[Unidentified]: Good evening, everyone. Welcome. We're starting the April 30th Medford Zoning Appeals meeting with regards to 280 Mystic Now. Dennis, could you read the notice?
[Denis MacDougall]: On March 29th, 2023, Governor Haley signed into law a Supplemental Budget Bill, which, among other things, extends to temporary provisions pertaining to the open meeting on March 31st, 2025. Specifically, this further extension allows public bodies to continue holding meetings remotely without a quorum of the public body physically present at any location, and to provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. The language that may make substantive changes to the Open Meeting Law is in extending the expiration date of the temporary provisions regarding remote meetings from March 31st, 2023 to March 31st, 2025. 280 Mystic Avenue, case number 40B-2024-01. The resumption of consideration of the petition of Combined Properties Incorporated for a comprehensive permit pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B for a multi-family, eight-story apartment development located in approximately 3.2 acres of land at 278-282 Mystic Avenue, property IDs 5018, 5019, 50110, 50110A, and 50110B. This proposal will be developed in approximately 378 units to a mix of one, two, and three bedroom apartments with 96, 25% of the total units of them being designated as affordable housing to low and moderate income households.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, Dennis. Do we have representatives for the applicant? Chris Mann, I see you're raising your hand.
[SPEAKER_05]: Can you hear me?
[Unidentified]: We can.
[SPEAKER_05]: Oh, good. Yes, I'm Chris Meggeta with Combined Properties. I'm Senior Vice President of Business Development.
[Unidentified]: And will anybody else be speaking tonight?
[SPEAKER_05]: Sure. So I will just introduce, we have our development team here this evening. So along with me is Brian Cafferty with Combined Properties. He is our vice president of legal affairs. We have Sean Burns from Combined Properties. He is our vice president of design services. John Carey from Combined Properties is our architectural project manager. And then we have two consultants with us this evening. Paul Avery of Oak Consulting Group is our site civil engineering consultant. And Scott Thornton with Vanessa and Associates is our transportation consultant.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you.
[Unidentified]: Who wants to start?
[SPEAKER_05]: Oh. So I can if you like, Mr. Chairman.
[Unidentified]: Please go ahead.
[SPEAKER_05]: Sure, so is it possible that I can share screen and show you some slides?
[Unidentified]: Yes, you're all set.
[SPEAKER_05]: And let's see, when I do that, will I lose my video? Dennis, should I go full screen?
[Denis MacDougall]: Yeah, I think if you do that, if you just do the share screen, it should. Like, it'll basically move everything over to one, but what you want to show will pop up for everybody to see.
[Andre Leroux]: Sorry, Jamie, do we need to do a roll call just to open the meeting? Thank you. I apologize.
[Unidentified]: You're correct. So attendance for the board. Andrew in the room? Present. Mike Caldera? Present. Jim Tirani? Present. Mary Lee.
[SPEAKER_08]: Present.
[Unidentified]: Yvette Velez.
[SPEAKER_08]: And Kristi Evano. Present. Thank you. Appreciate that, Andre. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_05]: So is there anything I need to do to share a screen?
[Unidentified]: On the bottom, you should have a button that says share screen. Green share.
[SPEAKER_05]: Let's see. Let me go. I see it, yes, share screen. OK, and then I guess I would click on this. So are you seeing a slide? Yes. I'm just curious. Does this slide fill up your whole screen? Yes. It does. OK. All right. So thank you, everybody, everyone, for your time this evening. And we would like to share with you a background about this project, which we're calling 280 Mystic Avenue under the comprehensive permit application. I did introduce our project team who is here this evening and enthusiastic about the project. And what we're hoping to do with a very brief agenda is tell you a bit about Combined Properties. For those of you who might not be familiar, we'd like to say we're the local company that you never heard of. give you some background about the project, the site itself, talk about the design and architecture and civil engineering, site civil engineering, address transportation planning, and then I think ideally turn it back over to you folks on the board and perhaps the public as well for any questions and comments that you might have, and then perhaps have a discussion with you folks on the board about next steps that you would see that would make sense in the process. So I'll go right ahead. Feel free to ask any questions as I go along. To tell you a little bit about Combined Properties, we're based in Malden. We are a full-service real estate investment and development firm. And let's see. So interestingly enough, this slide has just changed. Oh, there it is. Look. Okay. So... So our credo is creating better places to live, work, and play. That's what we believe in. We've actually been in Medford for 40 years. We own five properties in Medford, all on Mystic Avenue, two of which are the subject of this project, 280 Mystic Avenue. The company dates from 1935, and we have acquired and developed over 3 million square feet of properties. One thing that's a little bit different about us is we are long-term owners and managers. So unlike some developers who develop and perhaps do it for a fee and then sell the property, we keep everything. And so that informs the way that we form our relationships with communities and customers and residents, how we think about the care and development of our properties. So I'll flip ahead here. And just give you a quick overview. I also want to mention that, and I think Dennis has shared with you, all of the project application materials are in a Dropbox folder that you can access. If you have any difficulty accessing the folder, you should be able to view the documents as well as download them and print them. If you have any difficulties, let Dennis know or let me know. Dennis has asked me to share these slides with him after the presentation, and I will. And the first one here, you'll have my contact information. Let me just move back ahead here. I also mentioned the project has not changed. We were first before the board in June of 2020 with this project, went into a period of hiatus, Uh, we entered into a tolling agreement with the board. Uh, there was a disagreement at the time about whether, um, the city would, uh, would, uh, uh, take advantage of safe harbor status under the 1.5% general land area minimum calculation. And there was a legal process going on before the Housing Appeals Committee. While that process was going along, we agreed with the board to enter into a tolling arrangement. And during that time, really, there was no activity. So we're back before you again. The Housing Appeals Committee did issue a decision in that matter. recently, but we have made no changes to the project since then. I will mention one change, which is a result of a zoning change. The city put in place a modified way of calculating the amount of parking that would be required for a project. If a project is within half a mile of a high-frequency transit resource and the project can have a somewhat reduced amount of parking on site, And because this site, which is the subject of the project, is right across the street from the MBTA 95 bus line, which does meet the standards for high-frequency transit, the project can, by zoning, have a somewhat reduced number of parking spaces. And looking at that, the new zoning, the amount of parking that we provide, which has not changed, actually falls within that, this new category. And so in looking at the list of waivers that we would be requiring or requesting, one of them was going to be for parking spaces. That waiver is no longer required because of the new zoning provision. So we did update the table of zoning waivers. And I did send that over to Dennis and chat with Dennis earlier this afternoon and also updated, I sent an updated version of the zoning table or I uploaded it to the Dropbox folder. That's one modification, but everything else about the project is the same. So again, just a quick recap, a little bit about combined properties to show you some projects that we have completed. This is Riverview Business Park on Commercial Street in Malden. We're showing you before and after. It's on the Malden River, which was historically a heavily industrialized river. There was a U.S. Navy Niter chemical depot there. The Navy left. It actually became Brother Gilbert Field, which was used by Malden Catholic High School. They surplused it. We acquired the property and redeveloped it into what we call Riverview Business Park, which is a pretty nice 100 or 95,000 square foot office and R&D building as you see it today. This is a site in Peabody today called Centennial Park. It was really a dump site, and we were selected by the city of Peabody as the designated developer to kick off this project, and we have converted it into some first-class office and R&D facilities today. This is on the Malden River, 195 Canal Street. It was a former chemical plant owned by a German company called Romtec. They did some pretty heavy duty industrial chemical work there and surplus the property. We bought it from them with some very serious geoenvironmental challenges. We work with them to coordinate cleaning up the site and at the same time converting it into a medical office building. So today it's occupied by Cambridge Health Alliance as a clinic. So again, before and after pictures there on the Malden River. On the upper left, this is a site on Pleasant Street in Malden, a transit-oriented site, a block from the MBTA Orange Line. Malden Center Station was some obsolescing, a very low-rise, rundown office and retail buildings. We redeveloped the site into 204 modern apartment buildings. Today, 206, we've managed to add two more apartments there, so I think a pretty significant addition to the neighborhood. to the downtown streetscape. This is also in downtown Malden, also a block from the T Station. We call it Exchange Street Apartments. It was a former grocery store and then became a fitness facility. The fitness company left. We acquired the site and converted it into 210 apartments. So you can see the before and after pictures here. This is the building that I'm in right now. I'm on the top floor of this building in the lower right. This is 295 Canal Street, also on the Malden River. It was a single-story industrial building that was used for manufacturing of canvas products. That company left. The building was vacant for 20 years, and we converted it into a first-class office building and also managed to, I think, upgrade the Malden Riverfront in the process. This is a pro bono project that we did for the Malden YMCA. We were heavily involved in the capital campaign for their, really, it's not a redevelopment, it's a new Y. On the left in the before picture shows us what the Y used to look like. It was one of the oldest and original YMCA facilities in the US, very run down, serious structural problems. They were losing membership, so we got involved in a capital campaign also in working with them to oversee the design and construction of a new Y. The site of the Y is a former National Guard armory in Malden. We managed to work with the city and the National Guard to have the Y surplused. It was not being used. And then ultimately transferred into the ownership of the YMCA and sort of redeveloped into a new state-of-the-art YMCA facility, and their membership has bounced right back. Again, the pro bono project, not a profit-making project for us. We do own five properties on the Malden River, totaling over half a mile of river frontage. And we have been working step-by-step to bring public access back to the Malden River. Here are a couple pictures of a path that we have built along the Malden River. And then again, and lastly, on the subject of the river, We were, I think, in the vanguard of realizing that the Malden River has value as an environmental resource and a recreational resource. And about over 20 years ago, we worked with Tufts University for relocation of their rowing program from Harvard's Newell Boathouse on the Charles River over here to Malden, where they have taken root. They now, as you know, have a permanent boathouse in the River's Edge project. And the river is now being used by Tufts as well as by high school programs, including by Malden, I mean, sorry, Medford High School and Somerville High Schools, as well as Malden High School and Mystic Valley Regional Charter School. So we have kind of adopted the river as a cause, again, to bring attention to its value for environmental purposes and recreation. So now finally coming to the site itself, the site of the project, the site we're calling 280 Mystic Avenue, and it's a combination of two existing properties, 278 Mystic Avenue and 282 Mystic Avenue. I'm sure you're all very familiar with Mystic Avenue. 282 is the site of a former Staples store, a single-story building. Staples was there for many years. They relocated to assembly and vacated the site. For a while, there was a Dunkin' Donuts and a Pizza Hut, and then they left. Dunkin' Donuts actually moved across the street into their own building. The building itself had some pretty severe structural issues. The soil there is very soft, built on wooden piles. And ultimately, with the building being vacant and examining more closely the structural conditions, the building was not worth saving. And we had to take it down a few years ago. So right now, the site is being used for parking by a car dealership. Not exactly a high use, but some use. And then 278 Mystic Avenue is a two-story office building. If you're familiar with the area, you'll recognize Bank of America on the first floor. They have a pretty good size banking office there, as well as a drive-through. There's a little bit of office space upstairs. And so the genesis of this project, the project that we're before you to talk about this evening, is a combination of those two sites that are really underutilized to create some much-needed housing. I'm going to show you a view of this looking south. So this is the same site looking south, thanks to Google Earth. We can see the city of Boston on the horizon, giving you a sense of the proximity to the city of Boston. The site itself is a little bit of an island. On the south end is what was Century Bank. It's now Herb Chambers, the five-story office building down there in green with the ribbon windows. And on the north end is the new bank branch. So you can get a sense of the proximity of the site, certainly to Route 93, very handy for on and off 93, as well as Route 16 and Mystic Avenue and Route 38. And then lastly, looking at some of the transit connections, transportation connections, and it's a little bit difficult to see. I don't know if my mouse works in sharing mode. I'm going to kind of circle my mouse around this blue spot in the lower center that says 280. And that is the project site. We have stepped back, so we're in our helicopter flying back a little bit, looking southward again with the City of Boston over here. And so we can see the proximity of the site to the City of Boston, very good access to Route 93, certainly routes to Route 16, Mystic Valley Parkway, and Mystic Avenue, Route 38. Right at the doorstep of the site are two bus stops for the MBTA Route 95 bus. There's one on each side of Mystic Avenue, so very handy. Transit access there. The new Green Line extension comes up this way, and there's a Ball Square station where I'm circling here. It's not right on the doorstep, but there's some proximity there to the Green Line. In the lower right, we can see Tufts has some proximity to the site, and then going south and west, obviously Cambridge and Somerville. And then further as we go south, we see the Orange Line coming out from Boston, there's the Sullivan Square Station, the Assembly Station, and the Wellington Station. Maldon to the, obviously Medford continues to the east, and then if you keep going, we come into Maldon, And then we can see Everett, Chelsea, East Boston, and Logan Airport, along with Charlestown. There, as you know, probably no numerous bike paths and walking paths here. The river is a nice amenity. And so just a little bit of an orientation. So that's a bit of background that I wanted to share with you folks. I will turn it over to Sean Burns, who is our chief architect in the office. And he can talk about the design and planning of the project itself. So, Dennis, do you need me to do anything as far as the screen or Chairman Thompson?
[Denis MacDougall]: I don't think so. I'm going to just stop your sharing and then we can go on to the next one. I think that's what you seem to do. Great. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_02]: Okay, thank you, Chris. Thank you, board members for taking time out of your busy lives to come here today. I also, I'm going to share my screen. And I will start here with the overall description of our proposed project at 280 Mystic Avenue. We're proposing 378 units. 25 percent of those units will be affordable. We have a mix of 50 studios, 167 one bedrooms, 122 bedrooms, and 41 three bedrooms. Each one of those bedroom types has a 25 percent affordable category. The building itself is eight stories, 85 feet high. It is approximately 600,000 gross square feet over those eight floors onto the site. We have a list of zoning relief required over here on the left, which you will fall, I'm sure, seen. We've eliminated the need for zoning relief for the parking with the advent of the lower parking ratio for transit-oriented or rapid transit-oriented businesses. And we have I'll move us to the next sheet, which is our landscape and planting plan. As you can see, the building takes up the majority of the site. The site is ordered here by the Mystic Valley Parkway. Mystic Ave, Route 38, and Winterbrook to our south, 93 directly east, and to the north is that bank lot. We are proposing that this eight-story building sits here. The first two floors are parking. Parking is all accessed from the northernmost, or excuse me, southernmost entry here, farthest away from the Harvard Street intersection. The garage is entered on this side. The main entry to the building is here, facing Mystic Avenue. There's a small landscaping area here and some visitor parkings in front of the building. We've suggested a multi-use path that circles the south and east and allows you to cut out this busy intersection to our north. We've created a double O type of arrangement to give courtyards, and these would be on the third floor of the building, These courtyards are 85 feet in this direction, and 135 in this direction. At its longest, it's 125 here, and basically 85 by 85. I think... continue? This is our 1st floor plan. It's typical parking deck for both the 1st and 2nd floors. Organized parking and a speed ramp up the back here. Again, we have entries here, trash on both sides of the building, and our stairway systems. We have a main lobby here. double height space. We go back. As far as handling loading and trash, we've suggested a one-way access and this is a limited access drive. It goes around the building in this direction for both emergency and non-emergency access to the building. Typical, well, this is a third floor, so it's not quite typical because it's the floor that has the courtyards. So we have a number of units on the inside here that have access to the courtyards, and the units above them, of course, will have access to the light from the courtyards, and then the second double-loaded ring units on the outside of the building. We have, this is the elevation from Mystic Ave and the elevation looking from 93. We have a mix of materials, but we have primarily, we have a two-story visual podium that's made out of possibly architectural masonry block. We have some areas here on the facade in a red brick color in an attempt to break up some of the massing. And we have these bump-outs that occur pretty much at every unit and gives the opportunity to create some nice living space and also gives you some variety on that facade. And then we have capped off the building with lighter material. And again, you'll see that we're at 85 feet to the roof level. And again, to the shorter, if you will, elevations. of the building with the same mix of materials. We've placed trees in the landscaping plan where we could fit them. This is a section of the building showing that indeed the courtyard of the building is substantial. The shortest dimension in the courtyard is 85 feet. and then the longest dimension in that south is 185 feet and close to 135 in the north most courtyard. That's a brief overview of how we got to this place, the architecture. I know that we'll be having lots of discussions about the architecture and that's massing and the site plan in the future. But given that this is an introductory presentation, I think I'd like to stop there and turn the microphone over to Mr. Paul Avery, who is our site civil, to give us a brief description of the site and how the civil is going to work. Thank you, Paul.
[SPEAKER_04]: Thank you, Sean. Can everyone see my screen? I will do a quick overview of the site grading drainage and site utilities. This plan on the screen now is just an existing conditions plan. There's a lot of detail here. I don't want to get into too much detail here on this at all, but basically there are a number of drainage systems that are shown on this and The systems do one of three things. They either run off onto Mystic Avenue, they go into Winter Brook to the south, or they go onto Mystic Valley Parkway to the northwest. There are no stormwater management provisions on site, no detention features, no water quality features, and all of this is in disrepair. What we're proposing to do shown here in green is the two prominent features you see here, these green rectangles. is we plan to take the rooftop runoff and infiltrate it into the subsurface below the parking, which occupies the first two levels of the building. That, as you can see, will accommodate the majority of the site area. The remainder of the site is the parking, not the parking, but the driveways which go around it, and we're proposing new systems to collect all of that. We will eliminate surface runoff onto Mystic Avenue. We will, well, almost eliminate, just a little bit off the curb line, but effectively eliminate it. We will eliminate entirely runoff onto Mystic Valley Parkway and the new systems will discharge into Winterbrook or the conduit that continues under Route 93. All of this will be treated for water quality in accordance with the applicable state and local stormwater management rules and regulations. But basically, through all the infiltration we're providing, and then the treatment of the remaining surface runoff, expect to significantly improve the existing conditions and be in compliance with current rules. Utilities have color coded this out. Our utilities will come from existing systems on Mystic Avenue. In blue we have water systems. We're showing separate fire and water supply services coming off of Mystic Avenue. The sewer we've shown coming out here just as a general location. We could possibly have multiple connections depending upon how the building lays out, but the intent is to connect into the sewer system along Mystic Avenue. Again, with the gas and electric, connect off of those services too. There's a lot going on with some existing utilities on the site, some of which may need to be relocated to accommodate the project. We anticipate doing full capacity analyses and confirming that the systems in Mystic Avenue have the capacities for the project. And earlier discussions, we talked about improvements to the water line, which I understand has some leaks along the property frontage. And that is pretty much it from the snapshot on site utilities.
[SPEAKER_05]: Scott, do you want to talk about transportation?
[MCM00000653_SPEAKER_02]: Sure. Thanks, Chris. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Scott Thornton with Van Ness & Associates. Excited to be working with Combined Properties on this residential project on Mystic Avenue. We prepared the original traffic study for this development in 2020 and the scope of that study was confirmed with the Medford Director of Traffic and Parking and included 11 intersections in proximity to the site along Mystic Ave, Harvard Street and Main Street. We expect to update that study and provide the same coverage to provide an assessment of the project's impacts. We'll conduct an assessment of the transit facilities and look at the MBTA schedule and ridership details. As Chris indicated, the 95 bus runs along Mystic Ave. The 101 bus runs along Main and Medford streets. The 101 bus is a little further away. The Green Line is at Ball Square, which is about a mile away from the site or a 20-minute walk. I'm not sure that that ridership data exists for the Green Line yet since the extension project is so new, but we will look into that as part of the analysis. We expect to include a number of background projects for future conditions. We are aware of plus or minus 11 in the area, including the Beer Hall up the road at 142 Mystic Ave and the Assembly Row full build out, as well as a number of others. In terms of project generation or trip generation, we think the site should generate somewhere between 130 and 170 peak hour trips during the morning and the evening time periods. That's a total of entering and exiting. and we'll look at census data for that tract to get an idea how many residents in the area currently use alternative transportation and factor this into our analysis and we expect to include in our future conditions a review of the of the intersection operations, capacity analysis of the study area locations to get an idea of the operating conditions, both pre and post development. And we expect to work with the city staff and eventually with a peer review consultant to address any concerns that are raised during that process. But we started the process, we're planning on conducting some traffic counts in the next couple of weeks to get an idea of existing conditions, and then we'll just roll into the traffic study. Chris, I think that's it for a snapshot of the traffic analysis. I'll turn it back over to you. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_05]: Scott, thanks, and thanks, Paul, and thanks, Sean. And I guess, you know, Mr. Chairman, I think back over to you for whatever next steps you think, any comments or questions, whatever you think is productive.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, everyone. I will open it to the board to any questions for the applicant.
[Mike Caldera]: Mike Caldera. Thanks, Jamie. So I understand the intention today is mostly to get the initial presentation and take some procedural steps, so I'll keep my comments brief. And also focused on just moving us in the right direction. So I've had a chance to review the submitted application in full, and I have several concerns that I'd like to see addressed before our next meeting. One, the submitted materials are inadequate to understand the project in context. The board relies on input from peer reviewers and city staff for its analysis, and currently there's insufficient details for those reviews to commence in earnest. I'm going to request that city staff ASAP compile and supply the proponent a list of information requests necessary to do this work, as well as requests from the peer review consultants once retained. The proponent should in turn supply these materials in a timely fashion to the city staff so that the board has this feedback in advance of our next meeting. Second, I think the unchanged plans here are a missed opportunity. Back in 2020, some current and former city staff wrote letters to the board expressing multiple concerns with the project that have yet to be reflected in the plans. The project is proposed in a focal location in a manner that's incongruous with Medford's comprehensive plan. I would like the proponent to take an opportunity to discuss with city staff and identify paths to modify the proposal in consideration of this plan and the likely uses that will pop up in proximity to the parcel. Additionally, the updated zoning evaluation stopped short of an updated waiver list, which should also include the non-dimensional requirements from which the project requires zoning relief. And lastly, The project also misses an opportunity to remove pavement from the buffer zone around Winterbrook. I'd ask that they please work with the city to identify a path to increase the impervious surfaces in this portion of the property to improve the environment and reduce the risk of flooding. The project would also benefit from publicly usable open space exterior to the structure for the benefit of its own residents and area residents.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, Mike. Mr. Maeda, do you want to respond to that?
[SPEAKER_05]: I appreciate the analysis, and I'm taking copious notes. So we welcome your input.
[Mike Caldera]: Thank you. Yeah, through the chair, thank you. Yeah, and my input is just we really need more details to fully review the project.
[Unidentified]: For the rest of the board, any other perspectives, questions for the applicant?
[Andre Leroux]: Andre? Yeah, thank you. Just a couple of some basic questions. One is, so this is a wood frame over platform, is that correct? Is that six, look like six stories of wood frame?
[SPEAKER_02]: At this point, it would have done likely to be wood frame. It would probably be metal frame. Okay, great.
[Andre Leroux]: And I remember one point, this may have been a long time ago, but way before my time on the board, but was there also a a time when there was consideration of a three-building redevelopment that extended to the other side of the drainage area on Mystic Ave?
[SPEAKER_05]: Sean, do you want to comment?
[SPEAKER_02]: Oh, yeah, I'm sorry, Chris, I was waiting for you, too. In the past, we've done a few presentations to the city departments. One of those did include residential buildings south of Winterbrook, and we also, over the past I would say 18 months ago, we're looking at doing three life science buildings on the entirety of the site. I think at this point, the life science sector of our economy is taking a pause. So any kind of development along those lines is also taking a pause. Likewise, I think concentrating on this site is what the north of the Winterbrook site is the intention of the ownership at this point. It's a big site, likely it would have to be phased, a north phase and a south phase anyway. So we did want to get something going on the books for that north side as we develop plans for the south side.
[Andre Leroux]: Yeah. And has there been any discussion with the owner of the two-story bank building on the corner? of Route 16?
[SPEAKER_05]: Historically, they have been in touch with us, even predating the recent, let's say, reimagining of that building. And going back to when it was really used by their auto service business, they Really, I think they came down to, I guess, a difference of opinion as to what the value of that site is. As you know, it's a pretty small site and not, I have to say, not really necessary for redeveloping the site that we're talking about today. It just was apparent that they didn't want to sell it and there wasn't really an agreement on the value of it. Um, you know, they went their way, and I guess we're going our way.
[Andre Leroux]: Okay, and obviously these questions are just along the lines of, um, the whole Mystic Valley, you know, corridor, or Mystic Ave corridor is really a, uh, you know, in transformation right now, and so the opportunity to Be a little bit more comprehensive with the properties on either side could give a little bit more flexibility in terms of the design and setting kind of the stage for that kind of next. next era of Mystic Ave. So I'm hearing that that's not possible right now, but certainly something that we, at least I would have welcomed quite a bit. And I think part of that is You know, from what I'm from what I'm seeing, it's it's a very large building footprint on the site, and so not as much flexibility in terms of being able to provide kind of public facing amenities and would certainly like to be. You know, thinking about that and to the extent that we can. Minimize that footprint and get some more public amenities out of the project would be great, particularly just in terms of turning Mystic Ave into more of a boulevard that is a good place to live, frankly, right? It's not been a place where there's been much residential use on it. I think those are my comments for them. Oh, the other question that I had was just to confirm, the landscaping and the architecture, is that all done in-house, combined properties?
[SPEAKER_02]: At this stage in the development, that's true. Okay. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_05]: Can I also just add one note on the subject of the life science concept? I think it was after we reached the tolling arrangement with the ZBA in 2020, the mayor actually suggested to us thinking about life science as a possible use for not only this site, but the two properties to the south of it. And we looked into it and actually thought it was a great idea. And we invested quite a bit of effort into design and engineering to create a life science project there, three building life science project. And as Sean mentioned, really the kind of the water drained out of the pool, terms of life science market, not anybody's fault. It was a good idea. But if we look at the real estate aspects of the life science business today, there's a lot of vacant life science office and laboratory space out there. There are life science companies dumping space back on the market. There's even vacancy in Cambridge, which has been ground zero for life science in the US for quite some time. There are, as you're probably aware, there are two very large buildings coming online in assembly that together are almost a million square feet. of space, which so far as I know is still available. And there's quite an overhang of vacant office space, just plain office space out there that some of which could be positioned or repositioned as life science space. So altogether, the condition in the life science market for real estate went from, you know, the sun is out to shelter in place. And, you know, I'm not sure that my crystal ball is better than anyone else's, but I don't have a feeling of this is going to bounce back. I think this is going to be a long term situation of trying to absorb the space that's out there. So we never lost our interest in multifamily. We always feel as though there's a need for housing. People need a place to live. We kind of came back to this after trying to make the life science concept work again. Nobody's fault. It's just the market did what the market did. So I guess I'm trying to explain how it is that we've come full circle back to you folks with a housing concept.
[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, thank you. I understand that about the life sciences and what's happened in the market. There was a lot of speculative life science projects being built, and that was my concern when we were considering seeing different possible developments in Medford. But it does remind me of my last question, which I forgot to ask, which is, is there a retail or mixed-use component to this on the first floor at all, or is this 100% residential?
[SPEAKER_05]: Right now it's it's pure residential.
[Unidentified]: Great, thank you. Go ahead.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess, piggybacking somewhat on that, my first question was, is it all residential? I wanted to know, too, about the mixed-use component or lack thereof. I think that's a real lost opportunity here. I think if you're going to activate that side of the road, which is, you know, there's no... Walkable retail right now on that whole stretch. From the highway on ramp down to the bank, except perhaps for the bank. At the end, there's the car. dealer, but there's no reason to really go down to that side of the road very much, at least out of normal business hours. So I guess what I have is a comment more than a question, and I don't confess to know the commercial real estate market such as you folks do, but what would prevent you from perhaps a larger building or two larger buildings of a combined office residential component, much like we're seeing in Assembly Square or, you know, that area? How are you seeing that that market is not there anymore? And I'm not talking about the life sciences market. I'm talking about just the commercial office market.
[SPEAKER_05]: Can I? So, good question. Thank you. Thanks. You know, the office market, what's called the pure office market itself, is very challenging right now. There's a lot of vacant space. The building that I'm in would be a good example. So this is a 55,000 square foot office building, and I'm sitting on the top floor. We have 45,000 square feet on the floors below me that are vacant, and very little leasing activity. If I could count on one hand, the number of inquiries we've had from prospective tenants since the building opened in the last five years. I think part of this is a reflection of the general condition of the economy. Part of it is the trend. We keep reading about work from home, remote working. And that seems to have, for now, taken hold. seems like office users are reevaluating the way that organized work. And many of them are coming to the conclusion that the kind of conventional wisdom of having an office, maybe it's really not so necessary or maybe necessary only for a few people or some people some of the time. And all of that has resulted in quite a bit of office space that's available. Of course, I don't have a number off the top of my head But the office market itself is very difficult, certainly for a developer to approach a lender today for a development loan, a construction loan. The banks are very much aware of this too. Many of the banks are taking back properties on which they had loaned money, office properties. And if you look in the right places, there's a lot of publicity about this. So it's a reasonable question, Chris. And I think if the market were different, there might be more seeming feasibility. Sometimes we say we know too much. Maybe this is one of those examples. But the office market is pretty challenging out there.
[Chris D'Aveta]: The second question I had is somewhat related, but are there any reasons or geotechnical reasons you're not going higher with this building. Along that stretch of Mystic Ave, it's actually, it's not that tall because of the scale of everything there, the wide road and the other one-story buildings that are in there. It will appear somewhat tall because you're compared and contrasted against those. But in reality, when you're when you're looking at what was the, I guess it's now the Herb Chambers-owned building, it's the tallest one there, even in your flyovers, it doesn't really look all that tall. Is there a reason why you're not trying to actually build a larger structure there?
[SPEAKER_02]: Go ahead, Chris. There's no real geotechnical reason why we're not going higher. We're just trying to gauge what is possible with zoning and with the economy and with the politics of everything surrounding this building. The Herb Chambers building is probably about 75 feet at its tallest. Ours is slightly taller. But there's no practical reason why it couldn't go higher. There may be some, you know, resistance for other reasons.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, Mr. Burns. Mr. Mahan.
[SPEAKER_05]: Sure, I just would add to what Sean said that You know, taller also meant more units. You know, along with that, there's some parking that would need to be provided. And it seems like a two-story podium of parking is pretty practical, pretty constructible. Physically, yes, we could go taller. But if it meant more units, we would obviously need to accommodate the parking for that somehow. We did a little bit of looking at going down on the site for parking. And yes, as the old saying would indicate, anything is possible. But it would be relatively more expensive to go down. There's a pretty high water table there because of the proximity to the Mystic River. And so this seemed like, I guess, kind of a sweet spot, I guess. balancing a number of factors. And Chris, I don't know if that's, you know, as sharp an answer as you might like, but that's maybe the best way we could describe it.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Yeah, no, thank you. Thank you. I mean, if you look at old photographs of that area, it's all swamp, you know, going back to the 30s or 40s.
[SPEAKER_05]: It is.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, gentlemen. Any other questions from the board? Okay, I believe all the questions I had.
[Andre Leroux]: Well, I just wanted to since nobody else jumped in, I just wanted to piggyback a little bit on what Chris was saying. I'm glad Chris made that comment because I do think there might be an opportunity here. Frankly, I'm a little tired of all the like the wood frame buildings that the apartment complexes that are I have to say very similar kind of characteristics to them. And I think there might be an opportunity here to do something that's that's different and exciting for. I do think it's probably one of the few places in the city that would be really appropriate for maybe a taller building. Maybe a taller building, but a smaller footprint, which would allow some other things to happen around it. Just something to consider. Also, since you have 93 right there, the higher up you go, the more you get the river views. Anyways, I think there's conversation to have there. I'd love to see some different imaginings of the site.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, Andrew. So for myself, I do echo Mike's feedback about the documents that we have available to us. We definitely want to see improvement on that content. And I think the feedback from the city and the peer reviewers will give us what we need there. With regards to Chris and Andre's comments, I will also echo the opportunity that we have. Obviously, the sense of engagement is something that we as a community are looking for those opportunities. And where those buildings that we've looked at have been wood frame, that has been a challenge. Where this is metal frame, changing the design, going up or providing some other capabilities at the street level would be interesting. And I think that's something that we'd like to see considered as we move forward to see what opportunities you would have there. All right. I think that is it. I will move to open public comment.
[Mike Caldera]: Motion to open public comment. Second.
[Unidentified]: Thank you. Roll call. Mike Caldera.
[Mike Caldera]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Jim Tarani.
[Mike Caldera]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Andrew LaRue. Aye. Mary Lee. Aye. Kristie Rivera. Aye. And Jamie Thompson. Aye. We are open for public comment. If anybody has any questions, comments, please raise your hand and Zoom, or you can email Dennis at dmcdougall at medford-ma.gov. I'll put that in the chat as well. I'll give that a minute. While we wait for that, I don't see any hands up yet. I'll wait until afterwards when we go to deliberation.
[Mike Caldera]: Jamie, I'll motion to close public comment on this session of the hearing.
[Unidentified]: Do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you. Roll call. Andrea Leroux?
[Andre Leroux]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Mary Lee? I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I.
[Alicia Hunt]: I haven't had, I actually just asked Aditi to remind me to follow up on that when I'm in the office tomorrow. So I'll let you know.
[Unidentified]: I appreciate it. All right. So I guess the discussion at the moment is next steps. Andre, go ahead.
[Andre Leroux]: This is maybe a point of inquiry for the city director. Wondering what the kind of the latest city planning documents are for this area so that as we consider this project, we maybe can take that into that account and whether you consider that those are those are up to date or not. I know that's changed over the last few years.
[Alicia Hunt]: So we do have in the comprehensive plan, there was not what one would call a study of this area, but we did do a lot of asking questions of people about this area. And there is either a page off the top of my head, either a page or a half page that addresses Mystic Ave and sort of what people would like to see there. There was definitely appetite for taller buildings, you know, more density on Mystic Ave, especially on the highway side. There is some reasonable place, right? Like the tallest building in Medford right now, I am pretty certain is about 120 feet. I actually don't know how tall this one proposed is. I would like, I actually am thinking, so there was some work done sort of studying Mystic Ave prior to my taking over as director, but I was familiar with it. Let me take a look at that. I also had a study done back as the sustainability director about green infrastructure opportunities on Mystic Ave as part of a redevelopment. Maybe I'll ask Aditi and I to take a look at those over the next couple of days. If it seems that they're in line, they predate the comprehensive plan, but if they're in line with what we heard at the comprehensive plan, I'll send those over.
[Andre Leroux]: Great. Thank you.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, Jamie, I'd like to motion to authorize the city to retain peer review consultants for the architecture and design, the civil engineering, and the traffic considerations for the building, and also to authorize the city and the proponent to engage in direct working sessions without board participation between now and our next meeting. meeting to iterate on the plans.
[Andre Leroux]: I'd second that.
[Unidentified]: Thank you. Roll call vote? Actually, any discussion on those topics? Fine. From anybody else? Okay, we'll do a roll call. Mike Caldera? Mary Lee?
[SPEAKER_08]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Andre LeRoux. Aye. Jim Torani.
[SPEAKER_08]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Chris D'Avena. Aye. Jamie Thompson. Aye. Any other items from the board? I know we have to, the next item from an agenda perspective is obviously to determine the next meeting date. Before we go to that item, is there any other topics that anybody wants to bring up? Okay. I know we looked at the calendar for next meeting and considering that we're looking at a lot of document updates, I know we have the traffic study to do. We have to get the peer reviewers on board. I know a month from now, we'd be looking at Memorial Day. If we looked at May 28th, I think that we'd have to add a minimum go to June 4th. We're looking at a Tuesday. Typically these meetings run a little longer, so I would prefer not to have the next meeting on the regularly scheduled meeting unless we thought that we were going to be doing a quick update before scheduling the next deep dive. So I guess for discussion, thoughts on a full meeting scheduled for the 4th or later. Mike?
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, Jamie, I totally understand your position on this. I do have some reservations in light of the updates that need to happen, the discussions that need to happen. It does take some time to actually retain and pay for the peer review consultants, and they're going to be requesting information. So I really want to make sure that When we're next meeting, there's been an opportunity to have those discussions and actually add detail to the plans and update the plans. And I'm not convinced that early June gets us there. So just weighing in to say it would be my preference, even though I understand there's downsides, to continue this to the June 27th regular meeting. And then we'll have an opportunity when we meet in May if things are moving along more quickly to maybe schedule an earlier meeting and reconsider. But I really do expect to see updates at our next session. And so I think the 27th of June gives time for that.
[Unidentified]: That makes sense.
[Andre Leroux]: Sorry just for discussion there. My only concern is like our last regular meeting went so long. Putting this at the same time might be problematic. So I just to hear what maybe what the staff, city staff thinks about that. Director Hunt.
[Alicia Hunt]: Thank you, and actually I was about to raise my hand with a thought before even Andre said that. So if we realize that things are moving along quickly, and we have, say, continued this to the next regular meeting in June, you know, to the end of June, but we realize in May that things are moving along quicker than we expected, I don't think we legally could open the hearing reopen the hearing earlier than that, because we have to continue to a date and time certain. So I have a workaround to suggest what if you literally continued this to the date and time certain of your next. regularly scheduled meeting at the end of May with the understanding for all the parties that it's not anticipated to actually hear any testimony, have any public comment, but rather that that's a scheduling meeting. Rather, you'll take your regular agenda and there'll be just a check-in to see where do we stand with the review of the consultants? Do we need one more week? Do we need three more weeks? Do we need six more weeks? And then at that point, you could schedule something either for June or July, because my gut is it's going to be hard to get a quorum of the board in July. There are going to be many meetings. You really want to have everybody whenever possible so that you don't lose people to the Mullen rule. It's just a thought off the top of my head.
[Unidentified]: I think that's reasonable. We know we won't be ready for presentations, but it's a good opportunity to check in and coordinate the schedule. How does the board feel about a. 30th scheduling time slot.
[Mike Caldera]: I'm going to motion to continue this matter to. May 30th at 6.30 for the purpose of a status update and discussion of the schedule for the rest of the hearing.
[Unidentified]: Jim, you're on mute. Second. Thank you, Jim. Roll call. Andre in the room. Aye. Jim Tarani. Aye. Mike Caldera?
[SPEAKER_08]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Mary Lee? Aye. And Christy Aveda? Aye. Jamie Thompson? Aye.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Jamie, can I ask a question? If it's noticed and the public is obviously notified of the notice, Does it specify in the notice that it's a discussion or it's an update versus a public comment? Director Hunt?
[Alicia Hunt]: So to clarify, the legal public noticing for this hearing, this project, has actually already occurred and was for tonight. It's actually, it's interesting, there are not really very many members of the public here tonight. So we would not be putting it in the paper again, doing separate notices for it. The way it would be, quote, noticed would be that it will be in the next agenda. And Dennis can put a little bit of text there that says scheduling update. But anybody who actually wants to follow when will the next meeting want would want to tune in just for the scheduling update. Does that sort of answer your question?
[Unidentified]: Thank you, director. So next steps to bring all the peer reviewers on board. Mr. Mayatta, you can work with city staff to coordinate the process for that. Do you have any questions for us going forward?
[SPEAKER_05]: Oh, this is very helpful. And thank you again, everybody, for your time this evening.
[Unidentified]: All right. Chair awaits a motion to adjourn.
[Mike Caldera]: Motion to adjourn. Just a point of order. We've still got two items on the agenda. Oh, I apologize. Thank you.
[Unidentified]: Dennis?
[Denis MacDougall]: No updates. We've sort of gone over everything and there are no meeting minutes because this is the first meeting. So we wouldn't have any. but we're fine. Yeah, I mean, we've got the notice, we got the, just the peer reviewers have sent us their thing. And on Friday I sent the design and I realized today that it would be designed when it was in my outgoing mail. So I just sent it to Chris. I just sent it to you tonight, the information about the design. So you have that, so we can get forward on that.
[Unidentified]: Okay. Thank you, Dennis.
[Mike Caldera]: Motion to adjourn.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you, Mike.
[Unidentified]: Roll call. Mary Lee.
[SPEAKER_08]: Aye.
[Unidentified]: Kristi Avenna. Aye. Jim Tirani. Aye. Sandra LaRue. Aye. Mike Caldara. Aye. And Jamie Thompson. Aye. Thank you for everybody joining us tonight. Appreciate the presentation.