. Um, for myself, no issues with the site plan as proposed. Um, happy to see an investment in an an industrial facility in in Worcester uh in this location. Um, no concerns uh with the removal of condition 1A um with the context that Miss Russell provided. So, I'm happy to support it. Thank you, Mr. McCormick. Uh, Mr. Delera,

thank you, sir. Um, I agree. I think this is a good well thoughtout project and I'm happy to support it as well. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gallera, Mr. King. Happy to support this one overall. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Tumi. Uh, no comments. Thank you. Uh, no comments from me other than um I would also be comfortable striking condition 1A. So, I suspect we're ready for a motion. I would make a motion to approve the definitive site plan for 15 CPA Drive subject to staff recommended conditions on pages two and three of the staff memo uh with the with striking condition 1A.

Second on the motion. Mr. McCormack, yes. Mr. King, yes. Mr. Delera, yes. Mr. Tumi, yes. I vote yes as well. Motion passes five to zero.

Great. Thank you. Good luck. Right. Next item we're going to hear is item number seven, 115 Madison Street in the area located at the corner of Green Island Boulevard and Lartine Street, formerly part of 115 Madison Street. This will be a public meeting for a definitive site plan. Good evening. Uh, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is, uh, William Buckley. I'm a senior project manager also at GFI Partners. Um, I am here tonight on behalf of Lamarine Street property owner, the uh u the entity that has uh 115 Madison Street under agreement and is u proposing the uh the development in front of you uh tonight. I'd like to first just begin by introducing our development team um who are in attendance tonight. Uh sitting to my left is Matt Ashley who is our civil engineer from Bowler Engineering. Um with us is uh Raphael Hernandez from Acropolis Design Consultants. Uh Matt Murva from uh Bowler Engineering as the landscape architect. Uh we've brought our um property management and marketing uh director Jeff Ferrron from Trio Properties. They're going to serve as the property management entity for the project. Um Juliano Fernandez from Turnkey Lumber. uh turnkey will uh provide the the modular units for the con uh for the construction of the project. And also we have uh representatives from from GFI also uh joining us tonight. Bob Larishelle uh Haley Palazola who's the vice president of um of development at GFI. Uh just quickly a little bit about GFI partners. GFI is a 30-year development company led

by Steve Goodman with extensive experience in multif family projects. Um, GFI is a known entity in Worcester primarily for um, for industrial development and that industrial portfolio now is approaching and possibly exceeding 20 million square feet. Uh, turnkey lumber uh, is a Lemonster based builder um, who will provide uh, who will be constructing the residential units in the project. They've uh, their in their history as a as builder of multif family units um, they've delivered more than 10 million square feet and thousands of units. Uh the application um before you tonight as stated is a definitive site uh application for a definitive site plan. Um we are in um uh the well and we submitted that that application um to you. We completed all the application contents. We believe we we met the standards that the application required. Uh the process to date, just to I I think just provide a little overview is um the site is although it's addressed 115 Madison Street still, it's uh it actually sits on the corner of Green Island Boulevard and Lamarine Street. It's a triangular shaped uh parcel just just under 1.4 4 acres and it was um it was created as part of the urban revitalization plan and the polar park master plan and some of the the work that's the exciting work and revitalization work that's gone in that area there. Um the the parcel was the subject of the development agreement between um uh uh Wester Redevelopment Authority and and Madison Properties. And this was contemplated as the second residential building in that agreement. And uh the the property in conjunction with Polar Park and some of the other resident the other the Revington residential building and some of the other uses that were uh contemplated around there was part of uh the MEPA

filing at that time. So, the project's already been through the MEEP process. Uh, as part of our application process, we we began working with the with the department um with an IRT meeting back in July. Uh, we we took all of their uh comments and considerations uh to and tried to implement them into what is what is the plan before you um tonight. We had a follow-up meeting in December where um uh we further refined those u those addressing those comments. Um very quickly, I just you know what we uh what we're really hoping that we can provide to you tonight is we want to show you that we've proposed a project that's consistent with some of these earlier planning documents and that um uh and that meets the criteria that the city has has worked hard to set uh for this for this area. Uh we want you to hear our excitement to invest $69 million or more into downtown Worcester. We're really thrilled to be a part of the revitalization that's t that's happening here and we hope that comes across. And uh I think lastly, we want to make sure that we've provided the board and the department with all the necessary information you need and uh hopefully to make a favorable decision on the application um this evening. Um as I mentioned, the site is currently vacant. um is from a from a design standpoint, we we really paid attention to the to the CCOD design guidelines. Uh we this is a compact uh site with urban density. Uh it's a redevelopment of an existing building. We've uh we worked hard to create active facads and a pedestrian scale environment around the building. Uh to reduce any surface parking in the area, we've we're we're going through the expense of creating podium parking on on two levels under the building. uh and we think the project is really going to be an asset to the economic development efforts of the city. We think it's going to be an asset architecturally to the city's uh portfolio of new development and we

think it's important to provide the housing to support cultural activities um that are that are taking place in the in the region. So we think it it fits really well with the uh with the design guidelines of the CCOD. We're also introducing um the modular concept which um you know the building will be built, the podium will will be structured and then the the units will be constructed uh pri primarily offsite which we're excited about. It's going to inc it's going to help um it's going to help the project in a number of ways but one is it's going to really shorten the time frame for construction and we think it result it's going to result in a higher quality unit. Um, our design is is is just that. We're proposing highquality units with market-based amenities in it with competitive rents. And that's, you know, we're going to continue to work with those uh under th under those principles. We think the project is is again another it's a gateway site into um into the polar park district. And that's as you can look at that image uh before you now uh you know we really made some efforts to to to as as you enter heading towards Green Island Boulevard and towards Lam Martin Street. Um we think that that's going to that's going to make for an attractive gateway. Um uh I'm almost done and I'll turn it over to to Matt. But the project is uh 258,000 square feet, right? Um we have a unit mix. It's 197 units with a unit mix that's um that's heavily weighted towards studios and onebedrooms. Um however, we have 10% of the units will be two bedroom two bedrooms and 10% of the units will be three bedrooms. And that 10% of the three bedrooms is something we identified in the market that's just that that that's lacking right now. So we're we're um there aren't a lot of three-bedroom units in the market and um uh we feel we're going to really be able to address a need there. Um the parking for the building as of as as proposed was 150 spaces

which is a.76 um ratio per unit. Uh we're proposed just over a 100red bicycle parking spaces indoors and also making some accommodations for the outside. the um there's a um amenity spaces throughout the building uh including a 12,600 square foot courtyard that um that we're really excited about and it's going to be a wonderful amenity for the residents. It's uh we'll have a swimming pool and outdoor work areas and and it's uh you know really uh finely landscaped and it's it's going to be um it's going to be a real special place for the residents of the of the project. We've also um and and it's identified at the at that gateway corner that I was talking about as we as you're coming um uh as you're coming towards the the intersection of Lamarine and Green Island Boulevard, we have a a retail facility at the end there with without potential outdoor seating. We think it makes for a it's going to make for an attractive retail location. Uh we've talked with the department with, you know, that'll um it's kind of to be determined who's going to I locate in that spot, but we'd love to see a coffee shop or even a you know, some sort of um something that could service the neighborhood, maybe a small restaurant, sandwich shop, something along those lines. So, we're going to we're going to build that out to accommodate those those uses. Um and um with that, I'd like to turn it over to Matt Ashley, our civil engineer from Bowler. And uh Matt will get into more detail regarding uh the site plan that was proposed.

Thank you. Matt Ashley with uh Bowler. Uh if you could flip to the existing condition pl uh page, please. I think it's right after all these renderings. Thank you. Um, so Bill did a really great job of kind of framing up, made my job a little easier here. So [clears throat] the the site is definitely uh a little uh abnormal for most sites here, triangular. Um, we have frontage on three sides and really only have a three-sided building. Um, which uh presented some uh unique challenges for this. So specifically we have Green Boulevard, uh L Martin, and then drive B goes down about halfway um on our building facade before it goes over to drive A. So in the current conditions as it's uh right now, the site was really largely um impervious out there, excuse me. And um then throughout the redevelopment in this area uh it was kind of used for construction and staging and for building up of the Green Allen Boulevard as you get over to the ballpark area. Um if you go to the next page please. Um so this is uh the proposed rendering. So um a little different than the existing conditions as you can see out here. Um as Bill mentioned it's going to be 197 units um full access for pedestrians around the whole building. um along with uh vehicular access around 85% of the building as well. Um as Bill mentioned, there is a bunch of uh ground floor amenity spaces uh for the residents along with the commercial space and large outdoor patio area which is intended to be of public use. Um, I'll let Matt Murva a little later go into more descriptions, but there is that public uh pocket park down at the intersection of La Martine and Green Allen Boulevard and then also a smaller one up by Drive B and Green Allen Boulevard.

Uh, parking for the development um will all be underneath the building uh accessed off of two separate different garage entrances. Um, they won't be connected internally. Uh the upper story, yeah, right where the mouse is, will be entered off of drive A and drive B, um right as planned at that intersection. And then the lower level will be accessed off of La Martin going down underneath a grade just about four to 5 ft there. Um then right on the corner of that uh entrance right there on L Martin is the proposed bike storage that Bill mentioned. So that'll be 70 um bicycle storage is there. And then additionally, there is uh more uh bike, motorcycle, scooter parking, charging opportunities located uh within each of the garage floors as well. Um and then consistent with the city of Worcester standards and what DTM looks for, we did um strategically place bike racks uh around the exterior of the building depending on what was there. Um so the key areas for this would be at the main building entrance located up by Green Allen Boulevard in Drive B. Um, we have do have some additional bike racks located there. So, any Uber Eats or Door Dash bikes, someone's coming in, drop off a package, does have the opportunity to secure their bike there um underneath a covered overhang uh for protection as well. And then additionally, we do have some more coming down Green Mountain Boulevard and then uh more located down by the retail space as well. Um, talk to access. [snorts] Um, other than that, um, the there is pedestrian access all around the building. Um, and we worked uh pretty extensively with the department here. Um, and looked to widen the sidewalks um, as much as we could. So essentially Green Boulevard uh sidewalk will be

getting a little wider. Um with the inclusion of some area on our property um we maximized drive B as much as we could. Um and then working through um L Martin as early as today. We're looking for opportunities to widen up the sidewalk down there. That one's kind of in the current condition. Um basically minimum standards. Um and I think Michelle said if you know two people really can't pass by there. So we're looking to opportunities to widen that as much as we can. uh coming onto our property there. Um and then we also do have some connectivity through the pocket park uh as well to get you up to the patio area or you know you don't want to go all the way down to the end and turn around, they'll have that opportunity as well. For utilities, um this area was looked at um very early on with all departments in trying to um limit any rework that would have to be done out there. So with that in mind, the utility connections were really designed to try and maximize using existing stubs that are onto the property and working with DT DPW as well. Uh specifically, um looking to use the sanitary connections off of Green Boulevard, which was planned for a development of this nature. Um and then additionally on drive B there is a water mane that comes down that we'll be looking to connect into and not out into Green Boulevard or L Martin. Um and then working through DPW um there was a request to uh loop that water main. There's a stub coming off of L Martin on into drive B and then um so we applicant has agreed that we're going to loop that water main for I think it's benefit for the project and the neighborhood and and DPW and everyone as well. for a storm water connection um largely building roof leaders which will be um treated through water quality units and connecting into a larger system. Um I will let Matt Murva talk about this a little later. Um the city staff has

challenged us to provide uh perhaps some more um plantings and uh rain garden areas in the public uh pocket park area um which the applicant is happy to do. and we're going to work with city staff to promote as much info in infil infiltration as we can in that area. Um I think that is largely it for the site features from a high level. Be happy to answer any specific questions later, but in the interest of time I'm going to hand this off um to Raphael to talk about architecture. Good evening, Rafael Hernandez, Acropolis Design. Um, the building, the structure consists of a 25 configuration of two floors of podium construction, the basement and the ground level with five floors of modular wood construction above. Uh, the building will be designed to meet all the compliance of the architectural access board accessibility, life safety, and the passive house requirements of the city. Uh the exterior design, the facade employs a traditional design with a ground level uh base to be brick cement panels aluminum storefront siding. Um um vertical and horizontal raincreen uh cement board sighting in some areas. The main body will be made up of mainly cement board lap sighting with European style windows, doors and dark metal balconies that are projecting. Some are um projectile about 4T. Some are French style balconies that are only up against the the wall. Uh the upper level most level has a upper band to create the definition between the cap the body and

the base uh with angulating parapits and um wide coping and a cement board panel system. Um if you go to the floor plans a little bit the basement level please. So, as they said, you access um the lower level garage from Le Martin and there there are mechanicals and um the the elevator core and the bike rack. We with discussion with the staff, we will should be able to connect the bike to that adjacent staircase. Um, next floor, next the parking spaces. There's 76 parking spaces on the lower floor, 74 on the upper floor. We access it the upper level from drive B at a which is at a higher elevation. Also, all the amenity spaces, the lobby area, the leasing office, the fitness room, the rental space, the patio, it's at this level. Next floor, please. The this floor contains the res the start of the residential units as I said from studios to three bedrooms, the courtyard and the work from home spaces on the stairs and above this is additional units and they are basically consistent throughout the third through the sixth floor. Thank you. I pass it to my colleague for any further questions or comments.

Thank you, Raphael. Would you mind just going back to that rendered plan version?

Good evening. Uh Matt Murva with Boulder, uh landscape architect for the project. Uh Matt, Bill, Raphael have covered a lot of uh a lot of ground. Um, not much I really need to add other than um, we've we've provided for some extensive planting on the rooftop structure that you see there. That that courtyard in inside the triangle is elevated above the Lam Martin sidewalk and that spills out from the uh, from the residential units on that first residential floor as well as a a club amenity room uh, at that deck level. So, that's where you access the pool. There's outdoor lounge seating, um recreation area, outdoor kitchen, uh some shade structures. So, all of that would be um you know, for the residential use, similar to how we did it on the the Revington uh just up the block there. Uh but at at grade, you know, a lot of the streetscape um has been implemented uh through the reconstruction of Green Island Boulevard that we were a part of. So, there are already street trees along that entire edge of of Green Island. Uh, we are going to enhance the upper right corner there with a little plaza at the main entry. Uh, one of the conditions was to add a larger shade tree there, which we have no issue doing. So, that'll that'll be part of the landscape plan um as a condition. Uh and then for the for the little area, the green area that forms that gateway coming up L Martin Street, um that that we're really hoping to make an active corner there with the um with the future retail user there spilling out into that patio space. Uh so that that's a real opportunity to have that be the first thing you see when you come into this neighborhood. Uh we are going to provide some screening, some landscape um to enhance that corner.

We're we're putting some landscape around some of the uh utility equipment there, switch gear, transformers, uh so that that's not as as prominently featured and kind of disappears into the background. Uh but one of the things we discussed with with um with staff today was implementing more of a rain garden approach to some of that green area uh and providing for some infiltration um to handle some of the storm water uh which we we do agree with. We we can absolutely do that. Uh we're also in that triangular area going to provide a deeper sidewalk along L Martin Street which will cut into that green space a little bit but we've definitely got room uh to accommodate that. We just need to adjust some grading. So we're we're glad to have that be a a condition of approval as well. Uh from a lighting standpoint, um again, a lot of the the street lights exist in the the framework that's already established, but we're providing additional lighting both on that uh roof structure, which is in our lighting plan, uh as well as some sconce sort of building mounted lighting along the street edges. There were a couple of dark spots in the phototric that we'll take care of. Uh and we also can certainly increase the uh the number of lights along LA Martin which I think is one of the conditions that was uh proposed as well. So no issue doing that either. Um so with that we're we're glad to turn it back over to Bill or answer any questions you might have.

Thank you Matt.

Yes. Um and just to I I think close up the presentation and uh and open it up for um for as the as the department or as the board sees fit. Just a couple housekeeping items. Uh we we have proposed the project um to to take advantage of the well to opt for the payment in lie of the affordable units. So there uh there would be a uh 3% of hard construction costs uh payment made to the city in lie of those affordable units that um um it's my understanding that's would be a welcome investment in the affordable housing um uh fun trust fund at this point. Um we have also it um it came to my attention that this the city has a target of increased uh units built out for accessibility standards. So, we've uh we we've we've agreed to beat that. Um uh that I off the top of my head, I think it was 20 units uh built at at as at at a minimum easily adaptable um is is is how I I talked to Peter about it. So, it um but we want to meet that target that the board has set for uh additional accessible units. We will um you the the um I think all of the units become adaptable uh for accessibility um concerns but but these will be you know built out particularly for um to be easily accommodated for that. Uh we are uh working with the department on uh filing a housing development incentive um uh application uh to see if we could take advantage of the HDIP program um proactively. just a couple of the comments and there were um well I I actually I should just stop and say I wanted to just thank the board you know we we submitted this application just before the holidays um and the board and the staff um you know just before the holidays so I know the staff is you know did kind of yman's

work to get us a comment letter on the application they also dedicated most of the afternoon today to uh to help us work through those comments and um you know I think we made a lot of progress I think we're actually, you know, at a point where there's a the set of conditions that um that we would be comfortable with. Um proactively, you know, we know that this site was um was part of an environmental cleanup um you know, from its former use as um uh is the Wyman Gordon property and the Abuing Stanley Stanley Tool Building. So, you know, whatever the work we do here and and under the AULs, the multif family um uh use is an allowed use, but any work that we do in the soils, we're going to have to present a RAM plan to the city, and that's one of the conditions. We're also aware that through the MeE process, uh a transportation demand management plan needs to be created for uh for the project. So, we're we're we're we're actually willing and and interested in doing that because we think that there's, you know, opportunities to accommodate loading, uh, you know, making sure that our our residents are, you know, familiar with, uh, the the public transportation and area and actually how to, you know, uh, encouraging the utilization of that. uh you know we got to make accommodations for you know the the in in today's date we want to make accommodations and we already have actually in the architectural plans for uh you know Door Dash and Uber deliveries and and and packages that show up. So we've we've on the first floor elevation we've actually created a a dedicated package entrance that gets right into the package room so that we're u those package deliveries aren't aren't uh making their way through the um through the through the lobby and the main entrance of of the building. Um we're excited about the amenities that the project has and um you know we've uh we've been working a long time on this so I could probably go

on and on about how excited we are to actually be here tonight and um you know with an opportunity to present the plan to you. It's been a long a lot of work in the making. So with that we'll um we'll turn it over to the bo to the to the department or the board and uh and we'll we're available to answer any questions or concerns you have. Okay. Thank you guys. Uh turn it over for staff comments

through the chair, Michelle Smith, and the planning division. Um I'm just gonna slide back here and hopefully adjust my microphone to not give you a bunch of feedback. Um going to go back to this colored markup plan here. So, um thank you, Mr. Chair again, Michelle Smith in the planning division. Um, tonight in front of you, as you've heard in detail, uh, we have a property that's located in our downtown BG6 zoning district as well as the commercial cord corridor overlay district. The applicants seeking to construct the sixstory structure uh, which has uh, about 250,000 square feet, 197 dwelling units with a 2500 square foot uh, commercial space on the the ground floor. Um there are 150 approximately parking spaces proposed within two levels of parking garage. One which is partially subterranean um and the other um neither of which are um connected. They're independent of one another. Within the the actual residential component, you have a breakdown of 58 studios, 100 one bed units, 19 two bed units, and 23 bed units as you heard from the applicant before. Um, in addition to the 150 or so parking spaces, which gets to about point um 75 spaces per unit, uh there are 108 uh interior bicycle parking spaces, 70 in a dedicated bike parking room, which does feature um kind of a repair station as well as charging equipment for electric bikes. Um and then there are a variety of additional spaces within the the garage itself and some of the um uniquely shaped pieces given the the shape of the property. Um so you can see here on this plan some of those locations um if my cursor works um in these kind of triangular areas is really where you see those those parking spaces for um electric bikes and

motorcycles. Um, we have a variety of comments on the project, a lot of which we've listed in conditions. We did have the benefit of talking to the applicants team for some time today and we appreciate them being so responsive given that we were just able to issue our comments today. Um, so thank you to their team for that. Um, so we do have some changes to the memo that we had issued earlier which are shown in blue on the updated version of the memo and I have one additional inclusion for you beyond that should the board move to a vote but related to the the comments kind of more generally and globally on the project. Um, through that conversation that we were able to have with the applicants team earlier today come to better understand a little bit about their intentions related to u managing the parking. So the garage is intended to be least associated with the residential component of the use. Um so this is is really residentbased parking. Um so the commercial use itself wouldn't necessarily at this point in time u be planned to have that um access dedicated specifically um but instead more featured for the residential component. So these users coming to the garage would be folks who are familiar with the site um not folks that are unfamiliar. Um the the access control has yet to be specifically uh evaluated by the applicant, most likely to be provided through some sort of RFID card or other um operative measure that would gain access into these spaces uh for parking. Typically, the board likes to see at least a single car length off of the street to accommodate a turning vehicle into the the garage itself. Um, so we have provided a comment and a condition that you'll see in the memo requesting that modification particularly along Lamarine Street. Have a little bit less of a concern about the ability along drive B just given it's essentially an internal driveway and less of a kind of throughput street whereas um folks fly on L Martin Street. So we want to make sure that folks can get into the garage off of the street um not create a an issue there. Um so we have a

recommendation for that revision. Um, in terms of and I'll ask obviously for the applicant to correct anything that I I've misunderstood as well. Um, in terms of the bicycle parking area, we did have some comments um on this. Uh, as you can see in the the corner here, this is where the bike room is located. Immediately adjacent to it is a stair. Um, this is the subterranean level, if you will. So it has um at grade access off of Lam Martin Street, but given the grade of the site, that portion sort of embedded below grade in in part. Um so the the pedestrian access or cyclist access would be coming into the site into the bike room from L Martin Street in that location. Um our recommendation was that the applicant consider incorporation of an additional internal connection. You can see in this hatch pink darker pink walkway um here the applicant's providing is attempting to provide dedicated pedestrian access to the bike room or cyclist access to the bike room more likely. Um and that you can come down the stair where my cursor is here and access that with relative ease. Uh but given kind of that route, it's it's more likely that folks will actually just opt to walk out on the sidewalk and head around this way rather than kind of going down another story, walking up a ramp where the cars might be coming and going. So, we've asked the applicant um to explore if there's an option to interconnect with this this stair here, which they're calling stair C, or find another option for access that doesn't require folks walking up the ramp to get into the bike room. um while maintaining also this this access point onto Lam Martin Street because as you can see from some of the elevations which I'm gonna scramble around the slides and apologize in advance for um here you can see the the door into that bike room here on the the bottom right hand corner of the screen. So that's another comment that we've asked um related to that the applicant has made a

request to modify the condition slightly um to allow them to evaluate the different options for that location. And so that is condition 1B. And so our suggested modification to that condition would be after the first part of the sentence where there's a comma. So it says um provide an interior connection from the bicycle parking room into the building via stair C. So we would suggest you add language to say or another interior location that does not require walking up the garage ramp, while maintaining a functional door on L Martin Street. So that's our one recommendation um as to modifications to the conditions. So just covering that as I go through that section of of our comments. Um you saw that there are a variety of different locations where there's additional um green space that's being provided. All of that will help improve storm water management over the historic condition. Um given its its manufacturing and industrial history, there are some limitations with that um related to use restrictions on the property because of former contamination. So we've asked the applicant to explore um where possible assuming that um they are able to based on the state requirements for those contaminants to incorporate some additional infiltration into this area. Um so that is is mainly the area over here this kind of triangular shape. Um and I'll note that they have um currently on that kind of atgrade level u beyond the existing street trees all of which are proposed to remain um they're incorporating um with the conditions that we have recommended 25 additional shade trees or ornamental trees that would be incorporated into the project uh which will be a great addition just trying to cool this area off as it's one of our heat islands here in the city. The roof also being a reflective or white treated surface um would help with that as well. Um, beyond that, in terms of comments, you heard a little bit about the sidewalks. Um, the sidewalk, if you've walked or uh driven past that on La Martinez, is a little bit narrow as it exists today. So, we have asked the applicant to extend that

further onto their property is essentially hardcaping and grants an easement to the city for sidewalk purposes along that that section. And in discussion with our department of transportation and mobility, while that's currently proposed to kind of terminate here at the corner of the building where you kind of feel that constraint if you were walking along the street and the applicant had proposed some nice landscaping um along the outdoor plaza area. We've actually asked them to extend that further all the way down to the intersection um with Green Island Boulevard, Herman Loi Street, that uh fun intersection there uh to try to uh expand that and make it easier for multiple folks to pass just given the intensity of development and the planned redevelopment. um for this area. The board members, some of the board members anyways, may recall earlier iterations of um the Revington site and some of the proposals um from the original development where you see this drive A and drive B. Um at the time, there was a proposal to interconnect drive B all the way through. Um, at this point it's not entirely clear based on the applicant's control of this portion of the property and the um, existing ownership as to what will happen with that kind of third parcel, the former site of the Stanley Tool Building. And so at this point in time, the applicant is intending only to make pedestrian improvements or accommodations for essentially a walkway along that area and is not proposing to construct something that feels and looks a bit more like a road. So instead, they're proposing to install a more continuous um curb cut and an opening uh and close the sort of construction access opening, I'll call it, that's been there. Um that you can kind of see here on the screen where there's a break in that um and restore that so that it's like what else is along the street in that location. Um continuing, um there are a few comments that we had in terms of the layout of the parking within the site itself. There are a few parking stalls that are just very difficult to maneuver in or out of. So, we do have some comments um in the conditions of approval that board members will see, which is 1G if you want to follow along. Um which relates to these parking stalls kind of here

closest into the corner. Um where it's really challenging and near impossible to maneuver in. So, we're asking the applicant to eliminate that. Um and if they wish to maintain spaces with a narrower drive outlet, they have the option of seeking a special permit in the future from the board. Uh we've also asked them to eliminate the uh parallel space that's located between uh two footings and is a compact stall just because we again think that's a really challenging space to maneuver in and out of. Um but ultimately that's something that the board can consider whether you think that's appropriate or not. Uh we know garage spaces are at a premium cost as well. Um but practically speaking the the stalls at the end of um this this uh section here which is paralleled on the upper floor here labeled 102 um those are just a challenge to maneuver in or out of. So we're asking that those be eliminated. In terms of other comments u folks are familiar with this area and the challenges that we have with flooding in the neighborhood. Um given that is the case, we have asked the applicant to take some additional measures for the site um to make sure that the the design is done in a way that is safe for the users and protects the property. So we have added a number of conditions which may be atypical for the board to see. So I'm just going to um quickly go through those um which you'll find in our list of conditions of approval. Um so those are um related to installation of backflow preventers for all utility connections. So that's one Q and one R which is providing an emergency pump backup generator um on site in the event of u malfunction of any of the plumbing components of the garage which are located at that kind of subterranean level. I say subterranean it's really 4 feet um below the the flood elevation if you will but it's partially below grade. So referring to it in that way. Um and then we are asking for emergency response plans to be developed in association with um a potential flood of

this area and have uh plans be posted in all of the stairs and elevators that have access to that level. Um similarly, we're asking that they adjust the grading. it it's quite close to the the future projected flood elevation um along Lam Martin Street to adjust that to create essentially a burming effect so that um flood water wouldn't go into their driveway and down into the parking area and instead would stay ponded in the street and I say that it's in a theoretical event so um it's based on modeling um not not perfect science um but based on um the FEMA maps um and the FEMA preliminary flood study those are the elevations that we're referring to as far as the the flood plane goes and and I will clarify that this property itself is not located in the flood plane or a mapped flood plane. Um however uh given the elevation and the way that this whole area drains and the drainage uh issues that we have essentially our city surface system our our drainage system ponds up um and puddles up because it can't efficiently move water away fast enough because this area is one of the lowest points in the city and we have so much impervious area that drains to it. And as a result, um, the water just can't leave fast enough, right? And so that condition gets created and that's driven, um, to elevation. So even though technically speaking, there's sort of a burming effect that's created around this that does not put it within the mapped flood plane, um, we're just taking caution to make sure because we know that this is has components that are below an elevation um, that is potentially susceptible to flooding. Um, so those are some unique conditions that you may not be used to seeing. So just calling attention to those in particular. Um and I'm happy to answer any questions that you have uh related to the flooding or otherwise. Um in terms of uh parking within the the parking garage, um they are proposing 30 EV ready spaces which is what's required under the specialized stretch code. It may be helpful actually

if the applicant could clarify um any number of spaces that they intend to provide online at occupancy um in terms of chargers for tenant use. Typically, that's a condition that the Department of um Transportation and Mobility puts in. You'll see that in their comment letter. We've um adjusted the language on that in terms of the specific number to eliminate that um explicit requirement that you often will see. Um so, you don't see that carried forward in the the DTM comments, but instead um you'll see one DD, which is clarify the locations and quantity of parking spaces to be equipped with EV chargers um at occupancy. So, if if the applicant could just comment on that um before we kind of close out, I think that would be helpful in case the board would want to to include that specific number that they're proposing um to include in the conditions. Um as you heard also, there is a requirement for a transportation demand management plan to be provided that has yet to be submitted. So, I just want to clarify, we have that as a condition of approval. It will need to meet the MEPA certificate requirements and be acceptable to the Department of Transportation and Mobility. This would include information that addresses sort of how they're going to try to minimize um trip generation from the property. Um how things like uh deliveries and others would be accommodated by the site um and and um uh commitment as a perpetual condition to continue to meet those obligations moving forward is also listed in our conditions. In terms of other comments, I'm going to go to the architectural plans. So, here you can see all the different elevations of the building. A challenge when you're designing a building that is surrounded entirely by streets or things that feel and look like streets is to make everything functional but also um architecturally pleasing. Um so, the applicants made great strides from especially from their initial iterations of the design uh especially working with modular components even more of a

challenge um to progress this. And so, uh, the one elevation that we would like them to continue to progress is along Lam Martin Street. So, you can see that second to the bottom on this sheet here. Um, so you can see generally there's a a a sort of brick presentation or or hard presentation of that wall. There are a few windows. Um, and then the the entries that you see are one directly into the bike room that I highlighted before as well as one adjacent to the um to the garage door. So, we've asked the applicant to continue to progress this. We are requesting at minimum additional glazing be added. Essentially, changing out what you see is kind of these like louvered vents um with the awnings, changing those out with uh windows that mimic what is sort of plan west um for the design. Um but we've written up a condition that also provides some latitude for them to progress and explore other design treatments for the section. So, you'll see that listed under condition 1g. Um, I'm sorry. Under condition 1 I, which says, "Enhance the architectural design of the Lamar Lam Martin Street elevation to better activate the ground floor, including changes that reflect use of additional glazing, living walls, or green screens, murals, etc. In order to increase visual interest, modifications must minimally reflect decorative lighting and the inclusion of two additional windows similar to the westernmost window on this elevation where vents appear. If if absolutely necessary to accommodate the requested architectural design changes, the sidewalk extension can be narrowed but not reduced below 6 and 1/2 ft. Um, so we're giving them a little bit of latitude here in the event that the green screen um, ends up a green screen or a living wall if they were to choose to make that were to kind of need to protrude a bit further and limit the enhanced sidewalk that they've added some standards here to progress that. Um, the board should consider if you're comfortable with um, staff making the the call based on the language and the condition. Um, you'll recall that we are

within the commercial corridor overlay district and within the CCOD there are specific design requirements related to garages just as well as as activating. Um, this is a compact pedestrian friendly area that we want to encourage active facads. And so within that, we specifically say that folks have a mandate of providing facade details and landscaping to maintain an attractive streetscape along a garage edge. So the board should just consider if the design at this stage with those modifications would meet that standard or if you'd like to see any modifications and if so what those might be. Um so I think that's that's really main point of discussion. Um, beyond that, I think we've we've kind of navigated through to acceptable language um to provide reconciliation between discrepancies in civil and architectural plans um as well as as just um some of these clarifications and protection measures related to to flooding that um staff have incorporated into the conditions. I'm happy to answer any questions um that the board might have, but we'll wrap my comments up there. Um thank you.

Thank you, Miss Smith. Additional comments from members of the city staff. Mr. Chairman, Andy Truman, director of engineer. We engineering has no questions.

Okay. Thank you. Uh, anyone else on the city staff? Seeing none, um, members of the public, anyone in the room wishing to speak tonight, come on up. Good evening, CL board. Mike Kaine from Oh my god, let [clears throat] me clear my throat. U Mike Kane from the Wester Regional Chamber of Commerce. Um also a resident in the Vernon Hill neighborhood. Uh I just want to echo the comments of uh the applicant. This is an exciting project. Um 197 units in the the Green Island neighborhood as well as the Canal District. Um it's going to complement greatly uh the ballpark as well as the other development projects going around in that area. Um I also want to talk about um the importance of the inclusionary zoning uh ordinance. Uh a project like this a couple years ago um we possibly wouldn't get any affordable units out of but developer here tonight. I'm going to be opting into the payment and loot option. Um we're going to be adding some more units through the affordable housing trust fund. So that's uh extremely important. I also want to talk about the applicant too and say uh again thank you for investing in Worcester. Um thank you for investing in jobs and uh they're they've been seen 30 years we were talking about here tonight. Um they're responsible. They're already investing up on Copage Drive. So um really important to have them here in the city and uh we hope that uh and get say as well say thank you to the city staff um the planning board as well as the developer and uh we hopefully hear a favorable um option back here tonight. So thanks Right. Thank you. Anyone else in the room tonight? Is there anyone online?

We have a few folks online. Um if anyone wants to speak, you can raise your hand. It's going to be star nine if you're called in. Um first up, I'm going to ask Dena to go ahead.

Hi, good evening. My name is Dina Tedeski. I'm a Worcester resident and I wanted a comment regarding the item number seven under new business, the 115 Madison Street and uh what an impressive setup this looks like here and I think that it's going to be a welcome addition to our community. I am definitely concerned that there's that I know that there's a choice and they go with the 3% to move back to the city uh in lie of making affordable housing. However, that doesn't help our community and families now that are really in need and and want to move into communities exactly like this in their area in where they work, where their kids go to school, um and and families and single parents and so forth uh and individuals. So it's really important that I think we consider how this affects us and if there isn't um any is there any kind of discussion that can happen from the planning board to encourage that that would be strongly advised so we can make that and as well as accessible apartments. We have a lot of families that need accessibility in this community. Um the additional piece too if there isn't any discussion already about any trans public transportation that's available in this community that that would be something to make sure that's uh um put given value to because this is again this this location there are a lot of options for families and it would be key since there's already discussion around the bicycle racks which I think is really important to encourage walking um the landscaping to help our not only this community but the environment would be is um a critical piece and this is a a great opportunity for our community to have uh accessible housing as well as affordable housing if that is something that the board can consider. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Tedeski. Who's next? Um next up, Patricia, if you want to go ahead. That's what I got. Um, Patricia, if you're online, we can't hear you in the room. Looks like they might still be muted. So, star six, if you're on your phone, there could be a double mute, but otherwise, you'll have to unmute yourself. Can you hear me?

Oh, yep. Yep. Go ahead.

Oh, hi. Uh, my name is Patricia Hobbs. I'm the president of the Green Island Residence Group and I live right near this building on Grovena Street. Um we've had other um um developments um discussions at at other board meetings and our biggest concern as a heat island is is the um use of trees. I did hear that 25 trees are planned but we were hoping for street trees and I realized that the sidewalk is narrow. um at one point again talking about a different project um that that we have attended the meetings and we heard that there was a request to have an easement to widen the sidewalks. Um, you know, I I really wish that that could have been explored because um I know that trees are often put in the interior of the building for the luxury of the people that live there to have shade, but the regular um pedestrians walking through the neighborhood don't get that um uh benefit. And to see the very lovely pocket park, thank you very much. That's that's going to be very very nice. But I'm just curious, where are all the other trees? Uh, thank thank you, Miss Hobbs. Who's next?

Um, next up we have Mildred. If you want to go ahead. You should be able to unmute. Um, if you're called in, it's going to be star six. Looks like we might have you.

Thank you. Uh, Mildred Martinez, Worester resident. Um, I think this, uh, proposal is impressive. Um, as a Wisterite, born and raised, um, it's exciting to see, um, new developments, uh, pop up. Um my one concern um is uh as um a single mom um with uh children in the city um it's concerning that um the payment in lie of affordable units um is what's being proposed for a complex of 197 units. Um, I'd like the planning board to really, you know, consider that because families such as mine, um, that have been here for generations are being pushed out. Um, market rates right now are very similar to Boston. Worcester is not Boston. We're doing great strides and there's a lot of, uh, economic development, but folks like myself, um, you know, we're being pushed out. Um, and it's just it's it's a travesty um that uh residents that are um investing in the community, that live in the community, that have ties to the community um simply would not be afforded um the same opportunity um because um the the the rates would just be, you know, astronomical. Um, so I I definitely um plead just to to think um even if there's a percentage um because it it doesn't um equate um the 3% that goes into the fund, it it doesn't equate to what um that resident would invest back into the community um and what it would do um to building um that camaraderie.

Thank you for your comments, Miss Martinez. Who Who's next? Natasha, if you'd like to go ahead next.

Hi, my name is Natasha Vicki. I'm a resident of Worcester. I live in the main south area, which is not too far from where this is going to be going up. Um, I do I love what you guys are doing. I love the plan. I love the construction and all the stuff, but as we've heard from a lot of our other members that showed up and are speaking right now, we're very concerned about the fact that this is not incorporating any units for low-income families. I have an amazing job. I make decent money and I can't afford to live in Worcester. I've had to leave my apartment that I've had before in order to be able to take care of my 13-year-old daughter and go back to my parent house. And this is not just a me story. This is a story that I'm hearing a lot in our communities. I work in the communities with a lot of the members who are low income. And one of the things you're hearing is a lot of them are now at the risk of becoming homeless. And these are families with jobs. So it's not somebody who doesn't have a job. It's families with job who work in Worcester. How does this help us? How does this support that need? We already have a growing homeless community and we're going to get bigger if we don't address that issue. I don't find that a lot of the market value homes are being built to address the majority of the people that live in Worcester because we we can't afford it. Our incomes don't match up to this. I would like the board to consider um adding or finding some ways to incorporate our needs into these buildings. Thank you.

Thank you, Natasha.

Through the chair, I don't see anyone else um with their hand raised. If you're called in, it's star nine to raise your hand and we can uh allow you allow you to unmute um or you can raise your hand on Zoom. Um, we have Dina with her hand raised. I just want to make sure you didn't have any other comments. Yes, I apologize. I had forgotten a piece of information if I could still share it. So again, Dina Tedeski, um we as the woman who just spoke before, there are a lot of families that are being pushed out and are living in hotels and other situations like that that are being told they don't have the income and the ability to pay for housing of this kind of caliber, this wonderful kind of opportunity. yet they're paying anywhere between $2,2500 to $3,500 a month to stay in some kind of alternative housing because they can't move into traditional housing. And so this is something that's just really to kind of keep in mind when we look at affordable housing, accessible options, and making these units a real reality for our community. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak a second round.

Thank you, Miss Tedeski. Is there anyone else uh looking to speak? give the applicant an opportunity to respond to any of the public comment if if you wish before we go to board discussion. Uh your microphone's off. [clears throat] There are consistent comments. I will say that. And um you know I do just want to point out that a project um at this magnitude the the the payment in Lou is a significant payment right where um this is a likely going to exceed um $40 million in hard construction costs right so that payment in lie is um will exceed a million that will go towards the affordable housing uh trust fund and um so you know I guess I would just acknowledge that that's not insignificant. I understand um you know it's we understand the plight of affordable housing throughout the throughout the the state and and the city of Wester and and others. So we're we're hoping that that payment in Lou is going to make a substantial difference in the community.

Okay. Thank you for your comments. Um sounds like we can go to board discussion. Uh Mr. McCormack, would you like to start us off? Sure. Um yeah, just start by saying thank you to both the applicant and staff for a thorough presentation. Um overall, um excited about this project. Uh it's fitting a lot of building into a very small and kind of odd-shaped lot. Um so I I think the the design from that standpoint um I was pretty impressed with. Uh I think the unit mix was um important to include the additional two bedrooms, three bedrooms and the number of ADA uh units uh was a was a a good thing as well as a number of the um the the pock pocket park and uh number of trees that are proposed in such a small area. Um I am uh I'm glad that staff brought up a comment about uh the facade on La Martine Street. I I do hope the applicant um can take that condition that staff proposed and um make some headway with that cuz I I I think this building will serve as a bit of a gateway or bridge between uh Green Island and the ballpark um area. So, uh hopefully some some improvements can be made there. Um the parking I if I'm correct, I don't believe any parking is required for this project. So, um, you know, it's mixed feelings about having so many, uh, structured parking spaces and and somewhere that doesn't need it and so close to transit, but I understand that, uh, that that may be what the the applicants see as the market demand. Um, but glad to see so many bike parking and EV ready spaces included. Um, so overall, yeah, um, I think happy to support this project. Um, I don't have any issues with the conditions that staff outlined. Um,

yeah, I guess we'll leave it at that. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. McCormack. And just, uh, an issue that you raised that I know staff also brought up as well, uh, EV ready spaces versus how many may be online at occupancy. Do you guys, um, have an answer on that question? Yeah. Um, sorry. Um I believe there was a minimum of 10% EV uh EV installed and then 10% ready, right? And but now we've recently had our first meeting with our passive house consultant and I think we're if if I recall correctly, our passive house requirements um to meet the specialized stretch entity code are going to require that we do all 20 upfront. Is that right?

Yes. Yeah. All TW is uh yeah all 20. Yes. And there will also be a possible solar component to the building, but as we're getting into construction documents that will we'll get more into that with staff to to be developed. But but understood the intention is that those EV ready spaces are EV operable spaces. So to you know we would there's a I I don't off the top of my head know what that minimum is but if there was a if the condition needed to commit us to 10 or 15 operable from day one that's more than acceptable. I think I think passive house is going to require even more than that. Yes.

Understood. Uh Miss Smith do you want to explicitly condition that or are you comfortable as described through the chair? It's it's up to the board. The board has when the applicant's been agreeable to putting in a number. um you have done that in the past. I think our recommendation here was at least 5% which would be eight spaces. So that could be for dual head chargers for example. The code itself requires that the spaces be wired but doesn't require the charger actually be installed from my understanding of specialized stretch code and I'm not going to pretend to be familiar with passive house. Um but that that's my general understanding. So it it's a progative of the board. Um and if the applicant's willing to commit to say 10 um you could put that in. But ultimately um something that you can decide.

Okay. Would you be willing to have a condition that says 10 given that you believe you're going to have to exceed that anyway? Yes. Okay. Perhaps we could do that. Um so moving through board discussion, Mr. King, would you uh do you have any questions or comments? Well, just overall happy to support the project and just to acknowledge the resident's comments on affordable housing. Definitely an advocate there. to confirm on our end that's an inclusionary zoning ordinance not a planning ordinance so we wouldn't have any leeway there I guess question to the chair okay so no further questions

yeah to clarify the ordinance gives basically the developer different options to comply and so they have a suite of options and this is what they're choosing the payment inlue is one of the options they can choose uh to complete and so that's their their option and there's no special permission or discretion with that respect It's their choice. Thank you there. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mr. King. Mr. Delera.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, a couple of things. Um, first, [snorts] I guess I my my colleagues have heard me um reflect on this before. I lament the architectural trend towards what I consider to be kind of undistinct features. It's not specific to this particular application, but it's just the broader trend that that I've seen. And so, um, you know, I appreciate staff, uh, emphasizing some of the smaller architectural details that they would like to see, um, in a future edition of the plan. So, I support that. Uh secondly, um I guess I'm disappointed that the applicant chose not to build the affordable units and opted for the fee in lie of instead. And what I would say um in response to the residents is that as uh the board just reiterated, this is um a matter of the inclusionary zoning ordinance. And so the planning board's hands are tied in terms of that particular issue. Uh but I would say is if this is an issue that people feel strongly about and it certainly seems that way then perhaps efforts should be directed towards city council to address the ordinance so that the fee in lie of isn't an option that the developer can choose to to utilize. Um but otherwise the planning board's hands are tied at this point. Thank you. [clears throat]

Thank you Mr. Delera. Mr. Tumi, any comments from you? Again, this is a very impressive project and a neighborhood that could use use it again just to see the continued development in the ballpark area relative to the payment in Lou. When does that payment actually come to the city? Is that at occupancy? Is that sometime during the building process?

Yeah, through the chair it's it's prior to occupancy. Um, so we essentially when they apply for a building permit, we assess um we assess the cost. The cost is based on the construction costs. Those will be reported at the time of building permit. So, you know, it might be a 40 million project now, but in the future that number could go up um with construction costs. So, that will be assessed at the time of the building permit application and then the payment usually comes um prior to occupancy. Um, so basically not being able to occupy those units and there's a variety of other things that they have to to meet. Again, more the curiosity of when that money going into that fund can actually be used to create housing versus, you know, if there's almost some upfront me means to be able to have parallel development instead of serial development to be able to take advantage of that funding to to be able to do that or somewhat some financing that'll be paid off when that actually is occupied to be able to do that. just to be able to get affordable housing online at the same time.

The other question is relative to charging. Um, and this is more maybe just in general as opposed to yours. If you've got an EV, does that become a dedicated parking space for you or are you able to use a charging station while you're charging and then have to move your car to a regular parking space for for that? I'm just one of those things I'm more curious about as to That's a good question. And um I'm going to turn to our property management uh team here and see if that's something they've come across yet.

I might be able to help you out. Just as a as an EV driver, most of the charging stations that apartment complexes put in have a uh while you're charging, as long as you're drawing power, you're paying for that power. Uh they'll let you occupy the spot. As soon as you stop, there's usually a waiting period and then you start acrewing fees uh that are um oftentimes substantial. So it's in your best interest to move your car. Okay. Yeah, correct. I was gonna say cor correct. And that's and there's several options and several ways to do it. And that's obviously probably the more standard way that I think you'll see in some of these parking garages. And parking is first come, first serve. If you've got was it 115 and you've got 197 residents. Um

typ uh typically you're going to reserve those spaces I think is a better way to probably approach that in a in a situation like this. So that would be the preferred way. um just easier to manage that from that perspective. Okay. And again, I'm fully supportive of the project and look forward to seeing it come online. Thank you, Mr.

Thank you, Mr. Tumi. Um couple comments for myself. So, as many of my colleagues have said and I think, um many of the commenters, folks from the public said, there's a lot to really like about this project. Um it's uh much needed additional housing in the city of Worcester. Uh we have a huge problem as somebody um with a sibling who has mobility challenges and have you know I've gotten to know other folks in the city with similar circumstances. We have a huge problem with accessible housing. Uh so the idea that um you you know you're hoping all of your units are ultimately adaptable, but some of them are going to be uh more readily adaptable um I I think can go a long way to addressing that and that's that's terrific. So I I really applaud that. Um, love to see EV charging spaces because, uh, in my experience, a lot of the projects that were built in the last like maybe 10 years when EV was just coming online, they, you know, put a few chargers in and are now struggling with, uh, a lot of demand um because perhaps the market outstripped their expectations. Uh, so great that you're adding a lot. Um, I do I I work in affordable housing so I understand the payment in loo. It's an option. It's uh we the city ultimately the city council designed the ordinance that way or they approved the ordinance that way. So um for the residents uh who are you know rightly raising um concerns uh very common concerns that we're hearing a lot recently about the availability of affordable housing not just in Worcester but in the Commonwealth in general. Um you know I I I agree it's unfortunate. Um, and you know, if it's $1.2 million on 40 million in construction that goes into the affordable housing trust fund,

that doesn't build a lot of affordable housing. Affordable housing is a pretty expensive commodity. So, um it's a push in the right direction, but uh unfortunately we can't um as a city uh the way our ordinances are structured, we can't um put that entire societable problem which has many disperate causes um you know on the back of one project. Uh so I I do appreciate that some money will be going in a substantial contribution. A million dollars is a million dollars. Um, I do wish that there were more opportunities and I in particular wish um our city council and for that matter uh state and federal um authorities were taking this a little bit more seriously as well. So, um that's a general political comment. I'm still going to support the project. I think it's I think it's great. Other comments from board members before we have a motion

hearing? None. I think we're ready. Right. I would make a motion to approve the definitive site plan for 15 Madison Street subject to staff recommended conditions of approval on pages 2 through um five with um amendments to one B and 1 DD as discussed by staff. Just clarify the address 115 Madison and second. Uh on the motion, Mr. McCormack, yes. Mr. King, yes. Mr. Delera, yes. Mr. Tumi,

yes. I vote yes. Motion passes five to zero. Good luck. Thank you very much. We're very excited. Okay. Um, Rose subdivisions, are we talking about that? Yes, actually that is on our agenda for tonight. Um and we have a slide with the suggested motion. Um we just need a minute to get there. Sure thing.

Um so this item is related to subdivision performance agreements shy um and an extension relative to the permit extension act. So, you may recall um there's a new economic development bond bill which permitted a 2-year automatic extension of time for all um approvals within a 2-year period from 2023 to 2025, I believe, for an additional two years. Um, and we're just asking that the board take a vote to extend the sunset dates of all active subdivisions, which are listed below, um, so that they will automatically be extended with the economic development bond bill. Um, so this is just like a blanket motion to extend the sunset dates um, in line with all the other extensions of time that were automatically granted by this bill. Um, so you can see our suggested motion here. If you have any questions before you take a vote, we're more than happy to address those.

Any questions? Uh, I think I would, yeah, I would make a motion to extend the work completion dates by two years from their otherwise scheduled expiration dates in order to align with the automatic extension of the sunset dates resulting from the economic development bond bill for the following active subdivisions. KR Drive subdivision, current work completion date uh 4925, new work completion date 4927. Uh, Arboritum Village subdivision. Current work completion date 91625. New work completion date 91627.

Second on the motion. Mr. McCormack, yes. Mr. King, yes. Mr. Gilera, yes. Mr. Tumi, yes.

I vote yes. That passes five to zero. Uh, on to ANRS. Up next, we have a few different ANRs before the board tonight. ANRS 9 A, B, and C are not properly before the board. So, first up, we have 12 Picasset Street, ANR 2025 075. Uh, it's one lot presently today. We're in the RL7 zoning district. Picasset Street is private and then it terminates um as you can see about halfway down on this lot. Um, past that, it is also private, but it's on the official map. So the lot to be created has in excess of the minimum frontage requirements which is 65 ft for a single family house of frontage along the improved portion of Picasset Street. Um the house to remain on lot one also has in excess of the required minimum frontage. Next up we have 22 Commonwealth Avenue. It's one lot presently today in the RL7 zoning district. The minimum frontage requirement 65 ft. Um both lots along Commonwealth AB, which is a public street to typical street improvement standards, um have more than 65 feet of frontage. Um and then lastly, we have a ANR plan for 100 C Street. The board may recall this is um recently approved a subdivision for Sea Street, but presently it is not been endorsed and recorded. Um, so the street is not technically a street yet. It remains a private driveway. Essentially, um, a driveway that's not on the official map. So, it does not provide frontage to this lot, which is the lot to be created. It's a lot to the north of Sea Street, so it's labeled as not a buildable lot. This is lot 1A. We're in the MG1 zoning district. There's no minimum frontage requirement. Um and as soon as that road is built, they'd be able to come back in

um and obtain an ANR with frontage on the road once it's constructed. But um this is one lot and then on the next page there should be a second set. This would be the lot to remain which has sufficient frontage along Arat Street. Um so that's all we have for ANRS. Thank you. Is there a motion to endorse? Sorry. Uh make a motion to endorse uh ANR's D, E, and F. Second. On the motion, Mr. King. Yes. Uh Mr. McCormack, yes. Mr. Delera, yes. Mr. Tumi, yes.

I vote yes. 4 to zero. That motion passes. Uh for communications, there is a landlord summit this Friday from 9 to 1 at the DCU center, uh which the city is participating actively in and would love landlords to attend. Uh there is also for board policy and procedure a 2027 board meeting scheduled. Are there any comments or questions on the schedule? Nice that we're approving it a year out. Just one question. What is the August meeting? August meeting of this year. this year.

Give us one moment. That's all right. So, uh, this year in August, we have, [snorts] and Rose, if you find it faster than I do, feel free to say. We should have a meeting on August 5th. And then I believe again on the 26th. I'll be good for both of those.

Okay. Um there's no vote on this. Correct. U through the chair. We would ask you to take a vote to accept that just because then we can use that to hold people to the filing deadlines. Um so if you would vote to accept the schedule, the filing deadlines and meeting schedule as presented by staff. Mr. McCormack. Yeah. I would make a motion to accept the 2027 board meeting schedule. Second. On the motion, all in favor say I. I. I.

I. That motion passes five to zero. Uh, okay. Uh, one set of amen. Uh, one set of minutes to approve. Are there any additions or corrections to the December 17th minutes? Hearing none. Is there a motion? Motion to approve the December 17, 2025 minutes. Second. I believe I have to abstain from voting though, correct? Because I wasn't on the meeting. That's correct. But you can second the motion. Perfect. Second. Uh, all in favor say I. I.

I. And anyone abstaining? All right, that motion passes four to zero with one abstension. Uh motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. I. We're adjourned. Thanks everybody. Good night. Thank you.