[Emily Hedeman]: All right, good evening, everyone. My name is Emily Hedeman. Welcome to tonight's meeting of the Community Development Board. I am going to call the meeting to order. Let's begin with some obligatory procedural matters. This hearing of the Medford Community Development Board is being conducted via remote means. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings. Anyone who would like to listen to or view this meeting while in progress may do so by accessing the link that was included on the meeting agenda posted on the City of Medford website. A recording of this meeting will be posted on Medford Community Media website as soon as possible. Reminder that given the remote nature of this meeting, tonight all votes from the board will be made by roll call. Please know that project materials for all projects before the board can be viewed on the city's website, medfordma.org. Clicking on current CD board filings and you can also find the link in the chat. Danielle or Alicia will post that. as available. We're going to start with roll call attendance. Vice Chair Peter Calves.
[Peter Calves]: Present.
[Emily Hedeman]: Hey, Peter. Ari Fishman. Sabrina Alpino. Present. Hi, Sabrina. Adam Behrens. Annie String.
[Ayni Strang]: Present.
[Emily Hedeman]: Hi, Annie. Ben Lavallee.
[Ayni Strang]: Present.
[Emily Hedeman]: Hi, Ben. Hi. And myself, Emily Hedevin. Danielle, can you please introduce any staff on the call?
[Danielle Evans]: Yes. Myself, Danielle Evans. Senior planner, Alicia Hunt, the director of planning development sustainability is also here. Sal DiStefano, the director of economic development is here. And Josh Niederman, our intern, who will be taking minutes tonight.
[Emily Hedeman]: Great to have you here, Sal and Josh. So the first item on our agenda is a continued public hearing. This is a continued public hearing that was opened on April 2nd regarding the proposed zoning amendment for the creation of neighborhood and urban residential zoning districts. Danielle or Alicia, do you have any kind of context you'd like to provide before we pass it off to Innes Associates?
[Alicia Hunt]: Madam Chair, I think that we've been discussing this a lot and that Innes Associates has a introduction to explain everything that needs explaining. Thank you.
[Emily Hedeman]: Okay, and I understand we're going to be speaking primarily about accessory dwelling units, so very interested to hear about that topic in the context of the neighborhood and urban residential zoning districts. Danielle?
[Danielle Evans]: Sorry, I wasn't able to unmute a little while ago. Yes, just to add one more thing.
[Emily Hedeman]: Your volume is very low.
[Danielle Evans]: Okay.
[Emily Hedeman]: Sorry.
[Danielle Evans]: Can you hear me?
[Emily Hedeman]: It's still a little low, but okay.
[Danielle Evans]: All right. Well, I won't say too much then, but basically, um, so we're not talking about the 80 years as a. As a public hearing to discuss or to devote on the 80 years, but. We can't really understand and discuss and vote on the neighborhood residential districts without knowing or understanding how the new ADU law interacts with it. And if you make one decision, what does that mean regarding the law? So we were thinking that this would be a good meeting to kind of educate the board and the public so that we have a better understanding as these are kind of happening in tandem. And with that, thank you.
[Emily Hedeman]: I think that's a great approach. Thank you for that context, Danielle. With that, I'm going to hand it off to Emily and Paola of Innes Associates. Good evening. Welcome.
[Emily Innes]: Thank you very much. Madam chair. Good evening. Everyone for the record. My name is Emily and associates and I'm here with my colleague Pelo Ramos Martinez. We are going to, as a planner, Evan said, we are going to present to you today information about. the ADUs. We had a number of questions, so first of all, we found the last public hearing extremely valuable in understanding people's questions, concerns, hopes for the zoning, but it was clear from some of the questions that ADUs and the new state law are interacting with what we're looking at doing in terms of the overall zoning for the residential areas. So there's two things happening today. One is we would like to present you basically the background information, give you a sense of what the new law actually is and where The city has options within that law to make some changes and Paola is going to go through that with you. She's going to also update you as part of her presentation on some of the dates we have for the next few public listening sessions on the overall zoning project. And then with respect, we are going to ask you and Danielle and Alicia, I apologize if I'm jumping ahead on this, but just to frame the discussion, ask you all to continue the rest of the public hearing for May 7th. In talking with city staff after the last public hearing, there's some additional research and analysis that we would like to do to answer some of the questions that people have. I think it was clear in our check-in that we do want to continue to consider public input, change some of the boundaries. I think there's, again, valuable information that came out of the public hearing. So that additional time would allow us to do some additional research based on the questions that we've heard and then come back and present that to you, the members of the board, and also the members of the public to help with that further conversation. So that's where we're headed. some additional information tonight that we think the ADUs and understanding that will help with the discussions and then a request to continue so we can just have a little bit more time to address the information needed to answer some of the questions that we heard. So with that I'm going to turn it over to Pella for her presentation and then she and I both will be able to answer the board's or at least attempt to answer the board's questions afterwards.
[Paula Ramos Martinez]: So if I may, thank you, everyone. I'm Paola Ramos-Martinez. I'm the senior designer, urban designer at Enos Associates. And I'm going to share my screen to start with the presentation. Can you all hear me correctly?
[SPEAKER_16]: OK. Yes. Thank you for checking.
[Paula Ramos Martinez]: If there is my voice or something, let me know so I can maybe open the PDF. As we always do in all of these presentations, to do a little bit of a process timeline, where are we, what are the next dates for public, for the CDB, for any of the topics that we are working on. when those opportunities are for public comments, and then we will go into the ADUs. As it was explained, today we're not going to see the draft that we are preparing. That will be for a different city board, because it hasn't been yet voted on the city council. So what we're going to do is very generic, so not really in depth in the draft, but more the generic so that we understand where are we in that framework that gives us the 80 years. So as we know, we are doing the planning and permitting committee meetings. We have done, right now we are in the corridors. We are presenting the corridors and the ADUs. And the next one that we will have, we will bring again West Medford Square and the ADUs to discuss on April 30th. Um, we are today in the city board. We are looking at there. Well, today's actually the 80 years, but it's in the bigger topic of the residential districts. And then in May 7th, we will have the next iteration so that we bring again the residential districts to be voted or discussed. Um. And then we have different public meetings. We will have the May 8th about squares and the ADUs. We will have the May 29th, other corridors, and then June 9th, parking and the TDM strategy. So what are we doing? As we have said many times, but just for if anyone is joining again and is new to all of this process, what we're doing is to look in at the zoning, all of the zoning in Medford after the comprehensive plan was released in January 2023. And there was also the climate adaptation plan in April 2022. we are taking all of those strategies that were identified in those plans and introducing it in the zoning and changing and updating everything that needs to be updated in the zoning to follow what was identified in those plans. And we come with this. They come with this plan, which is the vision plan. And what we're doing is going by the topics of the quarters squares, the residential districts, and those are the ones that we are looking at, uh, right now. So, um. The accessory dwelling units, I've always, I think I've said it in several of the meetings, the city of Boston released an accessory dwelling unit guidebook. If you look for it on the internet, it's very easy to find and it has a lot of information. So I'm using a little bit of their diagrams and how they presented it, because I think it's very simple and clear. So the ADUs, also known as accessory dwelling units, it's that extra dwelling unit that you can have in your house, but it has certain restrictions. So that is that accessory use is not really the main or principal use. Those ADUs can be internal, that means that it's inside the house, some part is being redone as a complete unit. It can be attached, so it's attached to the building and it can be a little bit inside and then the, for example, the entrance of that can be from the external, from the attached area. And then it can be detached, it can be a completely different building on its own that is in the same lot as the principal building. So we have these three typologies because usually we think as a detached, but let's think that also can be internal or attached. Why are we doing the or why the state is interested in the ADUs? And they have many reasons. It can be by providing houses and care for a family member. It can be by aging in place so that they can The seniors of the house can move into the ADU, or the person that is taking care of the seniors can move into the ADU. Downsizing from an existing home generates extra income, housing young adults, and mainly provides a lot of more space for family, friends, or that extra housing for the city. What an ADU must have is a full bathroom and kitchen, living areas that always are going to meet that size regulations, those minimum sizes for habitability, adequate light and ventilation, safe exit routes that are compliant with the safety regulations, all the codes, a design that enables fire department access in case of emergency, electric and water shut-off valves, and then sometimes, depending on where we are, is the sprinkler systems. So, to be clear, the ADU, it's not a garage, it has to be a dwelling unit by the code regulation, so it has to meet all the regulations that any other dwelling unit, even if it's main or in any way or form, has to follow. So how can be those ADUs and what they have in the guidebook for the city of Boston did, they separate them by typologies and these are in very small lots, medium lots and bigger lots and what are the different strategies that you can do. So these are all different typologies that you could have being the pinkish area, the ADU. And it can be by splitting your own unit, by converting your attic, by adding another floor, converting the basement or extend into a rear yard. So those are the different ways that you could do it. In a medium lot size, you can adapt the garage, you can extend towards the backyard, you can attach an ADU on the side, or you can attach an ADU on a corner lot. So you have two main streets, let's say, facing a house. And then when it's a bigger lot, you can attach an ADU in your front yard, build a mid-size ADU in your backyard, or build a large ADU in your backyard. And they describe and give examples of all of these different typologies. If anyone is interested, I think that it's good to see it. So with the new law that Massachusetts passed in February, they give new definitions and they define what the Protect Use ADU. This is something new, we didn't have this before. And so what they do is use the Accessory Dwelling Unity ADUs as a protected use. And so that is something that every municipality has to follow. And what does it mean is an attached, detached, or internal ADU, as we saw before, that is located or is proposed to be located on a lot in a single-family residential zoning district. We will see what that means, the single-family residential zoning district. It is not larger in gross floor area than half of the gross floor area of the principal dwelling. or 900 square feet. So whichever is smaller. So we have a restriction in size. It cannot be more than half of the gross floor area of your principal dwelling unit or 900 square feet. So whichever is more restrictive, that's the one that you would be able to do. And then an ADU that is non-conforming to zoning shall still qualify as a protected ADU. if it otherwise meets this definition. So it has to be in a single-family residential zoning district, and it has to have this restriction in the square foot. What is the single-dwelling residential zoning district? This is any zoning districts where single-unit dwellings are permitted. And this is as of right or by special permit. So any district where we have single-unit dwellings or single family, also known as, as a buy right or special permit, then it's considered that they will have this protected use ADU. And then we have the new also concept of a local ADU. And a local ADU is mainly, it doesn't follow those definitions. It doesn't have to be in a single family residential zoning district. It's not that protected ADU, it's all of It's everything that is not that protected ADUs. So that means the rules for that local ADUs is going to be made by the municipality, in this case Medford. And it doesn't have to be restricted to a single family residential zoning district. And also it doesn't have to be restricted by the 900 square feet. So that's what we are going to separate. Protected use in one end that is protected by Massachusetts law and everybody has to follow. and the local ADUs that depends on the municipality that will adopt those. And they can decide, for example, not to have a local ADUs. So by law, there are some prohibited regulations that before were possible. And in fact, Medford had some of these regulations and right now are not possible. And those are owner occupancy requirement, minimum parking requirement, use and occupancy restriction, unit caps and density. So ADUs cannot be counted in any density calculations. It's not another dwelling unit. And then relationships to principal dwelling. There is a requirement to be attached or detached. You cannot have any requirement. You cannot ask. That was something that Medford had. So right now you cannot ask. It has to be attached or detached and has different regulations. It cannot be differentiated. So those are the prohibited regulations. And then what are, for municipalities, what can they decide? So they can allow accessory dwelling units in any residential district. And this can be by right or by a special permit. So we don't have to follow the single dwelling unit district. It can be any residential district that we consider. It can allow bigger ADUs than the 900 square foot restriction. and it can allow additional ADUs on the same lot by a special permit. So you can allow a second ADU, but that second ADU or third ADU, if you want, those have to be by special permit. Those cannot be allowed by right. And then the short-term rental municipalities can establish any restriction or even prohibit that these ADUs are being used as short-term rentals. So for the protected ADUs, what we have are some dimensional standards that we already said about the restriction of the size is 900 square feet or half of the gross floor area of the principal dwelling, whichever is smaller. And then this is an important one that we are still working on, is that it can not have more restrictive dimensional standards than the ones that are required for the principal dwelling. So if that lot has a duplex or a single unit or a three unit, the ADU cannot have more restrictive dimensional standards than those. And here we are going to talk about setbacks. We're going to talk about height. We're obviously not talking about the square footage because that is restricted. So principal dwelling, the single family residential or accessory structure. And in these three is whichever is most permissive. So, for example, the accessory structure will tell us that the limitation for height is 15 foot, so around three and a half. But for the principal dwelling, it can be two and a half. So what I can do for my ADU is going to be that two and a half. So it's going to be whichever is less restrictive from any of those three. If we look into what we have in the district that we were working on, the NR1, NR2, NR3, UR1, and UR2, what are those permitted building types? For example, NR1, we have single unit dwelling and then the historic conversion. Then in this, because we have that single unit dwelling, we have the protected use. if there is no local ADU by right, but there it could be a local ADU by a special permit and that means that as maximum units we will have the single unit. This we are going to exclude the historic conversion because we are still studying how we are going to divide that historic conversion if we can allow more units or it's just going to be one more than the districts allow. So that is still that's why I'm not putting it here whenever we have that answer, we will add it. So excluding the historic conversion for now, for example, for the NR1, we will have one unit plus the protected ADUs plus the local ADU by a special permit. So we'll have at the end these three, in theory, special ADUs, dwelling units. For the NR2, we will have the two units plus the protected ADUs plus local ADU. Those are four The NR3, we are still allowing single unit by right, so there we have the protected ADUs, so three plus the ADU plus local. This is the maximum units that we can have in this district, so it would be up to five. UR1, we would have. So in UR1 and UR2, because at this moment we do not allow the single unit, then it doesn't trigger the protected ADUs. So what we have done is we could allow the local ADUs, but not for every structure in here, but for the 1, 2, and 3, so up to three unit dwellings. And so we'd have the 3 plus the local ADU in this case, plus another local ADU, but in this case would be by special permit. And then the UR2 would be, again, here we don't have one or two units, so it doesn't trigger protected ADUs, though it will be local ADUs by right, and then another local ADU by special permit. So we have that total of five. And up to here, there is also the issue of parking. That's something else that is regulated for the protected ADUs. And in that case, we have one parking. It needs to be required one parking if the lot if that parcel is outside of the half mile of high frequent transit, and the other one would be zero, they don't have to require any parking if it is within that half a mile of a higher frequent transit. The local ADUs, we could have different standards, so we could apply larger square foot, larger dimensions, and we could apply different requirements, and we could allow different parking standards if that was something that would interest. Because of that, we are still working on the draft. That's why I don't bring it. But let's say that that is not established by law, so we have more flexibility with those. And now I'm going to stop sharing and very welcome any questions.
[Unidentified]: That was very informative.
[Emily Hedeman]: I'd like to open it up to members of the board to see if anybody has any questions. And just as a reminder, we're seeing this kind of as like a teaser, so we can keep it in mind as we are considering the neighborhood zoning in front of us.
[Peter Calves]: My question, and I think this is just kind of a potentially lack of creativity on my part, is I was looking at some of the zones and the different zones and the different structures within the zones where you're considering potential ADUs, and this is more of a general forum question. I'm trying to think of like a triple-decker and like how you have an ADU in a unit in a triple-decker, if that's what that means when you're thinking about three, kind of three-unit building or something of that kind of form.
[Danielle Evans]: Danielle, I see your hand. Yes, thank you, through the chair. Essentially, the reason why that they would be allowed for, you know, a three family and a two family could have an ADU is because a single family is allowed there. So, and I'm trying to get some clarity on this, but I believe that the, so you'd only have one ADU for the entire triple-decker in that case. So, not each unit doesn't get their own ADU. The triple-decker, that's the building, would be allowed to have an ADU. And the size limitation, my understanding, is based on the building, so the triple-decker itself. It's a peculiarity of the law. So what I'm trying, I think it's going to end up being sorted out by the courts because I haven't been able to get questions answered from any of the webinars I've been in. So say you have a triple-decker and each unit is 900 square feet. Does that mean you can add a 900 square foot ADU, which doesn't have like any real distinction from the other units? It seems kind of strange, but that seems to be what we would have to allow. So one of my concerns was, say, you have a nonconforming 9 unit building in a zone. Could they add the 10th one and not make it affordable? Could that be a loophole? So there's been lots of discussions about Oh, we should allow single families in this zone, but everyone, you have to remember what the impact would that be with the new law. So it's, I wouldn't have written the law that way, but we are where we are.
[Emily Innes]: Emily. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I think that's one of the reasons that we're presenting this to you in a general aspect today, to let you know what the parameters are, because there, as Planner Evans says, there's quite a few questions out there still. We got an excellent email from the building inspector today, Scott, who said people need to remember, too, that while the zoning may allow the ADU to come in, the building code might not. And I think Paola addressed some of that with that list of things that Boston has of the other things that you need to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to do an ADU. You know, to that point about the triple decker, certainly one of the units could potentially have an internal ADU. Or there could be an addition to that triple-decker to add that ADU, or it could be a detached structure. Maybe there's enough room in the back of the lot that the triple-decker is on that they could add one. Some of the triple deckers, for example, the internal layouts are quite long. They're quite deep. And so you can see a small ADU. It doesn't have to be up to the 900 square feet. It could be a smaller version. So I think there's certainly some flexibility in the layout. But I think Planner Evans raises some good questions that have not yet been answered. And I know we've had some more ourselves.
[Peter Calves]: Thanks. It's been very informative.
[Ayni Strang]: Annie? Just, Emily, so a triple-decker has enough land, just say, per code, to add an ADU. Wouldn't that be cost-wide very prohibitive? It's one thing if it's attached, and it's a whole other thing to Dig and pipe and the whole nine yards. That's my first question. And in general, my second question is, I was looking very carefully when Paula did her great presentation. If somebody has an ADU in some communities, they're allowed to rent them and other communities not. So it's each community to assess, is that correct?
[Emily Innes]: So I'll address the first one and then Paola, you may be also helping to answer the second one. So in the first one, yes, that's another factor, right, is the zoning will allow the ADUs, the building code may further regulate it, and the ability for somebody to add an ADU is dependent upon their finances, right? It is not cheap to add an ADU. It's not cheap to build a new structure, even rehab an older structure for an ADU. So that's something else too, especially right now, right? Commodity prices are up, interest rates are up. It's not easy to do. On the issue of rentals, so the, I think what Polly you were referring to was the short term rentals, that ability for communities to determine whether or not they're going to allow the ADU to be available for a short-term rental, so under 30 days. Certainly some of the communities, I was working in a coastal community, for example, that has a significant summer population, and they're very concerned about short-term rentals. However, for long-term rentals, the ADUs can be rented out. There's no restriction on a long-term rental. In fact, that's one of the purposes, right? Paola mentioned the aging in place, you know, that idea of being able to either have a caretaker or, you know, rentaling for extra income. That's one of the many functions of an ADU. Paola, I don't know if you have anything you want to add to that.
[Paula Ramos Martinez]: No, yeah, I think you covered Well, yeah, it was only about the short term. It's not about the renting any unit. And in fact, you don't have to be the owner of the principal building to rent it out. So you could rent both units or anything if you wanted. Thank you. I just, if I may, I just wanted to add to We also present this so that we understand that whenever we add that, and this is something that Danielle mentioned, whenever we add the single dwelling to any of our districts, that triggers that protected ADUs. That means that then we will have that addition in any of the principal structures that we have. So let's say that we have an NR4, and that NR4 would allow single unit, two, three, and four units, that means that that protected ADUs is triggered in any of those building typologies. If you go to the four, that will be four plus protected ADUs plus the local ADU by special permit, that will give us the total of six. That's why also we give this so that whenever we say we will include that single unit, that will trigger that protected use.
[Emily Hedeman]: Okay, that's helpful context. And then can you walk me through from a process perspective how this is going to work with the planning committee? Like, are they going to they're going to come out of it with recommendations? Those will come in front of us. Okay.
[Emily Innes]: Yes, if I may, we're still working on what those local option 8 or the local ADUs would be. What are the restrictions from Medford's point of view? Will Medford allow a local ADU by special permit or not? So those are still part of the conversation. And if so, what are the restrictions on those? So those are still part of the conversation.
[Emily Hedeman]: So at this point in our capacity as community development board members, if we wanted to provide input on those conditions, would we do that as a board member or would it be more appropriate for us to do that as a member of the public? And maybe that's a question for Alicia or Danielle.
[Alicia Hunt]: Madam chair, if I might, I think that's actually a great question because I think that it is very valuable. So there is a committee that's working on it and meeting regularly with the subcommittee of the council and the formal way for this board to have opinions would be through the later process. If this board had a consensus opinion and wanted to say that and wanted us to just officially just convey that from the board, to that committee, we could absolutely do that. Like, hey, you know, in advance, they wanted to let you know if any individual member wanted to share their opinions. That's also honestly, it's really helpful to get that kind of perspective now. And you could do it as a member of the public, you could show up at a meeting, you could email or discuss it with me or Danielle. a little bit of me wants to say like, you know, all opinions are equal, but actually the opinions of this board are more, you know, are actually have, are more equal. And it's, it's helpful to have sort of some insight early on. And part of why I just wanted to raise my hand is so the, to make sure that this group was aware that all of this has been presented to the council subcommittee that's been working on this. There was a strong leaning right now to allowing the special permit ADUs throughout the city to allow this second ADUs in all the districts. And I feel like because, and the reason I want you to have that awareness has a lot to do with the density that we're allowing in these zoning districts. And that's why I appreciate this presentation tonight. I just feel it's really important that an NR2 is actually a location where Lots of parcels could by right have three units and by special permit have four, and that's just something that people should understand as we're doing this. But if people wanted to weigh in on that, I mean, I guess I would invite you to do it however you feel comfortable. In order for it to be a board opinion, you'd have to do it in a public meeting and then filter it through. I mean, you as the chair could show up and speak on behalf of the board. but not unless you've gotten an opinion from the board, then you're just showing up as an individual member of the CD board.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, I just, I want to respect the process and make sure that, you know, that committee is operating, you know, relatively independently.
[Alicia Hunt]: Well, the reality is that they need your opinions and getting, if you all are thinking very differently than they're thinking, It would really extend the process a lot, right? They come up with their ideas. They send it to you. We have public hearings. It's so radical that it has to go back to the start of the city council and re-advertise. And that just really draws things out unnecessarily. So.
[Emily Hedeman]: I mean, I don't have a negative reaction to allowing ADUs through all zones. Yeah, I'm curious if any other members of the board, if that kind of strikes them as inappropriate. Annie?
[Ayni Strang]: I think it's perfectly appropriate. And I think going into how families are structured and how, in a certain sense, families are going back to structures from a couple hundred years ago, and the fact that we want our city to be more livable and not have people age out of a city or leave because it's too expensive to raise a family. I think that having a nuclear family, an extended family, and having the ability, it seems to be a very good idea.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, I think that's really thoughtful insight. And, you know, triple deckers were initially, um, I, you know, everybody's probably heard this, but, um, they helped people live in the city more affordably. So maybe this is like our generations version of the triple Decker. Peter, I see you came off mute.
[Peter Calves]: Um, yeah, I agree. I think I do think there. If if what the committee is saying, if what the city council committee is saying is looking at. Allowing the special permit ADUs in all zones, I think I agree with that. Because I do think it's appropriate to have the ADUs, and I do think particularly the special permit ADUs, because that does allow for review in case of something being kind of just geographically weird with the site. So I think it should be, I do like that as it's structured.
[Emily Hedeman]: Alicia, can you confirm, I thought I heard that it was, well, can you just repeat what you said the committee was leaning towards?
[Alicia Hunt]: I believe they're leaning towards allowing the local ADUs by special permit in all zones. Is that, Danielle, am I remembering the same thing you're remembering?
[Danielle Evans]: Yes, through the chair. My understanding is they want to allow I think locally to use by right for those one, twos, and threes to achieve kind of like parity with the zoning districts that would have them also by right for those building types. So, I think that So, up to the NR3 will allow the single families by right, so any of those building types, which goes up to the three family, I believe, would allow an ADU. So, in the other districts that don't allow singles, that we would have that local option to have an ADU. up to the 3-unit dwelling structure, so not for the 6-unit or 10-unit multiplex or multifamily, but to just to make it fair across the board. Sure. And then whether to have a second ADU by special permit, whether in a single family zoning district, or when I say single family zoning district, I'm using the definition that the state uses as where they're allowed, not just only single families. Where was I going? Oh, to allow the second one by a special permit.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, Pella, you had that table in your presentation that I think was very effective. And I think that could be a good tool Uh, to communicate with the board in the future, just to show kind of, you know, what is allowed. Right now, what is what is Medford proposing could be different. Um, so, yeah, there's that line local by special permit. And I'm assuming the gray is that it's not official, right?
[Paula Ramos Martinez]: If I may, yes. So whenever we trigger that protected ADUs or that second ADU, that will be a local by a special permit. And then when we do not trigger that ADU, as Danielle said perfectly, to give that parity with the other, whenever we have a single or two or three, that single would be non-conforming. But in any case, we can allow in a single non-conforming to to have that ADU. So anywhere in year one, year two, where you have that single two and three units, you would be able to add that local ADU by right. So then that is the same as in the others. And then we would have that local ADU that second, if they want to add a second, if they have the space and if they follow the requirements, then you can add it by special permit.
[Emily Hedeman]: Okay, great. Emily, I see your hand.
[Emily Innes]: Thank you, Madam Chair. And just to confirm, I think maybe Paula touched on this, but you see the excluding historic conversion, the numbers before we've talked about in the past, that idea of historic conversion, allowing just one more unit. than what's allowed in the district. I just want to note that we did hear in the last, one of the reasons that this is excluded from the counts that she has below, is we heard in the last public hearing some suggestions that maybe historic conversion should be by size of unit rather than number of units because some of the older homes are quite large. So we are considering that, and that's why it's not in this count here, because we're looking at that. So it just makes it cleaner to look at the single unit, two unit, three unit calculations here.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, that's helpful clarification. Adam, I see your physical hand.
[Adam Behrens]: Thanks. I just had a question if there was any information on like historical demand for ADUs or just to get a sense of like, what are we really talking about from like a, like an impact perspective of like, what do we think is going to be the demand for going forward and if this comes to the city a lot as it is and Yeah, maybe Emily can answer.
[Emily Innes]: Emily. Thank you. So I'm not positive on Medford itself, I'll defer to city staff for that, but there's a researcher named Amy Dain, D-A-I-N, and she did a in-depth research report, I believe it was last year. historical demand throughout Massachusetts for ADUs. What we can do is we can dig up that report and provide it to the city staff to include with the other materials that we've been providing for this project. I think that could be very helpful, but I think if I remember correctly, one of her findings was that throughout Massachusetts ADUs were not used as much as expected. Now, to be fair, many communities had significant restrictions on, you know, they used to be called in-law apartments. There were a lot of restrictions on how you could do them, how long you could have them. So, and her report takes that into account. But at the time she did her report, there were some communities who had relaxed some of those restrictions. And it may be an interesting baseline for people to understand. So, but it's been commonly mentioned in local planning circles, I think, could be a useful resource for people.
[Alicia Hunt]: And I will just share that it's hard to, like, we don't have historical because it's been something that's not really been allowed in Medford. But I will tell you there is pent up demand, because as this was moving through the, I think we started to allow some level of ADUs with the recodification time, and we started to get applications. And since the law has come out and been passed, we're seeing more and more applications. We actually have several in the pipeline right now that we're sort of trying to sort through, are these allowed as of right? Do they meet with the zoning? And that's where some of this testing of like, what does it mean about setbacks and required front yard versus front yard versus, you know, and how does this all get applied? We have several in front of the building commissioner that he's been consulting with Danielle and myself right now that we're trying to figure through. So there's definitely a pent up demand But that doesn't mean that suddenly everybody's going to build from.
[Emily Hedeman]: Good question, Adam. Any other questions from the board? If not, I can open it up to the public. OK. So just to kind of set the stage here, typically for public comment, we only We're only looking for public comments on the new material that's been presented. I do recognize that there's a good population of people on here, speaking to the number, not the quality, although you guys are all great as well. So ideally, the comments would be thoughts on ADU as applied to the neighborhood and urban residential zoning districts. And the reason I say that is because we haven't seen the modifications from Innes Associates based on the comments from last meeting. So It's like the board hasn't seen them, not just anybody hasn't seen them. So a lot of the comments that were shared last meeting may be in process of being incorporated into the next iteration. So I don't want you to think that the comments and thoughts that you provided last meeting were disregarded. They're in process. They're currently baking. So that's why I'm trying to focus the comments on the ADU within the context of the neighborhood and urban residential zoning districts. That being said, if you have had epiphanies over the past two weeks and wish to add additional insight that you did not get to share the last meeting, by all means, make your comment. We want to hear as much as possible. but we're not gonna be voting on the neighborhood and urban residential zoning districts this evening, just to kind of set expectations for the board and members of the public. So with that, I'm going to read my standard spiel. I'm now going to open up the public comment period. Those who wish to provide comments can use the raise hand feature. Feel free to start clicking that now. If you are using Zoom on your desktop, there should be a react option or a raise hand function. You just need to click it once and you will be in the queue. You can also send an email to OCD at medford-ma.gov before providing your comments. Please state your name and address for the record. A reminder to all meeting participants to please refrain from using the chat function to message any comments to city staff or board members as it's not part of the public record. If you are having technical difficulties, please do use the chat to message Danielle or Alicia just to alert them that you're not able to participate, and we'll do everything we can to get your insight. Each participant will have two minutes to speak and be able to speak once. If your comment goes beyond the two minutes, I usually offer a little bit of a warning period and then wrap it up with the final thought. But if it goes beyond that, send an email, ocdmedford-ma.gov. We read all of the comments, so I encourage you to use that tool. Alicia, I can manage the comment queue.
[Alicia Hunt]: I think I see three hands raised. Sorry to interrupt. I was going to do the timer. You said two minutes? Is that correct?
[Emily Hedeman]: Two minutes, yes. If I said something other than two, then I misspoke. I'm sorry. It's been a very long day. I'm sure it has for a lot of people on this call, and I appreciate everyone being here. So the first speaker that I see is Judith Weinstock. You're going to get a request to unmute. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Judith Weinstock]: Hi, it's Judith Weinstock at 144 Burgett Avenue. This is going to be a little awkward for me to phrase, so bear with me. It's a question, and I think it's a question that combines zoning and building at the same time. But I'm wondering if there is a way to include in documents somewhere For example, if you live on a 4,000 square foot lot and whether you want to request by right or you're in one of the zones that just allows, say, an ADU, is there a way to back into what the minimum lot size needs to be to, say, even accommodate the largest one ADU that you could potentially put on that lot. So I'm talking about like a process of elimination where you would say, oh, gee, we're talking about a 4,000 square foot lot with a 1,300 square foot house. They wouldn't be able to build more than 650 square feet. With all the setbacks back, forward, sideways, height, is it possible to say what lot size would actually just be too small, period? I guess that's my question.
[Emily Hedeman]: Almost like an ADU calculator.
[Judith Weinstock]: Yeah, something that would be by lot size, right? Because theoretically, if it's not permissible on 600 square feet, maybe it is on a 7,000 square foot lot. And I think that it would be helpful for me to even know that in terms of all of the building types. So I do think it's a combination of zoning plus building department, right? Because it involves math from rules and regulations from both.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, and just to ask a follow-up question, and I'm not being glib, I just want to make sure I'm getting your intent here. What would you do with that information, or what conclusions would you want to test?
[SPEAKER_16]: I think that the only thing
[Judith Weinstock]: Keep going, sorry. Wow, I thought it was a movie coming on. The only thing I'm trying to get to is what, you know, where will it be impossible? That's actually, it's not a question of where it's possible. It's really a question of trying to back into almost where is it not possible to build.
[Emily Hedeman]: That's really helpful context. Thank you, Judith. The next commenter that I see is Cheryl R. I don't think it's a request to unmute. I think I just unmute you. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Hi, I'm Cheryl Rodriguez, 281 Park Street. So I just had a few procedural questions since we didn't see the new neighborhood zoning tonight. I'm wondering how far in advance you'll receive the copies for the presentation that we heard tonight and then two weeks ago, as well as the updated zoning language? because I felt like when I went to look today just to see what was happening, there was nothing to see. And I know you need to prepare ahead of time and the public would like to have an idea of what's actually in the zoning ahead of time, just because the slides are nice, but don't really provide the in-depth information that you need, like the size of the lots, the amount of things that can be placed on them. So I was hoping that you could get the materials ahead of time for the next meeting so that we can all know what we're discussing in real time. That's it, just simple.
[Emily Hedeman]: Thanks, Cheryl. And Danielle, I see your hand raised. You might have some insight for us in terms of timing.
[Danielle Evans]: Yeah, through the chair, I just want to say there isn't a revised language for dimensional requirements or anything. for the zoning or a revised map. We're still really studying it. Nothing is ready yet, but we had thought about maybe cancelling the meeting because it was the only matter on there, but we felt that we should still have the meeting because there were our things to talk about, despite not having an updated zoning amendment to look at. There's no new materials that have been provided to anyone yet. Everything is still very in draft form, processing the volume of comments and some of the issues that have been raised. So there isn't anything yet. Regarding presentations, I don't know what kind of lead time We could expect for those, usually they're being prepared like the day of, I think. I don't know what's realistic for presentations. Usually we don't request those or require those of anybody ahead of time, but that would be a policy that the board could create if they felt that they needed to see presentations in advance.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, because we don't even sometimes we see presentation material in advance, but, you know, we, we got a meeting packet right this week. It's. Public comments, it's our agenda notice. And then all the content from the April 2nd meeting, but I think all that had was the map. I don't think it even had the presentation. So yeah, I mean, something we can discuss as a board and may help increase accessibility for the public, especially with, you know, very, very meaningful topics like this. Yeah, Cheryl, I think you bring up a good point. The next hand I see is Jeremy. Jeremy Martin, you're going to get a request to unmute. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Jeremy Martin]: Hi, this is Jeremy Martin, 65, Birgit Ev. Can you all hear me?
[Emily Hedeman]: Yes. Thank you, Jeremy.
[Jeremy Martin]: I'm sorry for the background noise. Cheryl actually asked most of my question, but I think just to continue that thought, it's been noted a few times that it's hard to see the maps in the presentation. I would really ask that as there are new maps and new information provided that However, the board schedules their meetings and thinks about voting that there'll be an opportunity not just to review something in a hearing, but then to follow up and have an opportunity to review separately before there is a vote and before the public comment is closed, that would be greatly appreciated. I'm wondering if on that point, Danielle or Alicia or Emily, if you could. lay out for us how you see that process playing out. I think a lot of us were under the impression that there would be a vote tonight on changes that would be presented tonight, and I'm glad that that's not the case. But can you help us understand, is it next meeting? Is it two meetings from now? How much time and runway do you need before there is some changes that we can start evaluating and considering? That's it. Thank you very much.
[Emily Hedeman]: Thanks, Jeremy. Paola, I know you had a slide that kind of walked through the process. I don't know if that would be useful now, but what I'll add is, you know, we could vote on it next meeting. We could decide to continue it. There's really some variability there. You know, it depends what we see back from the consultant, if we feel like that has appropriately addressed you know, the public comments, the board's concerns, then, you know, we could vote on May 7th. I agree with the sentiment that Jeremy, you, and Cheryl both shared in terms of, like, let's get material in advance. You know, maybe that's something the board can discuss after the public comment period has closed, but it could be May 7th. We could continue it. You know, For better for worse, the board is independent, and we can operate on a timeline that we feel is appropriate for what we're hearing from the public and what we're expressing as a board, which I know isn't a great definitive answer, but it's kind of the most transparent one. Thank you for sharing that, Paola. The next commenter that I see is Gaston Fiore. I'm going to go ahead and unmute you. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Gaston Fiore]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Gaston Fiore, 61 Stigny Road. I just have first an administrative question. I'm at the NR underscore UR zoning folder on Google Drive. So this presentation will be uploaded into that folder. Is that correct? I don't see it currently.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yes, it's not going to currently be in there.
[Gaston Fiore]: Okay, perfect. So the 2nd, okay, so that was my administrative questions because I think in particular, the table with all the ideas that are allowed was very helpful and it will be very helpful for us to reference it for the next meeting. So, then I had a question. So, in. According to the slide that had the table, my understanding was that townhouses then don't allow local ADUs, right? Is that correct?
[Emily Hedeman]: I'd have to defer.
[Gaston Fiore]: In UR1, I'm talking. So under residential one, we have townhouses and multiplexes of 4 to 6 units. I know that for multiplexes, they won't be allowed, but I wanted to double check regarding townhouses.
[SPEAKER_16]: Paola?
[Paula Ramos Martinez]: Um. Hold on. You're on mute. Yeah, that that was my, um, if I may share a madam chair. Um yeah, that is right. So at this point, it would be only for 12 and three units. Now it could be that we could allow it if the townhouse is three units in total. six or whatever the maximum units are under the UR1. So let's say that we could allow the ADU if it's only three units under that townhouse as three units for the three-unit dwelling. That could be a possibility if the public is interested in that at this moment because it can be
[Emily Hedeman]: Keep going. And Gaston, if you have additional questions, I'm going to give you another 30 seconds after Paola responds.
[Paula Ramos Martinez]: Yeah, so if we, because right now it can be from three to six, it's already a lot more than what the others would allow. And so it's in that limit. So we could allow it if it's only three units, but if it's a townhouse that allows four or five or six, then we wouldn't allow it. That's the possibility, but thank you for pointing that out.
[Emily Hedeman]: Gaston, do you have any additional questions?
[Gaston Fiore]: Yes, so very quickly, and thank you so much for giving me 30 extra seconds. So I just wanted to ask whether it has been analysed or thought at least regarding UR1 and UR2, where we would be allowing local ADUs by special permit. I think that's correct, by special permit. No, actually, by right, and then a second one by special permit. What is it? Because remember, so the local ones are actually up to 1,200 square feet. So they're more, the local ones, they're more than 900. So I was just wondering what the analysis has been done comparing whether it would be more advantageous to allow, for example, an extra floor instead of three versus the local ADU. Because, for example, green space, right? So if we added an extra floor, then it comes from top of the structure.
[Emily Hedeman]: I'm going to ask you to wrap up your thought, if you don't mind.
[Gaston Fiore]: Yeah, so that was my question. So in terms of is it more efficient to actually allow an extra floor versus allowing a local ADU for UR1 and UR2?
[Emily Hedeman]: So just a clarifying question, maybe for Alicia and Danielle. Are members of the public able to provide input directly to the planning committee?
[Alicia Hunt]: Yes, those meetings are public meetings. Okay. They are welcome to show up and planning committee almost all I will say actually has always been taking comments on those.
[Emily Hedeman]: Awesome. So Gaston, you have some really thoughtful and specific questions. And I think they're great for us to hear. But I think reiterating them or sending a note to the permitting committee, the planning committee may help reinforce your point as well. Just want to kind of provide that recommendation. The next commenter that I see is Elizabeth Bale. Elizabeth, I'm going to go ahead and unmute you. Please state your name and address for the record. Elizabeth, are you there?
[Elizabeth Bayle]: Yeah. Hi. I had my audio muted, so I had to figure that out. Thank you. 34 Emory Street, and I had submitted comments in writing, so I'm not going to reiterate those. But I do want to advocate for what others have asked for in terms of having presentations, maps in high resolution that can be zoomed, and I prefer segmented maps where you can see street names and stuff, and the tables that have the details in as much time as possible. Because I don't think people are really understanding the effects that this is going to have on them. It's too hard to figure it out. And just looking at those 10 pages of tables that Innis has provided for the new proposals is tough. Questions on those, I don't know how to get answered, but I'll just run through them quickly and lay them out there. One I have asked in writing before, but commercial use for NR3, it seems to allow commercial use public entertainment or recreation facility. is allowed in NR3 and I was really surprised to see that and I didn't know why such a commercial use would be allowed in a in a residential district at least on one like my street just has single and two family houses and So I was concerned about that. There's a lot of other uses that have CDB in the block where it would say Y or N. And I wondered what does that mean? Does that mean maybe you could do it if you go before the CDB? I just really wanted to know because there's a lot of things that are allowed in NR3 like lodging and boarding houses and community centers. And just one more thing about ADUs, if I may. I don't understand how, for a two-family or three-family, what family gets to have the ADU? Presumably there's three different owners in a three-family.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, I think those are great questions. Um, and the, uh, just to answer the questions that I know how to answer, um, in the table items that have CDB, uh, that's indicating that they'd have to come before the community development board, um, for a special permit for those specific uses. But maybe there's some clarity that we can add in the language there, um, just in case that's not intuitive. And then in terms of what family gets the ADU, that'd be subject to the legal agreements, whatever's worked out in the master deed and the condo ownership documents. So that wouldn't be for us to determine. And hopefully, everybody likes each other enough in the condo association to work it out. But if they don't, then, you know, There isn't an ADU belt. Everybody would have to be in agreement. Emily, I see your hand.
[Emily Innes]: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. This question came out from a couple of people, so I wanted to address it now so that nobody else would have to ask it. So I certainly appreciate the fact that people want the presentations after the meeting, and I apologize. I thought we had submitted the April 1, so the earlier April 1. So if we did not, I will double check and make sure that we've done that. For tonight, we made the decision to do the ADUs on Monday. This is Wednesday, so we weren't able to get it to you with sufficient time before the meeting, and I apologize for that. Going forward for May 7th, there's two things. One is we would, we plan to, and that's one of the reasons for asking for the additional time, We do plan to get you the information in advance. We are also, the city doesn't know this, surprise planning staff, we are working on an internal tool that we would like to check with you all first. And then if that works, we're happy with it, release it to the public that it would allow people to more easily, it's an online map. to more easily see what's going on. I would allow them to zoom in and out of specific parcels, so that is also obviously not ready for tonight or we would have demonstrated it to you. But that is something that we are working on now because we think it will help our conversations with city planning staff and with the planning and permitting committee and then obviously with you all as well and with the public in between meetings. So, we've kicked that off this week after our last session with the working group, our weekly check in with the working group, and we would expect to have that ready before the next meeting. So, based on the timeline that we talked about in-house. So, we're hoping that will help answer a lot more people's questions and, you know, just, we do recognize that people want that additional information. I also, with your permission, Madam Chair, I know we've got one more hand up, but I didn't want Judith Weinstock to feel that we were ignoring her question. I was just not sure if we were going to wait until the end or not. With ADUs, because An ADU can be an internal ADU. The lot size is irrelevant. It's, you know, for a use that wants to have an ADU, if they do, if they're an existing single-family home, for example, or duplex or whatever, and they want to do internal ADU within the existing building, then the lot size would not have an impact on that. So, yeah, thank you, Paola. This is from that Boston... Yeah, and I strongly recommend that people have a look at this. This ADU guidebook that Boston put out is really, really interesting and very useful. So just to consider that a lot size, as she requested, as Ms. Weinstock requested, that could apply for an attached or a detached, but it wouldn't apply to an internal ADU. And with that, I'll rest and listen to the remainder of the questions.
[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. Danielle, I see your hand as well.
[Danielle Evans]: Yeah, I just wanted to add a little bit to it. So, as far as, yeah, so there's no minimum lot size to Required to have in order to have an ADU, but there are those other parameters so we can have setbacks. We can have maximum building coverage, which would apply to accessory structures. So. you know, have like a blank, you know, a blank lot, and then you just kind of try to fit everything in there, you'd see that you actually can't, you do need a bigger lot to start to do more of these things. So, you know, you'll see, oh, minimum lot size 3000 square feet. And, you know, you're allowed to have up to, you know, four units and or six units. And it's that sounds crazy, but because actually, you wouldn't be able to get all that on there. Because there's like a menu of uses you can put on there. So, yeah, so I can understand that the question is to kind of figure out what actually can be done on certain a lot sizes to help, you know, allay fears of what actually can be built. And I also wanted to follow up on whose ADU would it be for say you had a three family, like in a rental situation, I've already had inquiries from property owners looking to add an ADU to their property, which would just be another rental unit. And the tenants there, I don't know what their if there's anything in their leases that would prevent them from being built or having to okay it. I don't know. I don't think that's been tested yet. I don't believe that really any municipalities allowed ADUs for anything beyond a single family, so I feel like it's probably untested. And for condos, just what, you know, Chair Hedeman had said, that it would be, you know, the condo association would, you know, make that call and they all have to agree or, you know, depending on how those condo docs are drawn up of who has, you know, majority vote or whatnot. I just want to add that the chair has messaged me saying she just dropped her Wi-Fi dropped. This might be her coming in.
[Alicia Hunt]: I believe she should be able to change her name if she can. Should we unmute that one just to see is this Emily? I was sending. and unmute the iPhone that we just let in.
[SPEAKER_16]: She's not unmuting.
[Danielle Evans]: Should we take a quick recess? or vice chair Calves, what would you like to do in this situation?
[Peter Calves]: I mean, do we know if that is Emily? Yes.
[Ayni Strang]: She just, yeah, she's there.
[Peter Calves]: She just got in. There we go.
[Ayni Strang]: Do we want to take a buyer break? Is that what you were saying, Danny?
[Peter Calves]: No, we're looking to find Emily. But I think now we found Emily.
[Ayni Strang]: I think Emily, I saw her name. Her Wi-Fi had dropped.
[Alicia Hunt]: Except she's in now. The account that joined with her name. Oh, now it does have. OK. There you are, Emily.
[Peter Calves]: I'm back.
[Emily Hedeman]: Hi, all. So sorry about that. Thanks for stepping in Peter.
[Peter Calves]: No problem.
[Emily Hedeman]: Did I miss anything?
[Peter Calves]: No, I was just trying to figure out where you went.
[SPEAKER_16]: I think you have one question left from admin.
[Emily Hedeman]: Now I'm on a good internet connection. All right, admin, you are going to be unmuted. Please state your name and address for the record. And we're going to set a timer for two minutes. Admin, are you available? I'm going to unmute you again. Unmute myself. Hi.
[Sharon Deyeso]: Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay, thank you very much. With one of my devices, it's coming under aid meant for administration. My name is Sharon DSO. I'm a longtime resident of Medford, Mass. corner of Mass Ave and Circuit Road. We have maintained home single family homes in this area now since I was about 15 years old in the Lawrence Estates. But that's not the here and there right now. I want to get back to something that maybe somebody can answer because there are probably people in the public who would be wanting to know some of this too. I'm a little confused. During the last few years, and maybe a little time before then, people were striving to develop more affordable housing. And then this whole plan in this whole planning board came about in the council passing certain different parameters for, you know, permitting really unique places like the beer hall etc for growth, I understand that. So first it was affordable housing. Now it's diversity. Now it's back to affordable housing again. I really really don't see in my, in my insight into Medford. what the plan is, why I know some things need to be changed, I know some perks needed to come to this city were long overdue, but each town in each city in Massachusetts and actually the country has its own forte. You know, whether it be a long western place or whether it be a historic, in a more residential place as Medford. What's the plan, and I also don't understand, rather than change and upsetting so many people among the community some of my neighbors have given up. That's why they don't even come into zoom. it which is very very sad. Why didn't you go into areas where there already was permitting, where you could build up for affordable housing, I'll make a bet on Boston Avenue near Tufts and on Salem Street too which is probably going to be devastated during the next 10 years. Why you just didn't work with business owners first, because you can build up in Medford. why you didn't ask them to invest some money, build up, most of those people would not have cars or vehicles, parking would not be a problem. You would probably gain then a better tax rate than somebody coming into a- I'm gonna ask you to wrap up your thought if you don't mind. Yeah. Thank you. So, um, I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. But those are my two questions. What is the goal plan? And I don't see that anything that's been presented, especially upsetting residents who really cherish and paid a lot of money for their areas to live in. What you're gaining or what what the goal is, and why you didn't go? Why? Why are you going about it backwards?
[Emily Hedeman]: You're about a minute over your time. Thank you. Thank you. But thank you so much for your comment. I do really appreciate it. And I think what the commenter is expressing is, is maybe some concern over just like the larger goals of Medford. There is a Medford comprehensive plan that was a multi-year effort. So I'd encourage, you know, reviewing the comprehensive plan and, you know, in terms of you know, convincing private property owners to develop their land. That's not the role of the Community Development Board. Sometimes it is cool things like, you know, the beer halls or, you know, cannabis dispensaries or, you know, subdivisions. But, you know, we're really just operating within the rules that we have as a board. I don't know if Sal is still on the line. and can speak to like any economic development activities that are happening, but that would probably be a more appropriate venue for those questions.
[Alicia Hunt]: Madam Chair, he had to drop off at 7.30.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, I appreciate him joining us for the first part, but understand. Are there any other public comments? I don't see any hands raised. Daniela or Alicia, have you received any messages with people that have technical difficulties? No, I have not. Okay. Alright, so I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment period for this meeting, not for the topic, just for this meeting. And I'd like to open it up to the board for any questions or discussion.
[Alicia Hunt]: Madam Chair, if I could just share for those who are still watching that we did receive a copy of this presentation as the meeting was starting. I did ask Paola for it, so I have uploaded it to the file for this meeting. We don't always upload the presentations to that that file on the Google Drive. But because it was asked for and I had it, I did put it in there. So if people look now, it's there now. It was not there. People are not confused. It was not there 15 minutes ago. That's a helpful clarification. Thank you.
[Emily Hedeman]: I understand we don't want to share the presentations without context. We in the board don't even get the presentations ahead of time. But I agree with the public's comments about having information available in advance. Emily and Paola, I'm very interested in that tool that you just discussed. But I think for something like that to actually be effective, it would have to be released several days in advance of our meeting so that people can use it to prepare and research and refine their comments and their understanding, not something that we review during the meeting. And then, you know, people are listening to the content and clicking through and, you know, then providing comment. We want to make sure that, you know, everybody, you know. Yourselves and associates and the board are all comfortable and well prepared.
[Emily Innes]: Understood. Thank you. Madam chair.
[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, I'm curious if members of the board have any other comments. Well, I know I'm very excited to see the progress for the next meeting. And if there's no additional comments by the board, what I'd be looking for is a motion to continue to a date certain, and that date certain would be May 7th. Emily and Paola, does that date potentially work with you all, realizing that we're all humans and you know, things happen and there's only so many hours in a day. We will be delighted to be there. Okay, wonderful. So I'm looking for a motion to continue to a date certain which is May 7. Would anyone like to propose that motion? Annie?
[Ayni Strang]: I make a motion to continue the discussion to our next meeting on May 7.
[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. Can I have a second?
[Peter Calves]: A second.
[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Peter. We're going to do a roll call vote. Peter Kaufs.
[Peter Calves]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: Annie Strang.
[Ayni Strang]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: Adam Behrens.
[Ayni Strang]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: Sabrina Alpino. Aye. Ben LaValle.
[Peter Calves]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: And I, Emily Henneman, am also an aye. So thank you to all members of the public who listened and provided comment. I'm truly inspired by how consistent and thoughtful all of your comments are. So continue sending them in, show up to the meetings where we're taking your thoughts and your comments very seriously. So thank you all for being here. The next item that we have is minutes. We don't have any minutes ready for acceptance tonight, so we're gonna move forward. The next item is zoning updates, given that that is the meat and potatoes of what we're talking about here. But I do still want to provide space in case there are any other zoning updates. Alicia or Danielle, do you have anything to add?
[Alicia Hunt]: I would say nothing beyond what was in the presentation about what's upcoming. Great, thank you.
[Emily Hedeman]: So the next item that we have is adjournment. I'm looking for a motion to adjourn.
[Unidentified]: I moved.
[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Peter. Can I have a second? I will second. I'll second.
[Peter Calves]: Motion. Oh, I think I can take it.
[Emily Hedeman]: Everybody's jumping at adjournment. I won't take it personally. Don't worry. We're going to do a roll call vote. Peter Calves?
[Peter Calves]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: Annie String? Aye. Sabrina Alpino? Aye. Adam Behrens?
[Adam Behrens]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: Ben LaValle.
[Adam Behrens]: Aye.
[Emily Hedeman]: And I, Emily Hedeman, am also an aye for adjournment. Thank you, everyone who came tonight. Big thanks to Danielle and Alicia. Could not do this without you. Really appreciate your support and guidance. And see everybody in a couple weeks.
[Alicia Hunt]: Thank you very much. A lot of work. Good night. Bye.