Land Use Committee

Governing Body: Somerville Redevelopment Authority and Land Use Committee of the City Council Meeting Type: Joint Meeting Meeting Date: October 27, 2023 (implied from transcript, as "October 27th meeting" is mentioned for DSNC vote) Attendees:

• Somerville Redevelopment Authority: Phil Ercolini (Chair), Courtney Brunson, Ewen Campen, Patrick McCormick, Christine Stone. (William Gage was not present).
• Land Use Committee: Councilor Wilson, Councilor Davis (recused for Item 2.3), Councilor Ewen-Campen. (Councilor Sait was absent).
• City Staff: Ben Demers (Senior Planner, Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development), Samantha Carr (Land Use Analyst), Yasmin Radassi (Legislative Liaison, Intergovernmental Affairs, Mayor's Office), Mr. Bartman (Planning Department).
• Public Speakers: Phil Ercolini (Chair, Somerville Redevelopment Authority), Adam Dash (Attorney, 48 Grove Street, Somerville), Peter Coyne (Peter Coyne Architects, Davis Square), Peter Kim Santos (Treasurer, Davis Square Neighborhood Council, 64 Andycott Ave), Scott Nowakowski (49 Morrison Ave).

• Item 25-1594: Mayor's request for approval of the amended 90 Washington Street Demonstration Project Plan.

• Item 25-1595: Requesting approval of an amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement between the City Council and Redevelopment Authority regarding the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street.

• Item 25-1596: Requesting approval of the development objectives for the redevelopment of 90 Washington Street.

• Item 25-1607: Executive Director of the Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development conveying a summary of the 90 Washington process review and development objectives.

  • Discussion:
    • Ben Demers, Senior Planner, presented proposed changes to the 90 Washington Street Demonstration Project Plan and Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).
    • Project Background: The 4-acre site at 90 Washington Street was acquired by the SRA via eminent domain in 2019 for a public safety building and transformative private development. The SRA and City paid $39 million for the site, including an additional $30 million after a successful lawsuit by the former owner.
    • Proposed Amendments to Demonstration Project Plan & MOA:
      1. Removal of Public Safety Building Component: The objective of creating a new public safety complex (fire headquarters, police headquarters, 911 dispatcher center) is to be formally removed from the plan. This project is now on a separate track.
      2. Addition of Fund Recoupment Objective: An explicit objective to "recoup funds used to satisfy the judgment for the taking of 90 Washington Street" will be added.
      3. Process Updates:
         • The "Technical Advisory Committee" will be replaced with the "90 Washington Street Civic Advisory Committee (CAC)" to align with current SRA and City Council standards (established under the 2021 Winter Hill Urban Renewal Plan project).
         • The requirement for a selected developer to "break ground within three years of the date of transfer" will be changed to "apply for permits within that timeframe" to allow for greater flexibility in negotiations and potentially secure higher land value or other benefits.
    • Development Priorities for RFP (Request for Proposals):
      1. Recoupment of Funds: Prioritize proposals that recoup a significant portion of the $39 million paid for the site.
      2. Land Uses: Encourage new housing (range of incomes/sizes), new commercial space (ground floor retail emphasized by CAC), new civic space (for non-profits/community groups), and new green space (important for Cobble Hill residents).
      3. Development Principles:
         • Mixed-use building formats (ground floor retail with housing above).
         • Dense development matching mid-rise and high-rise zoning districts, oriented towards the western portion of the site (near MBTA station) to respect Cobble Hill Apartments.
         • Flexibility in form/massing to encourage unique designs.
         • Leadership in sustainability and compliance with the city's stretch energy code.
         • No surface parking due to Green Line proximity.
         • Robust urban canopy and natural landscape, including a buffer to Cobble Hill Apartments and preservation of viable existing trees.
         • Incorporation of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) through involvement of women and minority-owned business enterprises (WMBE) in financing, design, etc.
    • Timeline: Amendments are expected to return to the City Council for a vote in November/December. An RFP for development is targeted for early next year.
    • Public Hearing:
      • No public comments were offered in person or remotely.
      • Councilor Ewen-Campen inquired about the timeline for approval and RFP release.
      • Councilor Wilson emphasized the desire from Cobble Hill residents for green space to be concentrated around their apartments and for massing to be on the western side of the site. He also suggested exploring city subsidization to increase affordable housing percentages.
  • Outcome: Public hearing closed. Public comment period remains open until November 21st. Item remains in committee.

• Item 25-1554: Requesting ordainment of an amendment to sections 10.10.3, 15.1.2, 15.1.6, 15.1.8, 15.2.1, 15.2.2, 15.2.3, 15.2.4, 15.3.1, 15.3.2 and 15.5.2 of the zoning ordinance to make pre-submittal meetings optional for most permits and to improve clarity and consistency.

  • Discussion:
    • Mr. Bartman from the Planning Department presented the proposed amendment.
    • Key Change: Make pre-submittal meetings optional for special permits, site plan approvals, variances, land platting, and wireless communications.
    • Required Meetings: Pre-submittal meetings would remain mandatory for subdivision plan approvals and master plan special permits.
    • Rationale: Data from 2024 and 2025 showed that a significant percentage (42% in 2024, 64% in 2025) of attendees at pre-submittal meetings were professionals already familiar with the zoning ordinance (e.g., engineering firms, architects, lawyers). These meetings often involve extensive coordination with up to 12 departments, which is inefficient for experienced applicants.
    • Cleanup Items:
      • Clarify language in 15.1.6 (application review, staff report, public hearing).
      • Remove language referencing manual submittal of permit extension requests (now handled via CitizenServe).
      • Standardize language for permit duration and extension across various permits (15.2.3, 15.3.1, 15.3.2).
      • Correct administrative appeals language to be consistent with state law (30 days instead of 20).
    • Public Hearing:
      • Attorney Adam Dash (48 Grove Street, Somerville) spoke in favor, noting that while he sometimes finds them useful, mandatory pre-submittal meetings add time and expense for clients who often already understand the code.
      • No other public comments were offered.
  • Outcome: Public hearing closed. Public comment period remains open until November 21st. Item remains in committee.

• Item 2.2: Requesting ordainment of an amendment to tables 4.1.13, 4.2.13, 4.3.13, 4.4.13, 5.1.14, 7.2.7, 7.4.8, 8.4.16c, and 9.1.1 of the zoning ordinance to permit home-based child daycare accessory uses and make corrections.

  • Discussion:
    • Mr. Bartman from the Planning Department presented the proposed amendment.
    • Key Change: The state of Massachusetts amended MGL 40A Section 3 to require all communities to permit family childcare homes and large family childcare homes.
    • Somerville's Approach: Somerville defines both as "home-based child daycare accessory use."
    • Amendment: This accessory use will be permitted in every district that allows residential housing. This involves changes to MR districts and high-rise zones.
    • Cleanup Items: While editing the Summary Use Table in Article 9, discrepancies from previous amendments to individual districts were identified and corrected.
    • Public Hearing: No public comments were offered.
  • Outcome: Public hearing closed. Public comment period remains open until November 21st. Item remains in committee.

• Item 25-1539: 12 registered voters requesting a zoning map amendment to change the zoning district of 363 Highland Avenue from Mid-Rise 4 (MR4) to Mid-Rise 5 (MR5) and Mid-Rise 6 (MR6), and 110 Willow Avenue from MR4 to MR6.

  • Recusal: Councilor Davis recused herself due to living across the street from the property.
  • Discussion:
    • Attorney Adam Dash, representing Altitude Properties LLC (owner of 363 Highland Avenue), presented the request with Gorka Bravo, Lorenzi Bravo (principals of Altitude Properties), and Peter Coyne (architect).
    • Properties:
      • 363 Highland Avenue: Currently zoned MR4.
      • 110 Willow Avenue (NSTAR facility): Currently zoned Civic.
    • Proposal:
      • 363 Highland Avenue: Change to MR6 (towards the Community Path) and MR5 (at Highland Avenue).
      • 110 Willow Avenue: Change to MR6.
    • Rationale:
      • The project is not financially viable under current MR4 zoning.
      • The proposed change would allow for more housing in Davis Square, including approximately 50 affordable units (20% of an estimated 250 units).
      • It would incentivize NSTAR to redevelop its underutilized site at 110 Willow Avenue.
      • The current building at 363 Highland Avenue (leased to Recorded Future, which is leaving) is a one-story concrete block, representing an underutilized opportunity.
      • Altitude Properties owns a small triangular parcel connecting Whipple Street to the Community Path, which could be integrated into the development.
    • Impact Analysis (Peter Coyne):
      • Massing models show a combination of 5 and 6-story buildings.
      • The MR5 building at Highland Ave would have commercial ground floor and amenity space, with the MR6 building behind it being primarily residential.
      • Shadow studies indicate a "relatively minor" increase in shadows compared to what is allowed under current MR4 zoning, despite the increased height.
      • The increased density could yield over 250 units, with a practical limit in the low 200s, potentially producing almost 50 affordable units.
      • The project would still require site plan approval and a special permit from the Planning Board, involving a full public process.
    • Public Hearing:
      • Peter Kim Santos (Treasurer, Davis Square Neighborhood Council, 64 Andycott Ave): Stated the DSNC voted to support the zoning change. Welcomed transit-accessible housing and the 40-50 inclusionary units. Praised the owner's good faith engagement and looked forward to continued dialogue. Supported upzoning 110 Willow Avenue as a blighted property.
      • Scott Nowakowski (49 Morrison Ave): Supported the proposal, citing the need for density near Davis Square Station and the benefit of incentivizing Eversource to redevelop the "eyesore" property at 110 Willow Avenue.
      • Councilor Ewen-Campen questioned why 110 Willow Avenue (NSTAR) was included, given it's not part of the applicant's property. Attorney Dash explained it was an opportunity to incentivize redevelopment of a blighted site and avoid spot zoning concerns. Councilor Ewen-Campen also clarified the potential unit increase from 119 (MR4) to 250 (MR5/MR6).
      • Councilor Wilson inquired about discussions with the City regarding potential subsidization to increase the affordable housing percentage beyond 20%. Attorney Dash stated they are open to discussions but no specific commitments have been made. Councilor Wilson also asked for confirmation that the presented massing was a "worst-case scenario" and that the actual design would include setbacks.
  • Outcome: Public hearing closed. Public comment period remains open until November 21st. Item remains in committee.

• Item 25-0085: By Councilor McLaughlin, Councilor Davis, and Councilor Wilson, that the Director of Planning, Preservation, and Zoning draft an amendment to the zoning ordinances for transit-oriented height and density bonuses for additional affordable housing and other enumerated community benefits.

  • Discussion:
    • Samantha Carr, Land Use Analyst, presented four conceptual upzoning scenarios for Gilman Square, emphasizing these are ideas for discussion, not formal proposals.
    • Scenario 1: Mid-Rise Upzoning in Neighborhood Core:
      • Rationale: Aligns with Gilman Square Neighborhood Council feedback, Summer Vision, and Gilman Square Station Area Plan.
      • Proposal: Concentrated MR6 mixed-use development along Medford and Pearl Streets (direct proximity to T-stop). Expansion of pedestrian street designation. Small Business District overlay preserved.
    • Scenario 2: Mid-Rise Plus Urban Residential Corridor Expansion:
      • Rationale: Responds to Council feedback for incremental upzoning within the quarter-mile transit walk shed.
      • Proposal: Builds on Scenario 1. Adds Urban Residential (UR) upzoning along Medford Street (west side), School Street, and Marshall Street corridors within the quarter-mile walk shed. UR upzoning (3 stories by right, commercial ground floor with SBD overlay) offers more flexibility for small businesses than MR4.
    • Scenario 3: Mid-Rise Six Expansion & Urban Residential Extended:
      • Rationale: Higher impact version for increased housing production.
      • Proposal: Builds on Scenario 2. Extends UR upzoning along School and Marshall Street corridors up to the Broadway Corridor (bridging into half-mile walk shed). Small Business District overlay expanded to new parcels on Medford and Pearl Street.
    • Scenario 4: Mid-Rise Extended:
      • Rationale: Highest impact proposal for increased housing production.
      • Proposal: Builds on Scenario 3. Increases MR6 upzoning along Medford Street and includes Stickney Avenue for MR6 (to unlock lot consolidation). MR4 upzoning on the west side of Medford Street. UR upzoning along School and Marshall Street corridors up to Broadway. Small Business District overlay expanded.
    • Fiscal Impact Analysis (Preliminary):
      • Scenario 1 (3 NR lots to 30-unit UR apartment building): Net municipal revenue gain of $28,000 annually, marginal increase of 1 student.
      • Scenario 2 (3 NR lots, 2 triple-deckers, 1 single-family to 30-unit UR apartment building): Net municipal revenue gain of $25,000 annually, anticipated additional 2 students.
    • Discussion on Displacement and Public Engagement:
      • A memo from the Mayor's Office raised concerns about displacement and the need for comprehensive public engagement.
      • Yasmin Radassi (Legislative Liaison, Mayor's Office): Confirmed the Office of Housing Stability's concerns are general to upzoning, not specific to Gilman Square. Emphasized the need for engagement beyond neighborhood councils to include all impacted residents, especially renters, to minimize displacement.
      • Councilor Ewen-Campen: Acknowledged displacement concerns but argued that upzoning near transit can prevent "double displacement" (displacement by market-rate mansions followed by displacement by new development) and allow for appropriate development. Stressed the importance of public engagement.
      • Councilor Davis: Agreed that increased development pressure is the intent of upzoning to address housing needs. Cited examples of small developments in Davis Square that could have benefited from higher density. Advocated for expanding the Small Business District overlay to all squares to protect small businesses and pedestrian experience.
      • Councilor Wilson: Supported upzoning in transit areas due to lower risk of displacing naturally occurring affordable housing and the potential for genuinely affordable units through inclusionary zoning and density bonuses.
      • Councilor Ewen-Campen & Councilor Wilson: Requested future analysis on the impact of upzoning on property tax bills for existing residents, particularly if parcels are upzoned but not immediately redeveloped.
      • The Assessor's Office is expected to provide information on tax reassessment and its implications after final confirmation from the Department of Revenue.
  • Outcome: Item remains in committee.

• Item 24-0328: 10 individuals, including five residents, submitting comments regarding item 24-0059, a zoning map amendment to change the zoning district of 321 Washington Street from Fabrication (FAB) to Commercial Industry (CI).

  • Outcome: Placed on file (work completed).

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned.