Somerville Planning Board 07-17-2025

Meeting Minutes: Planning Board

Meeting Date: July 17, 2025 Governing Body: Planning Board Type of Meeting: Regularly Scheduled Meeting Attendees: Michael Capuano (Chair), Amelia Aboff (Vice-Chair), Jahan Habib (Clerk), Lynn Richards, Michael McNeely, Luc Schuster. Staff: Steve Carey, Sarah White, Sarah Lewis, Dan Bartman.

Executive Summary: The Planning Board convened for a regularly scheduled meeting on July 17, 2025. Key actions included the adoption of meeting minutes from May 1, May 15, and June 5, 2025. The Board also approved the site plan and use special permit for the 483 Broadway development, with conditions. A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to a detailed presentation and subsequent adoption of the Assembly Square Neighborhood Plan. Finally, the Board discussed and adopted a modification to its Rules of Policy and Procedure concerning minor amendments for commercial spaces.

1. Meeting Minutes

May 1, 2025 Draft Meeting Minutes:
- Discussion:
  - Luc Schuster requested a revision to the first recorded vote on the dormer amendment, stating it should reflect a 5-0 vote with one abstention, not a unanimous 6-0.
  - Jahan Habib requested a spelling correction for "Mayor Ballantyne."
  - Jahan Habib suggested rephrasing "without as many hoops to jump through" to "less administratively burdensome" for professional language.
- Action: The Chair moved to adopt the May 1, 2025 draft meeting minutes as amended.
- Vote:
  - Michael McNeely: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.
May 15, 2025 Draft Meeting Minutes:
- Discussion: No suggested revisions.
- Action: The Chair moved to adopt the May 15, 2025 draft meeting minutes.
- Vote:
  - Michael McNeely: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.
June 5, 2025 Draft Meeting Minutes:
- Discussion: No suggested revisions.
- Action: The Chair moved to adopt the June 5, 2025 draft meeting minutes.
- Vote:
  - Michael McNeely: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.

2. 483 Broadway Development (Site Plan Approval and Use Special Permit)

Applicant: John Wood, represented by Tavis Babbitt (85 McGurdy Road, East Ham, Massachusetts).
Case Status: Previously opened, presentation made, and discussion conducted. Written comment period recently closed.
Discussion:
- Tavis Babbitt presented revised plans addressing previous concerns, particularly regarding bike parking and loading/unloading.
- He showed three options for bike lane interaction and loading:
  1. Original Plan: Maintains existing bike lane with a 3-foot buffer, consistent with the rest of Broadway. Proposed three bike stations accommodating up to six bikes. Loading/unloading is one day a week (Tuesdays) for four deliveries.
  2. Alternative 2: Switches parking to the sidewalk, creating a bend in the bike lane and requiring cars to cross the bike lane to park. Considered less safe.
  3. Alternative 3: Backing trucks into Strathmore for deliveries, avoiding Broadway interaction. This option was noted to potentially take up resident parking on Strathmore and was not preferred by neighbors.
- Sarah White (City Staff) noted that the new alternatives had not been uploaded to CitizenServe or reviewed by Mobility. She expressed discomfort moving forward with unreviewed changes but suggested conditioning approval on Mobility review.
- Luc Schuster acknowledged the effort in exploring alternatives but emphasized that the applicant should not be burdened with rerouting the bike lane. He inquired if additional bike parking would require a formal Mobility review or if it could be a minor addition.
- Sarah White suggested conditioning the application to ensure Mobility review of new bike parking, noting that Mobility had previously approved the original plans and "more is better" for bike parking.
- Tavis Babbitt confirmed the original plan, approved by Mobility, is considered the best layout, and the alternatives were explored to rule out less ideal options. He also highlighted time constraints due to the transfer of the liquor license.
Action (Site Plan Approval): The Chair moved to approve the site plan approval to develop a commercial building in the MR-4 district with recommended conditions from the staff memo dated May 27, 2025.
- Vote:
  - Jahan Habib: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.
Action (Use Special Permit): The Chair moved to approve the request to establish an alcohol sales use in the zoning district with conditions described in the staff memo dated May 27, 2025.
- Vote:
  - Jahan Habib: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.

3. Assembly Square Neighborhood Plan

Presenter: Sarah Lewis (City Staff)
Discussion: Sarah Lewis presented revisions based on previous Board comments, categorized into connectivity, program, infrastructure, and sustainability.
- Connectivity:
  - Elevated Bike Path: Confirmed a sidewalk-level bike path along Fellsway, continuing from Foss Park, as part of the bike network plan.
  - Ten Hills Connections: Illustrated intended connections across Fellsway to the Ten Hills neighborhood, primarily green and bike path connections with adjacent sidewalks and crosswalks. Noted Fellsway is a state highway, requiring MassDOT collaboration.
  - Middlesex Realignment: Highlighted the realignment of Middlesex into Fellsway, with the determination of a lighted intersection pending.
- Shadows (Ten Hills): Presented diagrams from the 2020-2030 Straight Proposal (master plan) showing shadows from the tallest building (290 feet) closest to Ten Hills. The shadow would extend approximately 1,000 feet on December 21, affecting the first few blocks of the neighborhood to varying degrees.
- Parking Model: Discussed the lack of a current parking model but suggested combining fiscal analysis assumptions with tracking charts from the FRIT project to develop one. Noted the original PUD approved 10,000 parking spaces, with only half constructed, and this was before the Orange Line station.
- Housing:
  - Fiscal analysis showed 2,900 potential new units in the illustrative plan.
  - Assuming zoning commensurate with the rest of the city, approximately 116 of these units would have three or more bedrooms (20% requirement).
  - A "predominantly residential program" could increase the total to 5,700 new units.
  - The original PUD approved 1,845 residential units, which are constructed or permitted (e.g., Block 9, 375 Herald Cullen Way).
- Economics and Program Flexibility:
  - The "City Plan" in the fiscal analysis is 60% commercial, 40% residential (Marketplace and Assembly South).
  - The "predominantly residential program" flips this to 60% residential, 40% commercial.
  - New zoning will be less specific to allow market flexibility, with sub-area divisions to maintain proportional balance and a "complete neighborhood" feel.
- Citations and Demographics: Updated formatting and demographics. Noted a significant shift in remote work from 3% pre-COVID to 29% post-COVID.
- Infrastructure and Sustainability:
  - DEP Regulations: Clarified that infiltration is allowed but extremely limited due to the site's industrial past, requiring careful monitoring.
  - Sea Level Rise: Referenced the Somerville Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment. The Office of Sustainability and Environment (OSE) will update its sustainable and resilient questionnaire for applicants to address this issue, especially in Assembly Square.
  - Microgrids: The plan coordinates with the updated Climate Forward document, with direct references to microgrids and other possibilities.
  - District Energy: An added paragraph specifically addresses district energy. OSE is studying geothermal potential and city infrastructure upgrades with Bureau Happold.
- Board Comments:
  - Amelia Aboff thanked staff for updating demographic sections, noting the interesting trends uncovered.
  - Michael Capuano inquired about the feasibility of a new school in Assembly Square, given the "predominantly residential program" scenario. Sarah Lewis explained that while a school would make Assembly a comprehensive neighborhood, the fiscal analysis showed that the new development alone could not cover the cost and loss of tax revenue from such a facility, making it a "worst-case scenario" for the city's finances.
Action: The Chair moved to adopt the Assembly Square Neighborhood Plan.
- Vote:
  - Jahan Habib: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.

4. Modification to Rules of Policy and Procedure (Minor Amendments)

Presenter: Dan Bartman (City Staff)
Discussion:
- Dan Bartman introduced the item, noting that Steve Carey would handle specifics. He also highlighted a broader departmental initiative to review the zoning ordinance for updates related to permits, procedural steps, and dimensional standards, following five years of implementation since its adoption in December 2019.
- The current discussion focuses on minor site plan approval as a tool for inconsequential development. The broad definition of "modification" in the ordinance (alteration, expansion, reconstruction, extension, or structural change to the exterior of an existing structure or interior construction that changes the number of dwelling units or ground story commercial spaces) often triggers full site plan approval for minor changes.
- Proposed Amendment: To allow minor site plan approval for an increase in the number of ground story commercial spaces. This addresses the original concern of reducing commercial spaces and aligns with the goal of the Small Business Overlay District to encourage multiple commercial spaces. This is considered an internal change, beneficial, and compliant with zoning.
- Dan Bartman also presented an example of a small sunroom addition in an MR district that currently triggers full site plan approval, suggesting this type of minor development should not require such an extensive process.
- He advocated for a future project to create a matrix within the zoning ordinance itself, clearly outlining what development activity requires which level of approval, rather than continually expanding the list of minor site plan approvals in the Board's rules and regulations, which are less transparent to the public.
- Board Questions/Comments:
  - Michael Capuano clarified that the proposed amendment for tonight only pertains to the interior commercial space changes, not the sunroom example.
  - Michael Capuano asked if increasing commercial spaces would impact other requirements, such as parking. Dan Bartman confirmed that with the repeal of minimum parking requirements and the implementation of parking maximums in transit areas, this would no longer be an issue. He stated that increasing commercial spaces is generally viewed as beneficial and does not trigger other significant regulatory concerns.
  - Lynn Richards expressed strong support for reviewing and streamlining the zoning code, citing a statistic from a graduate student that the average time from application to final approval in Somerville is 562 days. She emphasized the need to reduce costs and time for developers and businesses.
  - Luc Schuster also expressed general support for the amendment and the broader conversation about streamlining processes.
Action: The Chair moved to adopt the proposed changes to the Rules and Regulations of the Planning Board (specifically regarding the increase in the number of ground story commercial spaces).
- Vote:
  - Jahan Habib: Aye
  - Lynn Richards: Aye
  - Luc Schuster: Aye
  - Amelia Aboff: Aye
  - Michael Capuano: Aye
  - Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.

5. Other Business / Future Project Discussion (Summer Novo Project)

Discussion:
- Lynn Richards shared her experience taking a two-hour tour of the proposed Summer Novo project to better understand it, finding it "incredibly illustrative." She suggested other Board members might find it helpful.
- Michael Capuano acknowledged the value of site visits for comprehensive projects but raised concerns about Open Meeting Law implications if a quorum of Board members were to tour together.
- Dan Bartman clarified that individual Board members can engage with developers as community members, but a quorum cannot meet outside of a public meeting. He suggested a formal "next steps" presentation to the Board at a future meeting or individual tours.
- Michael McNeely suggested that staff or the applicant could provide a timeline or chart of anticipated touchpoints for the Summer Novo project, similar to what was done for the Winter Hill Star Market development, to help the Board understand the various approval steps and phasing.

Adjournment: The Chair moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:11 PM. Vote:

Jahan Habib: Aye
Michael McNeely: Aye
Lynn Richards: Aye
Luc Schuster: Aye
Amelia Aboff: Aye
Michael Capuano: Aye Outcome: 5-0-0. Motion passed.