AI-generated transcript of Community Development Board 11-06-24

[Emily Hedeman]: Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this evening's meeting of the Medford Community Development Board. I'm going to call the meeting to order, and let's start 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 as provided for in Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2023. A reminder that 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. If despite our best efforts, we're not able to provide real-time access, we will post a recording of this meeting on the city's website as soon as possible. A 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, by clicking on current CD board filings. And we will also drop a link in the Zoom chat for you all to use. We're gonna start with roll call attendance. Jackie McPherson, Peter Kals,

[Peter Calves]: Here.

[Emily Hedeman]: Ari Fishman. Present. Sabrina Alpino. Adam Behrens.

[Ayni Strang]: Here.

[Emily Hedeman]: Annie String.

[Ayni Strang]: Present.

[Emily Hedeman]: Ben LaValle. And myself, Emily Hedeman, standing in as chair while our fearless leader, Jackie McPherson, is unavailable this evening. Danielle, can you please introduce any staff on the call?

[Danielle Evans]: Yes, myself, Danielle Evans, Senior Planner in the Office of Planning, Development and Sustainability, and also Alicia Hunt, the Director of Planning, Development and Sustainability is in attendance tonight. I believe that takes care of staff for tonight.

[Emily Hedeman]: Great, thank you. Now, before we address our first agenda item, I'd like to recognize that our community development board and planning boards in general are not inherently political. But with the events of the past 24 hours, I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge the impact and importance of decisions that were made for our country and for our city. Feelings like frustration, fear, anxiety, and sadness are widespread today. It is our responsibility as a board to work within our mandate to support and advocate for those whose residents, relationships, bodily autonomy, or identity are at risk. When politics on a national level feels really overwhelming, we can turn to our own communities to improve life at a local level. I'm so proud to serve on the Community Development Board and so proud of my fellow board members, and I encourage everyone who has the privilege and capacity to serve their community to do what they can, whether it's a donation of time, money, or compassion. I'm also so proud of Medford. Our city saw about 67% voter turnout and largely supported candidates and causes that are in service of our neighbors, our community, and Medford's future. Now let's dig into our meeting agenda and fulfill our board's mission to guide growth and development in a coordinated and comprehensive manner for all that call Medford home. Thank you. So our first agenda item tonight is a public hearing for 21 St. Clair Road. This is a site plan review for a Dover amendment use. I'm going to read the public hearing notice. The Medford Community Development Board shall conduct a public hearing on November 6, 2024. After 6.30 p.m. via Zoom remote video conferencing relative to an application for site plan review submitted by Assisi Holdings LLC to renovate an existing four-story, 12,930-square-foot building at 21 St. Clair Road, Medford, MA 02155 associated with a proposed 40-room shelter for women and children. This project is subject to site plan review for Dover Amendment uses per the Medford Zoning Ordinance Section 94-11-8 and requires approval from the Community Development Board. I'd like to ask the staff for any introductory remarks.

[Danielle Evans]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, Danielle Evans, Senior Planner. I just wanted to kind of provide some background to what's before you. As the Chair mentioned, this is a Dover Amendment use, which is for uses that are protected under Chapter 48, Section 3, known as the Dover Amendment. So it affords protections to certain uses. In this case an educational use that exempts them from certain requirements of the zoning ordinance such as where they can locate and how relief can be granted from requirements like dimensional standards and parking requirements. So the scope of the site plan review is more narrow. So the board is limited to two inquiries. And the first question. to be answered is does the use qualify for protection under the Dover Amendment? And second, what are the reasonable regulations concerning the bulk and height of the structures and determining yard sizes, lot areas, setbacks, open space, parking, and building coverage requirements of any should be imposed on the use? The board's allowable actions tonight are to approve, approve with conditions, or deny, but you can only deny for failure to provide necessary information. So I just wanted to set the table and let folks know what is within the board's review and powers tonight. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Great, that's really helpful to help us set expectations as we discuss with the board and we engage in the public hearing. And we can go back and remind ourselves of those kind of extents throughout our discussion as well. I'd like to ask the applicant to present their application. Do we have a member of the applicant's team available this evening? I see Michael Ross.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Yes.

[Emily Hedeman]: Other members of your team?

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: There will be, yes. I can introduce them, Madam Chair, if that's okay.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, I just want to make sure that they are able to speak and or share, uh, share screen. I see some hands coming up. Leslie Creedle.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Can help you with the other names. We have Taisha Richard, Leslie Creedle, Ruth Rollins, uh, and our principals tonight are Andrew Litchfield and Steven Sweater.

[SPEAKER_20]: Okay.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: I also have my associate here as well, Maggie Roberts. I was gonna present and not everyone's gonna speak, but you know, there might be a comment.

[Emily Hedeman]: That sounds great. Are you able to share screen?

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Can I do that? Is that all right?

[Emily Hedeman]: Maybe? Yes, yes, you can do it. But technically, we may have to troubleshoot a bit.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: May I?

[Emily Hedeman]: OK. I think we got it.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: I can see your screen. OK. All right. Well, my name is Mike Ross. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Prince Lobel, and I'm representing the applicant tonight. Thank you for having me here, Madam Chair, members of the board, and for your comments thus far. And also for Daniel Evans for setting the table, really really well, just there. We are here on a site plan review, as Danielle mentioned, for 21 St. Clair Road, and this is a photo of it. What we're proposing tonight is a women's and children's shelter. And we have members of our team who are prepared to speak about that as well. But what I'm going to do is going to provide a high-level overview and then see if there are any questions. So this is our team, essentially. So Andrew Litchfield and Stephen Sveta comprise Assisi Holdings. These are two real estate professionals who have a variety of portfolio of properties and within them properties that deal specifically with social services like the one we're proposing tonight, as well as other properties as well, market rate and the like. They had previously worked with one of our providers, and that's Taisha Gushard. And Taisha has worked with a number of non-profits within the state dealing with shelter care, but also specifically with what we're proposing here, domestic violent care, particularly for women and typically young children. Taisha has worked with and her entity is called Pathway Alliance. She has worked with an organization called Justice for Housing. Justice for Housing is here tonight, led by Leslie Creedle. And Leslie brought one of her colleagues, Ruth Rollins, who does direct care, has been doing it for decades, I believe 30 years. So we have a real deep bench here to talk about the type of work we're doing, if that's what the board wants to hear about. Not here tonight, but provided in the materials that we've submitted to the board. is our engineer, Fasin O'Neill, who did a traffic review of the site. Our architect, Eric Zacherson, who provided the plans I'll share with you. Landscape architect, MDLA. And then there's myself and Maggie from Prince Lopel. And what we're proposing is the use I mentioned, we're calling it Halo House. And as mentioned by Danielle, The entitlement, the approval that we're seeking, site plan review is through the Dover Amendment that I'll walk through in a second. This is the site here at 21 St. Clair Road. It's next to, perhaps you'll recall, a somewhat newish condo development across from the parish center. It's sitting on a 5,396 square foot parcel. with an existing gross square floor area of just under 13,000. Previously used as a convent and also listed as a boarding house. Previously, it was a religious use and I would suspect it also came under some form of Dover amendment. But it's interesting, I looked at the property and the land itself was already subdivided and predates the zoning code, which in Medford is fairly early, 1925. Yes. And this site is 1924. The building itself was improved on the property in 1956. And I just thought this was interesting. The name of the road used to be called Love Lane. I just saw that when I was grabbing the documents. This is the existing structure. As you can see, it sits really tight on the property line. There's not a lot of space. And one of the reasons why I went to the history of the site is that this is not a case where we're showing up and finding just an empty parcel of land and we could build anything there. What we're dealing with is an existing condition that we're inheriting that has been in place as a building since 1956, as a parcel since 1925 or 1924. So we're taking an already subdivided, non-conforming structure, parcel, and trying to make a a use of the parcel, but also very closely following in what was previously there, at least in use, in terms of the impact and what have you. So I also want to just point out that even though there is almost no land to work with around this parcel and in this building, what is there is not really I don't know, utilized to the fullest and to the best. I mean, you can see the side of the building there. It's kind of an area for trash toters to be stored. The front doesn't have any kind of plantings. As you can see, you don't see bushes or trees or anything around the site. So there are things you could do, but it's just a very tight site. And this is the front of it. There's also no Sidewalk on this parcel, which we're proposing to add in front of our building. As you can see here again, this is the front of the building. And, you know, whether. it goes to the sidewalk, when it goes to this road, formerly Love Road, now St. Clair, we received a report from the Public Works Department saying that this is a private road, and it may be, but everything we've seen says that this is a public road. Medford's own street book lists it as a public road, and we did some other looking in the Registry of Deeds, and it was referenced as a public roadway by by recently developed projects. So, I mean, I didn't do the full title examination, we could, but it seems to me that is a public road, and would invite a sidewalk and and and parking in front. This is the site plan, again, you can see how tight it is on that parcel really built out to the edge. And yeah. So I'm going to show you these plans really quickly. This is the existing plans. The existing setup is a 27, 29 room, depending on how you count the rooms. former convent with these rear rooms, as you can see here, this community, this cafeteria on the first floor, this chapel on the second floor, this community room on the third floor. Okay, and that's the fourth floor. Um, as being kind of open spaces, and then you see this large, uh. Classroom on the 2nd floor here, this is the existing conditions. Okay. And what we're going to be proposing, I'll show you in a moment here. These are the existing elevations and again, I'm going to show you what we're proposing here in a moment. All right, here's what we're proposing. So we took those back rooms, that classroom, and that chapel, and that other larger spaces, and are able to put rooms in those spaces. And then that classroom along the second floor, we're able to divide that. and create 37 rooms for this facility now. And as you can see, these rooms have adjoining doors. And the reason why they have adjoining doors is because many of our clients who will come to this facility may have young children. You know typical age and we can talk more about this are toddlers but they might go all the way up into the to the young teens or teenagers but typically you'll see younger children with their mother. And in such a case where you might have, say, you know, a brother and sister or two brothers or something, there might be what would be appropriate would be to have an adjoining room next to the mother's room. And that's what we can do with these configurations. There's a lot of flexibility for that with these various rooms. There's also a tremendous investment in this building. This building needs to be fully upgraded with all new systems, all new mechanicals, all new safety devices, and it needs new HVAC systems, new floorings, new a lot of renovation on the inside. We're predicting that the renovation costs will be 800 to a million dollars on the interior of this building, as well as some minor work to do on the exterior. There is no change to the envelope of this building. The building is staying exactly the same. On the fourth floor, Yes let me make one other point this first floor is really where all the education and classrooms and discussions and job training and. even areas for children to play, will be used. Lots of flex space, a lot of ability to use that first floor in that regard. And then each floor has a corner room, which is a flex room in its own self that can be used as an office or as a Kind of alternative room, but it could also be used as a room if it's needed. And that's on the floors. Uh, 2, 3 and 4 room 14 room 27 and room 40. so those are 3 additional rooms. Um. So, we can talk more about the activities that occur there and then on the exterior of this. building, what are we going to do? We're going to remove the cross and the birds. We will replace, we will, you know, point and repair the bricks, repair the windows, replace some if needed. We'll be adding a signage to the front door that says Halo House. you'll see there that there is a lift to be proposed on the front entry and really that's the only substantially noticeable change to the front and to the really to all the elevations of the building except for this is that right side of the building and then on the left side of the building what we'd like to do here based on some of the comments we've received from staff Is to create a path of accessible travel here. So we have a redundant travel. We have a lift in the front, but we also have a ramp along the side of the building at construction level drawings. We will. have to do a little bit of work on this ramp. Ramps require a railing and they require a flat period for just a certain section of the ramp. Our architect will do that, but this was something that we at this level are just describing as a ramp. And we'll have to flush it out a little bit more when we get to construction level drawings. Okay, and then landscaping, I mentioned that there's very sparse, not a lot of plantings or anything happening on the site here. We're proposing, I believe, over approximately 50 plantings, trees, bushes, and the like along the front of the building, along the sides of the building, and then creating spaces and areas for people to gather. So that space on the right side where you saw the toters earlier and the garbage barrels. those would be replaced with an exterior area for guests, for clients to gather, to recreate, to sit, to have a cup of coffee, to do whatever. And then in the back, the same type of area there. Now, one thing we don't have here and we're talking about, and it's something that came from our caregiving team, is to create some sort of play space. What we think we're gonna do is that area that you see is eight and nine there, that that would be turned into some play area for our kids. It's just basic kind of playground type equipment, nothing too sophisticated. There's not a lot of space there, but we might incorporate that section five into it as well. That's a little bit of a change that we're proposing here based on some of the conversations we've had recently as we prepared to be ready for this hearing and having conversations with our team. And this is just some more detail that we'll be fencing that are mentioned on our site plan and are in the plans. And these are the types of bushes and trees and foliage and the like that we'll be planting. So just, you know, in terms of the Dover Amendment, which is the name given to 40A section three, Daniel already mentioned it. There's just two qualifications here. One is the use, an accepted use under the Dover, under 40A3. And we submit that we are, we are a providing educational services. I can, I provided the, and then are we, Are we, what are the reasonable regulations concerning the structures themselves? And that section two, I said to you earlier, given the site, given the history of the site and given the plan, we are doing everything we can to make best use of it. We are not changing the size, the envelope of the site, if you will. And we are working as best we can to utilize the entire site. uh, within the confines of this pre-existing non-conformance structure and use. I provided a, uh, a more detailed, um, application with some, um, more detail on both of these points, uh, uh, prior to today's hearing. Um, but you know, um, And I'm just kind of pulling from the language of 40A Section 3 of this nonprofit use that would be educating as an education component. And I go a little bit deeper. To point out that, in fact, a use is essentially what we're providing a domestic violent shelter for women and children that's intended on providing life skills, job skills, some of just the very basic skills that people need to function and stand on their own is really the very essence of what an appropriate and acceptable use would be under the Dover Amendment. I want to tell you a little bit about the Pathway Alliance group, Taisha's group, and they are all available for questions. I imagine you'll have some for them. It's a really interesting group that I've gotten to know and meet through this process. They're dealing with So they have some very strict guidelines of their own. They see clients that are typically between six months and a year, and they do have a year as being the maximum time that they want to have any one resident staying in their facility. And one of the things that I learned from Leslie, who's going to be working with this group, is that they've had tremendous success with not seeing recidivism in their space. I think she has a 99% success rate, meaning that 99%, at least in the case of Leslie's efforts, clients have gone on to stable housing and not relapsed, which I think is a This is the work they do with their clients. They spend a lot of time getting their clients to stand on their own two feet so they can go out and apply for and have permanent housing. And this is the work that they do with their clients on a regular basis. So here with us today is Taisha from the I guess the from the pathway entity and working now with Leslie from justice for housing and then Ruth Rollins has brought in was brought in by Leslie Ruth has her own entity that she works with called we are better together. But Ruth also does direct service and has been in the. Has been in this, as I mentioned, for at least 30 years. 1 of the groups that we're going to be working with is a group called RG reliable riders transportation company. This is a shuttle service. It's a van. The effort is to create 3 trips, or maybe more today to provide for the clients, but also provide for. employees the team understands that there is no parking at this facility the team will solve for that challenge they will solve for it for any of their staff who have parking needs we believe that those are maybe three or four people and they will find a area garage that may not be in Medford, it may be closer to transit, it may be some of the transit that they have. There's a lot of parking in those areas. And then the shadow will create predictability for these employees. In terms of clients, I'm told that No clients have cars, at least it's been the experience of all of our practitioners that clients do not come with their own cars. And so that solves an issue right there for us. So we feel confident and comfortable that the shuttle service will provide full access to and from the facility without needing to have on-site parking. And that being said, Andrew and Steve continue to talk to abutters and neighbors to see if there are opportunities, but so far there have not been. And again, we do not feel like that's necessary, but more we need to solve for some of the questions and some of the permitting questions that we've been asked during this process. And so we are trying to see if maybe we can even just have a couple of spaces nearby, even though we don't think it will be essential for the program. Go through this a little bit. I mean, there will be 24 hour security and there will always be a staff member on site at all times. Um, the facility provides on site, um, laundry services and, you know, food and meals as commercial kitchen. Um, and, um, and of course, sleeping, sleeping arrangements. Um, I'm going to skip over a couple of these items. Because I want to. available for questions if you have it. There's all kinds of classes, counseling, job counseling, meditation services, financial literacy classes, and the like. Other educational credit counseling services. I mentioned financial literacy coaching. This is what I wanted to show you. This is Justice for Housing. This is Leslie's entity right now. She has two buildings right now that she's operating. 74 Morris Street in Dorchester and 241 Woodrow Ave in Dorchester. Both of these properties are right in residential neighborhoods. If you walk by them, you would think that they're just a regular house in Dorchester. They know their neighbors, they are active in their community. During the fall, there might be a pumpkin on the stair, you know, et cetera. These are people who are in this house all the time. And this was that stat that I heard from Leslie earlier. They have over 367 clients. Only 1% has needed to go back into temporary housing. The rest have really been able to get on their own feet. Tiesha has worked with all these other groups, as have the other two practitioners who are with us, Ruthie and Leslie, but Tiesha has worked with all these other groups in some capacity. She may be referring someone from the Pines Trident, she may be referring someone from St. Francis, Casa Merna, etc. The one thing I've heard from all the practitioners is that There are almost no domestic violence resources anywhere in Massachusetts. It's extremely hard to find any resource like this. There might be a scattered site here and there in someone's house separated from services. This is a very rare thing indeed. There are a number of rules associated. This will be a non-smoking facility. There's no alcohol, no drugs. These are very regimented facilities that are supervised and intended to help bring people into a healthy environment and get them into the right pathway. So now I want to shift from the use and just kind of close out here more on some of the physical attributes of the site. Some of the maybe even you might say shortcomings of the site, but that we're dealing with as a result and how we're dealing with those challenges as we are proposing here to you for site plan review. Um, so, uh, there is no parking. I mentioned that. Um, I also mentioned that most residents will not own their own vehicle. I believe all of the clients will not own their own vehicle. And in the case of those two or three staff members, I believe that we will be creating a shuttle service that will bring them to the facility. Um, there's ample MBTA services. Uh, there are always going to be an employee on site, but the total number of employees, not that many, five to six, And that during any one shift, there might be half of that. The I did want to just have this little graphic on the side that, you know, there is we do want to build a sidewalk off of our property. We don't have. We would provide those two to the city for approval. And we do believe this is a 61 foot frontage on the site we do believe that there would be space for at least two, maybe three, three cars on the front of the building. Yeah, so I do think practically speaking, pickup, drop off, you know, deliveries, those types of things, it's good to have some space to do that with. And that would be what that would be made available for. I mentioned there's ample parking and then, of course, the orange line and the shuttle will tie into these resources. We provided a traffic study from Fossil O'Neill engineers. This is, I just wanted to share with you, is that the way traffic studies work, as you've seen in your capacity as on this board, is they look at what the previous use was, they look at what the proposed use is, and they see what the difference is. Here, there is no difference because the previous use and the proposed use have the same impact based on what we're proposing, based on what was there. Uh, and that's, uh, we've provided this, this, um, memorandum from Faso O'Neill, and we're happy to, you know, uh, answer any questions about that. Uh, Faso O'Neill concludes that based on the foregoing assessment, it is the professional opinion of Faso O'Neill that the proposed development at 21 St. Clair will have negligible impacts on traffic operation within the study areas. Just finally, finally, Finally here. So there were a number of comments made from your various departments within Medford, by the way, it's been a pleasure to work with Medford and your various departments and your staff, and all of us for certain things and we are fully compliant to with all of these items that they've asked us to, of course, most of these things are going to have to happen once we get into the actual. work and the construction level documents. I mentioned the wheelchair ramp at the side entrance and some of the other items that I shared during the course of this presentation. So now might be, Madam Chair, a good time for me to pause and answer any questions along with the team as well. Thank you for the opportunity to be in front of you today. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you for the thorough presentation. I appreciate the detail. So just to give everybody an idea of how this is going to go, I'm going to open up to the board for our questions and comments. And then after that, there will be a public comment period. And then there will be a board deliberation after the public comment period. So with that, I'd like to open up to the board for any questions or comments. Board members, feel free to raise your hand or unmute yourself. Adam.

[Adam Behrens]: Hi, everybody. Thanks for presenting, Michael. Just a question on the educational services. So are the teaching members of the particular staff uh like affiliated specifically with 21 st claire road are they part of sort of the larger organization um and and and just like how does that kind of work on a given week or or or or what's the sort of process that you guys have for allocating the teaching resources from an instructor perspective to meet the goals you outlined in terms of educating and providing opportunities for the people that are housed.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Yeah, I really appreciate the question. I think you'll get a real much better answer having either Leslie or Taisha or Ruthie respond. I don't know if either one of you want to talk about how you slot in the teaching courses and that kind of thing. I don't know if that's you, Leslie, or I mean, I can give it a shot based on what we've talked about.

[SPEAKER_26]: I couldn't unmute myself, so. That's why I didn't respond. Thank you, Madam Board and staff and members that are here tonight for allowing us to present. We have a structured educational system, really on focusing on workforce development, getting people back to work. We have a licensed CDL trainer that comes in and We have also a component where people can learn how to put in solar windows or solar panels. That has produced jobs for our participants. 84% of the participants have gone on to acquire livable wages so that they can afford a livable wage housing without having any assistance from public housing or any facility like that. We're also educating people and getting resume building, digital literacy, computer skills, things of nature that people need when they're rebuilding their lives. Most of the participants have had, I can say, a life that they've been on on systems of power like welfare, social security, things that have prevented them from getting, you know, sustainable jobs. And so therefore, it's a fresh start. In addition to that, we have life skills. I don't know if Ruthie or Tisha wants to add anything else.

[Emily Hedeman]: And if you have trouble unmuting, just, oh, Taisha, I see you unmuted.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_30]: Perfect. Yes, thank you. And so just to add to that, yes, we will be having individuals come to us as opposed to, you know, clients having to leave off the premises. And I'm sure for some things they will go outside, but for the majority, everything will be on site. So I hope I answered that. I don't know if Ruthie has anything to add.

[SPEAKER_12]: Ruth Wallens. Yeah, good evening. Yeah, so, and I hope I can add more value to the question. So, based on the population we're going to be working with, so every provider, community partners that we've already had experience with working with, with this population, will be trauma-informed. So not only are we going to, you know, in regards to financial literacy and supporting them around domestic violence services, we will also be working with the children. So we do have, between the three of us, we have licensed clinicians, trauma support, domestic violence services. So really, we already have the services and partnerships in place with other organizations that we're doing this work. So it's more so we're just trying to provide empowerment and wraparound services for the whole family. So we're not recreating something new based on our experience in doing this work. We already have partners in line to work with us that will be coming in working with the clients. The goal is to provide services at the resident where the program would be at. So I hope I was able to add value to the question.

[SPEAKER_26]: Yeah, with a focus on maintaining, rebuilding oneself. So a resume building, financial literacy, like she said, credit is a big barrier. And so we really focus on budgeting, credit, how to manage a bank account, how to obtain a mortgage. Our goal is to get people from shelter to stable housing and to home ownership. And that's what Justice for Housing, our role is.

[Emily Hedeman]: Adam, any follow up questions?

[Peter Calves]: No, I'm good.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. I see two board hands, and I think I also see a member of the public's hand. Just a quick reminder, this is board questions and comments at this time, and we will get to public comment. Ari, I believe I saw your hand next.

[Ari Fishman]: Perfect. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the applicants for the application. It sounds like a really wonderful project that will provide a lot of benefit to the community. My question is actually more to city staff and I'd love if you can kind of tell us a little bit about how common it is for Dover amendments to be non-traditional schools, so not universities, public schools, and the like. And I imagine that that's a common question. So if you can give us some context and history and norms for the public, that would be very appreciated.

[Alicia Hunt]: Sure, Madam Chair. I am so when this case this potential project was originally brought to us. We met with them with Robin Stein, one of our attorneys from KP law to review how this was how this could be permitted should this be permitted. And when their lawyers said, well, this would be a Dover use, she assured us that that was actually a very common way of permitting projects like this. That as long as this is not the kind of shelter that opens its doors at night, people come in and sleep and then leave in the daytime. That would not necessarily, that we were not talking about. This is where somebody lives there and there are supportive services. She said that is actually very commonly permitted as a Dover use. I do not have, I did not make any note of case law. I wasn't sure if that's at all helpful, but I assume that the applicant's lawyers came prepared with some case law to cite as necessary for it. We took our lawyer's word for it that this is a standard way of permitting a project like this.

[Emily Hedeman]: Ari, would you be interested in hearing some of that information?

[Ari Fishman]: I would, you know, we don't have to read every word of it, but I'd love to hear confirmation of that. Thank you.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Yeah, I mean, you know, and maybe I put Maggie on deck and put you on the spot, my associate who. who chased down all these cases. But I mean, I think, you know, you're in Medford, and you're probably used to having Tufts University show up and, you know, and apply under the Dover Amendment. But it's really the concept is the same. It's intended for educational purposes. And long ago, the question about whether or not a facility like this would qualify. And I think the leading case is McLean Hospital, which I'm sure you've all heard of. And McLean Hospital does a lot of the types of services here that we're talking about on a much larger scale. And it's McLean Hospital who, when they were initially permitting their facilities nearby, Lincoln, I believe, maybe not that nearby, but in Massachusetts. It's a Massachusetts case. This was, and other versions like that, McLean's the one that we cited in the materials that we sent to you, this is exactly what was cited, and this is what the Supreme Judicial Court has cited and continues to cite as the most recent relevant type of law in this space. And for those reasons, and then many others, I mean, I don't know, Maggie, how close I got there, if you're, Maggie Roberts, attorney.

[SPEAKER_19]: I echo what Mike said, it's, you know, there's a whole body of case law, but it's really just comes down to the education purposes of this broad concept. And I think, you know, it's that one case and many others, it's, There are these immersive residential programs where they're teaching their clients to lead productive lives, be independent. I think the quote is, education is a broad concept. And yeah, so just like Mike said, you can kind of Yeah, it's a broader concept that comes as more than just traditional school.

[Ari Fishman]: Thank you. And I'm finding this quote from the Fitchburg case very helpful and sensible. That's on the shared screen right now. I appreciate the thorough answer.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Ari. Peter, I see your hand.

[Peter Calves]: Yes, I have one question for the applicant and then a confirmation of a couple of things. The question for the applicant is, what is going to be the scope of the educational services provided on the site? Do you have that broken down and hours of instruction per day? Or is it not quite a model that you can measure in something like that?

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Well, I mean, we are still, you know, months away from opening our doors, we still have to build out the facility. And we do need to formally engage the team and really bring them in to do this work. So I can perhaps ask them to talk about what their experiences have been in other facilities and what the goal will be on this based on the number of our clients and the like. But we still are probably a good six months away from opening our door. So some of this stuff, I just want to put it in brackets there, if I could. Maybe, Ashley.

[Peter Calves]: That's great. I just am trying to get a sense of, like I said, the scope of educational services that are provided on site.

[SPEAKER_26]: Yeah, I can tell you from our other houses how we have random. So first of all, no case is alike. Everybody doesn't have the same social issue, right? And so first we have case managers who assess, right? Our goal is to stabilize, then educate, rebuild, and then focus on on, what do you say, out, like coming out of the home. So first, we have our case managers who assess the needs. We have Monthly meetings that have to have house meetings, we have a monthly house meetings and then we have weekly sessions with either a workforce development. depending on which class you're in. If you're taking CDL, they come twice a week. If you're taking a solar panel, that's every day. That's nine to five every day on site. Different Vocational classes have different needs. Digital literacy we do in the evenings three times a week. Financial literacy, I can go on and on. Financial literacy is done as needed. Everybody's credit barriers aren't the same, and so everybody gets a coach, and that coach determines how much time they need with that particular individual.

[Peter Calves]: That's great. That gives me, that's plenty for my, at least for my understanding of the programming. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Any other board comments or questions?

[Peter Calves]: Oh, wait, just a second. I realized I had a couple other things. One of which was just a confirmation that the St. Clair Road, at least on the MassDOT roadway jurisdiction, roadway inventory map, which is in my day job as a traffic engineer, what we use to determine jurisdiction does have St. Clair Road listed as a public way so that That does support the applicant's claim and something that we'll have to figure out. And this question, I think, is, oh, wait, no. I was going to say I have a question for city staff about what the options were for Dover amendment. But I think Attorney Ross did a good job of going through those. So I actually had those written down in my notes. So thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Great, thank you, Peter. Any other comments or questions from the board? I just had a couple of thoughts I wanted to share before we move over to public comment period. I see we have a lot of people on the call this evening, so I'll be brief. I did like that you mentioned adding a sidewalk in front of the building. However, that does leave a significant gap between the corner of the street and the St. Clair Road building. So that is something that I would like to hear more about, or maybe we could put in our conditions. Parking is always going to be a concern in Medford. We're working really hard as a city to make sure we're doing the right thing for that. I was a little concerned to hear that solving for parking is still in process. I hear your comments on the shuttle, and this may be a question more for city staff, but I am curious what parking regulations or restrictions, if any, are currently in place on St. Clair or if it's just a Wild West, like the roads we have in Medford.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: I'm sure I think that the staff was under the impression that it was a private roadway area to look at it. It does really look like that. I would not blame them for a 2nd for thinking that that is exactly what this was. Um, you know, I think we would love to participate in supporting the city by creating a sidewalk in front of the building. I would imagine at some point. The city would probably want to, you know, put some capital resources into putting a sidewalk there, although that's the city's decision, but I think by at least. Hitting our sidewalk. we can do our part to support that effort and we could create the appropriate transitions back to the ground condition, you know, whether it's a tactile strip on either side, however the Public Works Department wants us to do that. And then when the other streets are ready, you know, when the other sidewalk is ready, it will work. But I think it's just too much of a cost to think about doing an entire sidewalk from this side to the corner and also some logistics with the abutters. It just puts us in a whole other different role and cost bracket that we weren't prepared to sign up for. But in response to the comment, what we agreed to do is to do the sidewalk in front of our facility.

[Emily Hedeman]: Appreciate the feedback. And I see Director Hunt's hand is raised.

[Alicia Hunt]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Sort of about the whole, the sidewalk, the accessibility piece of it. I do think that we really need to get to the bottom of the fact that our city thinks it's a private way. If it is a public way, we need to have it surveyed and understand what the widths are. If we could have sidewalk where that is, clearly there is no edge to the other side of it. It just blends into a parking lot. It's in our best interest to understand that better. Obviously, we wouldn't have an answer to that tonight. There's been a lot of back and forth on this particular question. If this was a public way and it didn't have sidewalk, but it had space for it, then I do believe our traffic and engineering department would ask for the sidewalk to be made all the way to the curb, not just in front of their own property. That would be a standard request if there was space on the road for that to exist. And set that aside, I don't think that that item could get solved tonight. The question about where there could be just sort of public parking, all of our public streets are open for the public. No spot in front of somebody's house is a private spot unless they are on a private way. I will, however, mention that if you just cross Fulton Street, sorry, Fells Way West, to the other side of Fulton Street, that stretch of Fulton Street along in front of Gillis Park, there is parking on both sides. We do find that people from the apartment house on this the corner there over by Gillis and Hickey Parks park on that street. There does tend to be street parking there. If we're talking about two or three staff people, There is no reason why they couldn't be parking across Felsway West and walking over to their place of employment a block or two. It feels very reasonable to me. I think that in the big picture way, our concern around parking is resident vehicles. I do understand that in percentage wise, people who are homeless tend not to have vehicles unless of course they were living in their vehicle. And that's where they were before they came to the shelter. The other item is that if somebody is a victim of domestic violence, that does not necessarily mean that they are a very low income. They may need to be in the shelter because they are running from someone, but that doesn't mean they don't have a car. And so I do think that the organization really needs to think about that because there would be no long-term parking for residential vehicles here. One of the recommended conditions that we have been putting forth in a number of our buildings, regardless of what kind of building, we have done this for our high-income apartment buildings, is that the tenants are not eligible for residential permit parking. And that is a condition that can be put in place in this case. I recognize that there is no permit parking at this time in this neighborhood. That means that there won't ever be permit parking. There could be in the future and this condition would go with the length of the duration of the building. So thank you.

[SPEAKER_26]: Can I chime in real quick? We have a domestic violence house right now with 22 rooms and none of our participants have cars. Out of the three houses that we have had, we haven't had any residents have cars. If they do have cars, like we mentioned before, we will have a shuttle that comes to the facility three times a day to take them to the train station, and we do have T-passes that we provide.

[Emily Hedeman]: That's really helpful information. Thank you, Leslie. With that, I'm going to now open the public comment period. Those who wish to provide comments can use the raise hand feature or message Danielle in the comments. 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 everyone, we have disabled the chat function as that is not part of the public record. We want to keep the public record discussion available for all. However, if you are having audio or other technical difficulties, this may be entered into the chat to alert myself and staff. We'll see your comment and troubleshoot with you. Members of the public will have two minutes to provide comment, and we'll do our best to provide a warning before the end of the comment time. Each member of the public will only have one two-minute period to provide their comment. If you have additional comments, please feel free to submit via email at the aforementioned email address, ocd at medford-ma.gov. I'm going to hand it over to Danielle to comment queue and then read any previously sent emails or letters.

[Danielle Evans]: Madam Chair, I have a raised hand with a username of iPad KR. What was the time limit that we're giving? Two minutes. Two minutes. Is there, can I volunteer someone on the board to man a timer?

[Emily Hedeman]: I can keep an eye on time.

[Danielle Evans]: Okay. All right. I'm going to ask to unmute iPad KR.

[kOuBy-MtMpc_SPEAKER_03]: Hi. Well, I appreciate there's a lot of information in this meeting tonight. I am begging the board to keep the hearing open for review the material of tonight's presentation with an expert. The property also has a restrictive covenant of the deed relative to educational use. Have you received written approval of that from the party for the use? I have many, many questions and I'm disappointed to only have two minutes because this has gone on for a very long time and two minutes is not enough. I am a direct abutter. My property is listed as lot 22. I'd like to explain that parking is our main issue here in this neighborhood, safety being the second. In front of the building, you propose a sidewalk. No one mentioned that there is a hydrant there and that it is in fact a fire lane. There's no external fire escapes, it's 40 rooms where tonight you learn now it's 37, which varies from the plan that they originally submitted. And there's no elevator. There are two rooms on the first floor that will be handicapped accessible. The perimeter of the building There's four feet on the left hand side, which is where the proposed ramp would go to the side door. How would the children get to this place structure? And the corner is the entire width along the left-hand side of the building against the chain link fence is four feet. At the back, it's five feet, which goes to seven feet on the right-hand corner. I'd like to point out problems in the planning. The planning room 6789, looks like it's two levels. And this is not enough time and unacceptable explanation. I also have another feedback.

[Emily Hedeman]: We would love to have your name and address which is required at the start of your your comment. And I really appreciate your feedback and coming to the meeting this evening. Thank you.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_01]: Can I go next? Yes. Can I go next? My name is Abida Bhanu.

[Emily Hedeman]: I'm sorry. Comments are going to be called in order by Daniel Evans.

[kOuBy-MtMpc_SPEAKER_03]: So Abida is here and she's the other rebutter on the opposite side of the building. Oh, OK. I'm sorry. I didn't understand. Right. So she's actually here with me as well. She lives in the property at 11 St.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_01]: 11 St. Clair Road.

[Emily Hedeman]: Before we get in, could the first speaker please provide their name and address for the record?

[kOuBy-MtMpc_SPEAKER_03]: Yeah, it's Kelly Raso, and I live at 35 St. Francis Street. My property is lot 22, which the public could perceive as green space for the building.

[SPEAKER_20]: But that's not actually the case. The property is four feet. Thank you, Kelly. At this time, we're going to move on to the next.

[kOuBy-MtMpc_SPEAKER_03]: No, I'm going to ask you that. I'm going to tell you that a beater would like to speak, but I would like to explain for her her conditions because of her accent. She feels intimidated to speak. So I'd like to say that in the proposed age number landscape conceptual site plan, the building the bushes and all of these things that are in the site plan. It says there that there's a gate. That gate would go into the property of the Vita at 11 St. Clair Road. And it says that a five foot clear pedestrian access gate, That would imply that people would walk down her driveway. There is no other access from that side of the situation in that is. There's clearly not enough information here in the.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_01]: I want to talk a little bit. Please give me the opportunity. I am next door, 11 St. Clair Road, Medford, MA. And I am very shocked to know this kind of shelter. And my neighbor, one of the neighbor bring it to my attention. I'm shocked, still I'm shocked. And I care about my safety and it will invade my privacy. Doesn't matter 37 rooms or not. My question is the fire land, there's no parking, and do those property, those are non-profit property, do they pay property tax yearly like us? And also, I want to say that I'm very shocked that shelter is coming to the neighborhood where we're living in peace. And of course, a lot of people have the same objection. Please pay attention. This is not the right place for the right residents. I wish you can bring it to public attention, please, please.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. I appreciate your feedback. Danielle, who do we have next? OK, let me see.

[Danielle Evans]: Apologies, in China.

[Emily Hedeman]: And I see there might be a couple of situations where we have two people on the call. If there are any other people that are off camera that have two people, just give us a heads up and we'll make sure to provide enough time for both people who are with you to speak.

[Danielle Evans]: Thank you. Okay, the second person in line with their hands up is Lisa Simonetti. I'm going to ask to unmute you.

[Emily Hedeman]: And please state your name and address for the record.

[Lisa Simonetti]: Thank you. So good evening. Thank you for hosting this meeting. My name is Lisa Simonetti and I am at 85 Fulton Spring Road. So I am on the same side as St. Francis and Ridgeway. The third straight up. So I have a couple of questions. I hope I can run through them. I would love to be able to get some answers from them about them. I'd like to know what the maximum occupancy is going to be you're saying. You said it was a 40 person shelter. So we just found out tonight that it's a domestic violence shelter, which I understand people need a place to go to be safe, but in this congested a neighborhood with a 40 occupancy, or are you gonna be 40 adults with any number of children? I'd like to know what the maximum occupancy is. My understanding of Dover is that it is a robust educational amendment. And to compare it, quite frankly, to McLean's Hospital, which is on rolling greens in Belmont, is just a little disingenuous, considering the very, very congested area that Fulton Heights has become. A number of the homes on Fulton Street are now rental units and they park on Ridgeway on St. Francis and on Fulton Spring Road, which are all private ways which we get no benefit from our city to keep those roads up kept. And we are so congested and I'd love to know when they did the traffic study, quite frankly. I agree with the folks who live at St. Clair because that happens to be my parish church, that is a fire lane. And for the few masses that are still said at St. Francis Parish, what's gonna happen there on Saturdays and Sundays if God forbid there's ever a fire and you're not gonna be able to get a fire truck through because you've got parking and a sidewalk that's just gonna jut out from the old convent. And to say that the uses are exactly the same, first of all, that building's been vacant for I don't know how many years. And to compare it to 15 or 18 nuns living there who never had vehicles or anything else to what would be there now with full time staff 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, it's just being very disingenuous, and not very honest to the people of Medford, who are going to have a domestic violence shelter in a highly, highly congested area.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Lisa. I really appreciate your feedback. And we are going to save responses to any questions to the applicant at the conclusion of the public comment period. Thank you.

[Danielle Evans]: OK, the next person is Leo Lafarge asking to unmute.

[Emily Hedeman]: And please state your name and address for the record.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_26]: Hi, my name is Linda and I'm with my husband Leo, Linda and Leo Lafarge. We live at 463 Felsway West and my front door exits onto St. Clair Road. Again, I'm not sure about this traffic study that you did. I have the same questions about the roadway and how small that road is. It is only one way between the back of the church back door to St. Francis Street. That where we have this two spots that park on somebody else's property and about 10 feet wide for cars to get through. So parking and traffic will be impacted in that area for sure. And I know you say that people aren't going to bring their cars to work and people aren't going to have cars at the shelter, but I can already see that the two parking spots that we have, because we can't park in front of the house and we can't park on the side of the house, would be impacted. And I'm also concerned about a homeless shelter going into the neighborhood. We just had those condo units put in a few years ago, which has greatly increased the amount of people in the neighborhood and the water usage and everything else. And I'm just really upset. I have a child with special needs. And it's it's very upsetting that this is going to be I feel a safety issue for my child, my family, and I'm not happy about it. And I can't believe we're hearing about this tonight about a homeless shelter in Bedford.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Linda. Leo, did you want to speak as well?

[Danielle Evans]: I think I need to unmute them again. OK. I forgot there are two people.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_26]: No, he's fine. Okay, we're good. Thank you so much. I appreciate your feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Okay, next speaker is Lynn's iPhone. I'm asking to unmute.

[Emily Hedeman]: Could you please name and address for the record?

[SPEAKER_11]: My name is Lynn Sullivan. I live at 121 Riverside Avenue in Medford. That is my parish church I go to at St. Francis. One of my questions is, you have a lot of things to keep the adults busy. Who's going to be watching the children throughout the day and evening? And where are they going to play? Second of all, I wanted to ask, will this be Americans or will this be housing illegal immigrants?

[Emily Hedeman]: We're going to save responses to all public comments for the end of the public hearing. So if you have additional comments, I'd encourage you to share them.

[SPEAKER_11]: Well, I just asked about the children.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, we'll respond to all public comments at the end of the.

[SPEAKER_11]: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought that was the question I had. I'm sorry. I thought you were answering questions.

[Emily Hedeman]: We're trying to collect all the questions because I'm sure a lot of people have similar concerns, but we want to hear from everybody. Did you have anything else to add, Lynn?

[SPEAKER_11]: Not right now, no.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you so much for your feedback. I really appreciate it.

[Danielle Evans]: Richard Rosso is next.

[SPEAKER_05]: Hello, my name is Richard Rosso. I reside at 35 St. Francis street as well. And I'm a lifelong Method resident, 58 years. I've served the city on the police department for 24 years. I'm retired. I'm also a business owner in the city. And my concern is the safety in the building. with the four stories they have, I've responded to many calls. If there's a problem up on the third, second, third, fourth floor, are they gonna have an elevator or is the emergency services gonna have to run up four flights of stairs? Is this gonna be ADA compliant for the whole building? Which I think as an educational facility, it should be ADA compliant. on the whole floor. So I'd like an answer to that. And also I'd like to know why the traffic study, the citizens are in the neighborhood, couldn't see the traffic study. And I'd like to try to table this for the future because I'd like to confer with the lawyer and let them see the traffic study. And I wanna also know if it's gonna be ADA approved. I'm concerned about the fire and the children in the building. If something goes on in one of the upper floors, are they going to have to wait for emergency services to go up three flights, four flights, and how are they going to get them down? It's concerning. All right. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Richard. I appreciate your feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Madam Chair, I just want to state for the record that the application materials that are on the city website should include the traffic study. I know that was a late addition. I'll verify that it is there. If it is not there, I'll put it there.

[Emily Hedeman]: And I realized that we're sending a link to the current filings. Would it be appropriate to drop a link specifically to the traffic study?

[Danielle Evans]: Sure, if somebody can send that for me.

[Alicia Hunt]: Take the next calls, and I'll get the link directly to this folder and then one to the traffic study while you take the next comment.

[Emily Hedeman]: Okay, next speaker is Kevin Wong. Hi, Kevin. Name and address.

[SPEAKER_36]: My name is Kevin Wong from 1 St. Clair Road. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. The proposal seems nice, and I think if well executed, could provide a lot of value to the clients. But as a part of the community where the shelter will be located, I'm worried about the long-term sustainability of the project. And I also want to make sure that there will not be negative long-term impact on the community. So two points I'd like to call out. First at a glance from what I can see on the material available online, the property is owned by real estate developers. who seek to profit from this property and the property will be operated by a company, Pathway Alliance, that I learned is just three months old and founded by a real estate agent. I think it is easy to write a proposal and name names in your proposal, but execution is hard. Second, a shuttle is proposed, but without parking and more direct access to public transportation. Can a shelter really serve its educational purpose in getting their clients back on their feet? So, given those 2 points, if I may make a request to the Board, is to consider the long-term impact of allowing the Dover Amendment to be applied here. and to make sure that there are mechanisms in place to keep the petitioner and the operator accountable, such that it continues to serve its intended educational purpose. From what I've seen, there is no track record that indicates it will continue to serve that purpose in the long run. That will be all. I appreciate the board for listening to me.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Kevin. Appreciate you taking the time. Stephen Angeloni. I see there's two of y'all. Do you each want to speak?

[SPEAKER_16]: I think so. I'll try to keep it brief. I'm Iga Angeloni and Stephen Angeloni. We're at 1 St. Clair Road at the condo buildings on the corner. I think, you know, we all have the same questions about whether the Dover Amendment is being applied appropriately or perhaps a bit liberally. From my understanding, just because a an organization falls under nonprofit status, does not automatically give them protection under the Dover Amendment, unless the main source of the facility's use is education. And to me, this sounds like the main source of the facility is shelter, and that education would be a component and perhaps a part of the programming, though, admittedly, there was, you know, it was a little bit vague, and we're six months away, so it's not fully fleshed out yet, it sounds like. I think I want to echo Lisa and some other sentiments, Kevin's sentiments about the community impact. I think we're concerned in general, of course, about changes in safety, congestion, parking, et cetera. But being a domestic violence shelter, I think I'm also concerned about domestic violence, the people that the, I guess clients are, running away from finding this area and maybe increasing, I don't know, the danger in the area here. So I'm curious a little bit about the security. You mentioned a security guard on staff, but what does that really mean? What does that really entail? Just generally a little bit concerned for the long-term impacts for those of us who are walking that space every single night.

[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Thank you.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_39]: Yeah, that's all I'm into.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. I appreciate you both joining the call and giving feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Michael Ruiz.

[SPEAKER_23]: Name and address. Hi, good evening. My name is Michael Ruiz. I live at 45 St. Francis Street, directly behind Abita. Um, I'd like to echo a lot of my neighbors concerned about the, uh, the impact on the, on the neighborhood. Um, but I also. Question the validity of that, um, that Dover act. I mean, the, uh, the educational programs, I understand I'm a, I'm a lifelong utility worker. And, um, as a, as a tradesman, um, I can assure you that we do need, um, you know, train people in the workforce because we're losing them, but I don't see how two days a week is going to train somebody for a CDL. How are they going to do that in a parking lot that's got a street running through it? Solar panel installation, again, it's a great idea, but are they going to hang solar panels on the building? I mean, there's only so much classroom-type work. A lot of that is hands-on training that needs to be done. My other concern is just the neighborhood in general. I know human nature. People aren't going to want to wait for the shuttle. They're going to be late for work. They're going to drive. They're going to leave their cars on St. Francis Street. There's no parking on St. Francis Street as it is, thanks to the rooming houses on Fulton Street, the condos. A lot of the multifamily houses around here are now overloaded with tenants. They rent out bedrooms. The city allows that, which is short-sighted on their part. But I don't think this plan will ever really be correct. I don't think they'll ever solve the parking issue. I think the whole educational thing is pretty vague. It's just being used to house people. And as Mr. Wong pointed out, when this particular plan isn't self-sustaining, what is that building going to be used for next? What are we opening ourselves up to? These are also some of the concerns of my neighbors.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you for your time. Thank you, Michael. I appreciate your feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Angus Ho is next.

[SPEAKER_38]: Hi, yeah, my name is Pangas Ho. I live in the one St. Clair condominium, which is right down the street from the building. So what I want to, like, you know, add to, like, you know, what my other neighbors had mentioned is, like, you know, I would like to ask the board to really look into the motivation of the developer here. Like, you know, so I did a little bit of research, like, you know, This developer is a luxury home developer across Somerville, Cambridge. And then for historical context as well, we knew that last year they intended to convert the building into a nine-unit condominium to be sold to the public. And then we knew about it because they reached out to our homeowner association looking to rent parking spots from our condo parking lot because they couldn't find any parking for the condo, so they couldn't fulfill the zoning requirements. We didn't end up renting out the parking space for them. So therefore, their luxury condo project couldn't move forward. And then now they converted this project into this shelter project. And as Kevin mentioned as well, this nonprofit that they created to run this The shelter was only three months old, so it was only created after they tried to convert it into a luxury condo. That didn't go through, and only then they created this nonprofit to create the shelter. So again, I would really encourage the board to look into the motivation here, because what I'm worried about is the long-term sustainability here if the developer here is only motivated by profit. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Pongos. Appreciate it.

[Danielle Evans]: Emily Lazzaro.

[Emily Lazzaro]: Hi, thank you. I'm Emily Lazzaro. I live at 170 Mystic Street Extension. I'm a Medford City Councilor. I want to voice my support for this project. I appreciate the organizations that are coming together as a coalition to try to make something like this happen. I'm one of my day jobs is working for the Malden Warming Center. I care a lot about folks that deal with this kind of thing. It's very hard to find places for people to live, especially people with children. My organization can't serve children so it can be especially difficult when you're faced with a situation like this and I applaud your compassion and your dedication to this population. And I would also just encourage the board to keep in mind that there are always challenges. I think this is this proposal from the group that's put this paperwork together is pretty comprehensive. I think it can be carefully reviewed but I also think that now is especially a time for us to lead with compassion and try to remember that hard decisions are going to have to be made and people are going to face a lot of difficult moments and if we can try to help each other and move forward trying to find a way to assist each other and have empathy and compassion. I think that's the best way to move forward. And I would be proud of Medford if we could use an empty building like this for something like the proposed use. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Councilor Lazzaro. Appreciate you being here. Cheryl R. Name and address, please.

[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Hi, I'm Cheryl Rodriguez. I live on 281 Park Street, the neighborhood that Alicia Hunt said that these people can just park in, which they can't because it's very busy over here. We can't support you. And I think the neighbors have raised a lot of really good points. And it's kind of sad that a city council logged on to dismiss all those points. But this company is very new. And we don't know that they can succeed in this project. If it's too hard to park there, they'll probably just drop the teaching component and just keep the shelter. in place. So this is a real stretch of Dover to say resume help or helping them fill out housing forms would make it an educational facility because that's not true. If you build the shelter, the sidewalk in front of the building, your shelter bus is not going to be able to turn around. It's a very narrow area. So if the parking lot is in use, They're not going to be able to turn around. So I don't think they've done the math on that properly. I'm also wondering about the students that are going to be moving in here. Will they be going to Medford schools? Is this a migrant shelter? Will they all need ELL services? As I'm sure everyone on the meeting knows, yesterday we passed two overrides because our schools are overburdened. and we added 103 ELL students in March of 2024 that we couldn't support. So if this is that, then we're going to be in trouble again. I just want to have some clarity. And if they don't have answers to those questions, then I urge the board to not move forward because this plan isn't fleshed out and they're not ready to go. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Cheryl.

[Danielle Evans]: Wyman Chow.

[Cheryl Rodriguez]: They're not ready to go.

[Emily Hedeman]: Please state your name and address. Wyman, are you able to hear us?

[Danielle Evans]: Wyman, I'm clicking the Ask to Unmute button, so I think you need to push the button to unmute yourself.

[Emily Hedeman]: Should we just, should we come back? Move on and we'll come back.

[Danielle Evans]: Yep. Next person is Marge. Trying to unmute. You should be able to unmute yourself. No.

[Emily Hedeman]: All right, Marge, you should be good to go.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_27]: Okay, can you hear me?

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes, thank you.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_27]: My name is Marge Kirchmeier. I live at 25 St. Francis Street, and my house directly overlooks the parking lot at the church. And one question I had about the parking study is, I'm not sure when they did that study, but I see the parking lot very busy all the time between wedding between funerals and masses and different functions that they have, you know, at the social center. And I'm concerned about the safety of the children plus there's no real playground for these children that is, you know, I know you talked about making a little playground or a on the side of the of the building or something. But children are not going to want to stay in the house 24 7. They're going to want to go outside and they will go outside. You know, that's just the nature of children. And, you know, there's a concern if you have a lot of cars coming and going and possibility of a child getting hit or possibly, you know, fatally injured. I mean, that's that's, you know, a concern. You know, definitely there will be an increase in traffic with the food trucks and the shuttle services that you were talking about. So again, a safety risk. Staffing, I'm a retired nurse and one of my duties in assisted living that I worked in for eight years before I retired I was staffing and scheduling and it is very difficult to, you know, get qualified staff and keep qualified staff. You know, and I have a concern about, you know, the staff is going to be there 24 seven. But what about on the weekends when there's, you know, the case managers are not going to be working on weekends? To my knowledge, they usually don't. And so the, you know, what if it, and it seems like weekends when there's less staff, it's gonna be when there's problems, you know, of the people who are living in the housing. And this could include the police, the ambulance, fire, whatever, you know, the situation might be. And finally, my question is, what consideration of the neighborhood was this before this whole plan was made up? I don't recall ever getting anything in the mail about what was going to be happening here. This is the end of your comment here.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you so much for your feedback. I really appreciate it. I do see that there might be somebody else there with you. Would they be interested in providing comment?

[SPEAKER_39]: No, thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you so much, Marge. I appreciate your time and your feedback for this meeting.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_27]: I just finished one statement that, you know, I do think that you need to involve the community if you're going to be doing a project of this type for us to even get on board with it.

[Danielle Evans]: The chair, can I ask Marge, I didn't catch your address. I just want to make sure you said you weren't notified. I just want to make sure if you were on the list of butters.

[Emily Hedeman]: Can you state your address again, Marge?

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_27]: 25 St. Francis Street.

[Emily Hedeman]: Are you all set? Yeah. Thank you, March. And we are asking people to respect a two-minute time limit for those who have joined after. We are enforcing that time limit to make sure that everybody who wants to comment can comment, and also respect everybody's time. If you do have comments beyond that two-minute period, we encourage you to email, and I'll read that email off shortly, email OCD at medford-ma.gov with any additional comments or feedback that you may have. Thank you.

[Danielle Evans]: Should we try back? Waibin Xiao was the one that could not unmute. Yes. Let's try again.

[Emily Hedeman]: All right, let's move on and maybe circle back at the end of the public comment period.

[Danielle Evans]: If anyone is having trouble unmuting, you can direct message me in the chat or you can call the office line. We're closed actually. So no one will be able to answer the phone. You could send me an email as well. So the next person is Melissa Tobin.

[Emily Hedeman]: Please state your name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_06]: Hello. Sorry. Hi, I'm on the way. So I'm sorry.

[Emily Hedeman]: I just connected to you after Melissa. Okay, we'll be right with you. Thank you so much. Melissa, if you wouldn't mind stating your name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_34]: Yeah, hi, my name is Melissa Tobin. I live at 97 Taft streets, lifelong Medford residents. I just want to echo what my fellow residents of the Fulton Heights said regarding the building being ADA compliance, the parking in front. Um, the safety, the community impact also. Um, as we just pass some overrides to further fund our schools, really where how will these children be funded? Um. Also interested in learning more. about the total number of residents. I know there's 40 rooms, but is it double, triple, or quad occupancy would be great to share with us. I read through the documents and I did not see any of that. Some of the documents loaded on the Google site compared to what was presented tonight are a little conflicting. I also ask and challenge the board to do their due diligence with this matter and not take lawyers' words for things. You represent the city and also its residents, so we look to you to do your due diligence and not trust every single lawyer because they said so, read the documents, or even a non-profit that's been around for just three months. I also think we're just coming off a pretty heavy election yesterday with what was it four ballot options just for the city of Medford. And we have this meeting the very next night. I feel like it was placed on the calendar and kind of brushed under the rug so that there wouldn't be any comments from the residents. So I think before you make your decision, you host another meeting when it's not the day after an election in the city.

[Emily Hedeman]: 10 seconds, if you have any additional comments. That's it. Thanks. Thank you, Melissa. Appreciate the feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: We'll go back to Wyman Chow.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes. Thank you. Wyman, are you still with us? Hello, can you hear me? Sorry. Please state your name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_06]: This is Weimin Shao. I live in 29th and Francis Street, right next to this building. Now, when I get the news that this building was sold for the homeless shelters, I felt very much shocked about this news. Because this building is so confined, I don't think there's enough space for children and women to live in this small building. And also, the walkway is so narrow, there's no public parking lot, especially for this building. That's going to add a lot of burden and trouble in the streets around. Another thing is, now, 40 rooms for like 40, almost 40 families, which we don't know how many member of people are going to live here. Going to add a lot of uncertainties in the future in our neighborhood. I was a new resident. I just moved in like a few months. So, when I... before I purchased this house, I found this wonderful place, nice... It's a nice, quiet, peaceful neighborhood. Nice neighbors, quiet, you know, streets. Right behind my house, there is like a church. Everything is awesome. That's why I purchased this house. So, I feel very happy, but... When I heard this news, which really added a lot of uncertainties in the future of my house, that is why I feel much concern about this. So I just want to know how to solve this problem and make us feel more safe, make our neighborhood feel more safe like this.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you for the feedback, Wyman. I really appreciate it. Bobby Mitra?

[SPEAKER_37]: Yeah. Hi. Can you hear me?

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes. Please state your name and address.

[SPEAKER_37]: Yeah. So this is Bobby Mitra. My wife, Srirupa, and I reside at 17 St. Francis Street. We moved here 22 years ago. We've raised two children. It's a great community. And thank you to the board for giving us a hearing and to Michael Ross and his team. A lot of data got presented. You know, I applaud the need to tackle homelessness. but I'm appalled at the way this is being done. You know, those of us who reside on St. Francis' Street in St. Clair are pretty much coming to know about this today. You know, it's sort of being presented as a fait accompli. A lot of effort has obviously gone into preparation and, you know, the presentation. So, I just want to echo what my neighbors have been saying, Linda, Lee, Marge, Wyman, and others. There are two things tonight. One is that whether it's parking, security, the impact on the church, St. Francis of Assisi. That's partly why we moved here, too. It's a beautiful church right behind our house. Traffic, water, there's a bunch of things that doesn't seem to have been considered. The other part is that there are just too many unknowns. Someone talked about, is this a private way or a public way? That can influence things. Someone said this non-profit is just three months old. ADA compliance. There are a lot of unknowns, and there's not enough data. And finally, I think this whole thing about educational appears to be spurious. It appears to be duplicitous, because that doesn't seem to be the major intent of the halo house. And I would really appreciate it if people are straightforward in their communication. And so if I haven't read this already, I'm completely opposed to this happening here for all the reasons being stated. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Bapu. I appreciate the feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Maria Palermino.

[Emily Hedeman]: Please state your name and address for the record, Maria.

[SPEAKER_31]: Actually, this is from a Tuesday. Okay. Um, hello. Can you hear us?

[Emily Hedeman]: And people on the line?

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_24]: Yes.

[Emily Hedeman]: Would you each like two minutes to speak individually?

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_24]: Okay, yeah. My name is Matilde Sesta. I live on 39 St. Francis Street, right behind the convent. And I agree with everything everybody is saying, but I think these people, they're biting more than they can chew. Because if you put 40 people, I mean 40 rooms and kids, they're gonna be like ants. all over. And besides, I'm all for to help other people, but not on my expenses. I've been here 45 years, but now lately, every day I have to battle to park. because I can never stop for half an hour to my house and then go out again. I have to go in the back and do 10 meters going up and down. I'm 83 years old and I have to do this because I have to have somebody parked in front of my house. First with the school went up so many residents. Now we're going to have more people. And now they say they won't have enough cars. But later, let's see the result later. We don't talk about now. They all promise, promise, promise. As everybody else, everything at time out. Now, I apologize this project for everybody around and for my own life safety. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_31]: This is Maria now.

[Emily Hedeman]: Okay, please state your name.

[SPEAKER_31]: Okay, Maria to Mayo Palomino 172 Fulton Street, Medford, and I am really concerned about the fact that there will be so, the people have said this already, about how this number of people will impact the population here. In this particular area, Fulton, St. Francis, St. Clair, it's very, very, very tight. very congested. Parking, as Michael Ruiz always already said, is impossible, particularly on St. Francis Street. And there is no parking on Fulton Street. And then there is a private way, but those people have a private way. That's across from where I live, actually. So I'm very concerned about the parking situation, the number of people that there is no, honestly, there is very little space to put a sidewalk in front of this building, because there's the church, right. And if there is any particular accident, fire, someone needs an ambulance, it's going to be very, very hard for those vehicles to be able to access whoever that might be. So I feel like And have the plan show this on one side, they think they're going to put a ramp on another side. And they're going to put many, many, many bushes and flowers and that's all lovely. But honestly, there doesn't seem to be space to do that. So for all these reasons that people have already stated parking population, what the pair of children particularly and you know if people get sick and need and there might be a fire there's seriously no space for those vehicles to enter the property. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you to you both for sharing your insight and experience. Appreciate you joining the call. Waleed. Please state your name and address for the record please.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_39]: Sure, can you hear me OK?

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes, thank you.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_39]: OK, Waleed Al-Harash. I live over at 1 Sinclair Road. So I guess first and foremost, I mean, I think this hearing itself, just having listened to everyone, is wildly premature. Just based on what the attorney said, I forget his name, sorry, and Leslie from the program, I think it's pretty clear that they don't have all their T's crossed and I's dotted. So there's been a lot of responses from them. and statements that amount to, I believe this, I think, I'm not sure, that's still being discussed. That's not a plan. That's just like a haphazard wish in a fountain that they're bringing to a community that's going to be impacted with over 100 people, maybe more. They've pretty much brought this half-baked plan that's barely been thought through thoroughly from what I've heard and read in their proposal deck so far. In addition to that, I think this whole use of the Dover Amendment is actually so disingenuous hearing them talk about it, it's kind of made my head spin. Citing the McLean case itself where someone mentioned earlier actually sits on rolling greens and acres of space, not in a spot that's an arm length in every direction from a residential home or property is like disingenuity at its finest. And then in addition to that, I just want to be clear This is a homeless shelter, first and foremost, that's been bundled in a proposal from a real estate company that's trying to profit from it and kind of slide it under this Dover amendment. And I think Kevin or Payness may have mentioned before, the same company is the same one that tried to convert the same building into luxury condos and reached out to several of us to try and buy or rent our own parking spaces. So I do encourage the board to kind of really look into the motivation behind this project, because it's pretty clear based on the timeline, what the developers trying to do. And the part of it that kind of really upset me the most is, you know, as someone that was actually raised by a single mom in a domestically abusive household, it's kind of gross seeing this proposal, how they twisted their pitch going from high rise luxury condos to trying to pitch a quote unquote homeless shelter for educational purposes. So, you know, I just asked the council to take this back and give us more time and more, you know, meeting times to think about this more and consider it further before making a decision. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Alida, and thank you for being vulnerable with your comments. I appreciate that. Jen Proctor. Please state your name.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_21]: My name is Jen Proctor. I live at 36 St. Francis Street. I just learned of this yesterday from a neighbor. It was kind of disheartening being a neighbor and not being aware of this coming to my neighborhood. So regarding the Dover amendment, I don't think right with the lawyer quoted about like they're about six months out, but they didn't actually quote an educational plan, pretty like a concrete plan, which is the whole point of trying to be able to get this through. So it's disheartening on that part and that it's primarily going to be a shelter. I'm concerned about safety of both the potential HALO residents and their children, as well as the community. Also parking and congestion is a big problem in the area. And I didn't hear anything about guests and coming to the neighborhoods, but certainly with a 40-room residence, that would have potentially a lot of traffic to the area too. So I do think there should be some additional considerations here. It doesn't seem like all the plans even for the building and ADA compliance is all well thought out as well. So I think, you know, I share a lot of concerns with my community members that I think there should be additional consideration and further discussion on this.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Jen. Appreciate the feedback. Alex. Please state your name and address.

[Alex Lussenhop]: Hello, Alex. I live at 30 Wright Avenue. Can you hear me okay?

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes, whenever you're ready.

[Alex Lussenhop]: Yeah, I'll be brief. But I just wanted to speak in favor and support of the shelter. Just encourage people to have a little bit of perspective. Domestic violence shelter for women and children is pretty obviously a good and noble use of this space in our city, which is limited. And on its face, this is something that folks should support. These people's lives are more important than parking. And they're more important than, you know, nitty, these, you know, itty bitty things that can obviously be solved later. So I support the shelter and I would encourage people to look past parking and think about improving people's lives. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you for the feedback, Alex.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_53]: I just have a few questions. Did I understand the presenter correctly? You're going to teach commercial driving to people who the presenter stated not one of them own a car. My question is, if the facility open today. Forget the tenants or the students, where would the teacher park his car or his commercial truck? And if the applicant could tell us at what speed the shuttle bus throws people out of it as it doesn't have a parking spot, or is that in the traffic study? Additionally, I'd like to know who is the city peer reviewer for the traffic and parking studies? Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: I think I may have froze, but Ella, I did hear your question. Can you all still hear me?

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_22]: Yes.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you for your feedback, Ella. I may leave and come back and see if that helps with my frozen issue, but should I delegate to Peter as clerk while I troubleshoot a little bit? I'm so sorry.

[Danielle Evans]: Should we take a minute recess or?

[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, maybe those two. That way you hear all the testimony. Yeah, I'm so sorry. I'm going to start restarting now. Thank you all.

[Alicia Hunt]: We could take a two-minute recess. I think that would be great.

[Emily Hedeman]: OK. I really appreciate everybody's patience with that, the joy of technology. We had some hands up. Danielle, do you have the original order for those?

[Danielle Evans]: The order remains. So the next one is Mike O'Brien.

[Emily Hedeman]: OK. Mike, can you please state your name and address for the record?

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_22]: Sure, Mike O'Brien, and I reside at 1 Sinclair Road. I think I can appreciate the intention of the proposed shelter, education center. I can even appreciate not having a building next door that's not vacant as it's been for the last couple of years. I can even appreciate the developer looking for some return on his investment. for purchasing that building. But I would ask a couple questions, I guess. One, a little more clarity, and I apologize, I came to this meeting late, I didn't resume, but a little more clarity and transparency, I think, for developers to whether this was kind of the intention the entire time or was plan A, no go, and now plan B is now an attempt to get some return on the investment of purchasing the building next door. And to that end, it seems like this is a plan that hasn't been well developed, at least from what I've heard here on this conference so far. So, with the six month timeline I'd say, what exactly is the rush in terms of I'd rather see this, if it's going to get done get done right, rather than a quick turnaround here. And I know there's been a traffic study but there hasn't been a study as to the community impact. you know, be it property value, crime stats, et cetera, et cetera. Traffic studies all well and good, but I'm much more concerned about how this addition would affect the community overall. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Mike, for the feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Madam Chair, I just want to state that I believe that this is a new property owner. It's not the previous one. Director Hunt might be able to add to that. I just wanted to clear that up because I think that it's incorrect. I just wanted to clarify that. The next speaker on the list is Councilor George Scarpelli.

[Emily Hedeman]: Welcome Councilor Scarpelli. Please state your name and guess for the record.

[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, George Scarpelli 27 Butler Street so not only city council but also a neighbor. I've received multiple phone calls from many, many residents and, and again, the, the, the cause is noble, and I don't think anybody's going to deny that. but to the call that was on earlier of this being something positive for the quality of life of those people that will be attending that property. The quality of life of our residents I think are more important right now because again I think that The, the lack of communication from the butters and not understanding what's been happening. And then the speed of this after an election, I think, is really taking people off. And I think the biggest question that residents that have shared with me that they want to be to ask is. that the traffic study really hasn't been a thorough traffic study. I think this is where the city has to get involved, and we have to ask our traffic engineer to put a plan in place not coming from the people that are trying to develop the area, but something that is looking out for our residents. I think that'll be important. I think it's also important that that we understand what has tried to go in here in the past, and why it was denied in the past, because I believe that in the past, parking issues were a problem. And then again, I did lose the link, so I'm a little late if anybody mentioned it, but we're also talking about what the archdiocese is going to do with the rectory, with the cafeteria, the gymnasium, what happens if that's then sold off to another company. So I don't think the plan has really been vetted properly to the residents and understand the impact. Now, granted, like I said, it's a noble cause, but I think that is it truly beneficial for families that will be going in there when you're abutting the door into a street, into a parking lot that has masses, has funerals all times of the week. So I think there are things that we have to look at as a community, and I would, if we can, Emily, if we can ask the CD board if we can try to maybe table this to another meeting to really just for the transparency sake that all the residents that haven't been able to be part of this because they just found out about this just recently, I think would be important. I think that in fairness to everybody that's involved in the impact that is going to play, I think there are a lot of answers, especially with the traffic impact and the, you know, I listened to the attorney earlier and he spoke about that it's not going to be any people driving. It's not true. We know that. We know that and we need to get a better understanding of what the impact is going to be, especially around the neighbors that are above that, the location because there truly is no parking. I mean, we see it, and especially if there is a mass going on. So again, It is a noble cause. I, you know, if it was just like the methadone distribution center, it's a noble cause if it's in the right place. But again, I think this is we really have to look at our traffic to make a to make a feasible and smart decision and then making sure that everybody's involved in this decision when we talk about everybody, I mean, the neighbors. So again, I appreciate all the hard work you guys do. You're amazing. There's a lot going on. We're hoping that with our new zoning reform coming through, that's going to make everybody's life a lot easier. I thank you for your time, everyone.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Appreciate you joining the call. Emily Fishman. Hi, Emily. Please state your name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_35]: Hi, Emily. Thank you. My name is Emily Fishman. I live at 1 Chestnut Street. Also for the record, my spouse Ari Fishman is on the CBD, but I'm speaking from my own views. The abutters and neighbors have obviously voiced legitimate questions. I was a little bit surprised to hear the Councilor just now talk about whether a church would be a good neighbor for residents of this building. I feel like if we're concerned about that, maybe we're not discussing this in good faith But, you know, I have some information from my professional life as a teacher and from my personal experiences with folks who've worked in DV shelters. Funding for students does not fall on the receiving district when a child is placed in shelter. Residents of shelters do tend to be extremely thoughtful neighbors and very respectful of the area because the requirements of staying in shelter are very stringent and they obviously need to be there otherwise they wouldn't be. No one wants to be in a DV shelter. It's clear that there are important details to be worked out. I'm interested in Walid and what a couple other people said about the nature of this developer, it seems like there needs to be a lot more first-in-person conversations with folks in the neighborhood, both the abutters and the people a little bit farther out. A lot of us, especially today, coming off of yesterday, are worried about how to care for each other in a local way, given uncertainty about what's happening in sort of the bigger political picture, and not constantly pushing services and ways to care for community into other people's neighborhoods is how we do that. We want to have a community where there are resources for vulnerable residents. We can say we want this shelter, yes, but we need to hear more creative solutions for parking and pedestrian safety. But I don't like the tone that we support services for people as long as they're located elsewhere.

[Emily Hedeman]: 10 seconds. Thank you, Emily. Appreciate the feedback.

[Danielle Evans]: Daria Matos.

[Emily Hedeman]: Daria, please state your name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_13]: Hi, this is Darian Matos. I live at 54 Logan Avenue in Medford. I grew up on St. Francis Street, so I currently have family members that still are there. My question is, I have two questions actually. So under the Dover Act here, The children that will be in the building, I know some people have already brought this up, but will they be homeschooled under the Dover Act or will they be integrated into our school systems? I know that we are already overrun, as many people have said, so if it is under Dover, why wouldn't they be homeschooled there? My other question is, I happen to know that the interior of this building is in complete distress. Um, there is a significant amount of asbestos in the building. Um, so what is the remediation plan and the construction plan? I know you said you'd be up and running in 6 months. Um, so I guess that would be, you know, some information that would be important to know as well since it is. Um, asbestos. Um, and I'd like to also mention that, you know, I agree with Scarpelli, um, how he mentioned that, you know, this is a noble cause, and I do agree that there are, you know, many other locations in Medford that it might better be suited for. Um, the people that have all talked in favor of it don't live near here. Um, everyone's across the city. So, uh, I think, you know, just kind of reiterating that the parking is already a disaster. It is so hard to park there. I have two young children and to get to my dad's is, you know, it's such a headache already. And I think adding more people to this already congested neighborhood is not the correct location for this, again, noble cause. Thank you.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Dari. Appreciate the insight. And I see Councilor Scarpelli has raised their hand again. Do we have any other members of the public that would like to comment before we give Councilor Scarpelli the courtesy of a second comment as a councilor for the city?

[Alicia Hunt]: Madam Chair, actually I have one that a resident told me she couldn't speak out loud in her location, but she authorized me to read it and give her name and address for the record. Her name is Shalise Juliet Rowell, and her address is 35 Columbia Road in Medford. And she says, I'm a Medford resident, and I'm strongly in support of a domestic violence shelter in our community. As a child in Georgia, my mother volunteered at a rape crisis center, and I loved visiting a space that provided care and direct services to people experiencing sexual and gender based violence. I would be proud for Medford to provide a shelter for individuals and families experiencing domestic violence.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Alicia, and I appreciate their vulnerability in their comment. Any other written or submitted comments of the public?

[Danielle Evans]: We did receive an email that I put into your meeting packets, like this afternoon. I don't know if that individual was also in attendance tonight.

[Alicia Hunt]: I do believe that that was one of the residents who spoke this evening.

[Emily Hedeman]: That was my understanding as well. Councilor Scarpelli.

[George Scarpelli]: Thank you. I don't want to take long enough. Listen, I know we've had a tough 24 hours, whether you were for or against an override, especially what's happened nationally. It's been a tough, tough last 24 hours. So I just want to make sure that I clear something that a caller mentioned, that if I said anything that meant that I believe the caller said that the I said that the church wouldn't be good neighbors. I just want to make sure that I never said that I would never say that I think the church. I've been a person at St. Francis my whole life. And they've been accommodating to everybody and anybody. So I think they'd be great neighbors with anybody. So, again, just want to clear that up. I don't You know, it's it's it's too tough of a time right now to keep bringing up negativity. And if anybody took anything I said and something in a negative manner, I just want to make sure that I corrected that to make sure that we're all trying to stay positive and moving forward. So thank you, Emily. Appreciate it.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli.

[Alicia Hunt]: Madam Chair, I got one more direct message from somebody who said that they are not able to raise their hand. Humayun Morshed.

[Emily Hedeman]: We can ask you to unmute.

[wPYt766Eu-g_SPEAKER_08]: Hi, my name is Humayun Morshed and I live in 30 St. Francis Street. which is pretty close next street over. I definitely, definitely love to, I mean, oppose these proposals, because whoever's supporting, none of them live in this neighborhood. We are direct, I mean, we have to deal with this. We're going to be on the sufferer one. So because of this is very tight space, And also the concern is the noise. Think about the kids. I have three kids. And I'm thinking right now, that many kids, where are they going to go outside? Forget about any other places. I mean, in the summertime, they have to come outside. It will be a chaos, whole this area. So all my neighbors already raised great points, great concern. Only one thing I just want to say, this is not the right place. Thank you. Appreciate it.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. Um, who may appreciate your, uh, your comment, Danielle or Alicia, are there any other, um, first time commenters from the public? And again, if we encourage all feedback, um, you know, there's an email address that you can share feedback with that's been posted in the chat. Uh, so we'd encourage everyone to share feedback through that email address. If you have additional comments and have already spoken.

[Danielle Evans]: I don't see any hands raised of folks who have not already spoken tonight.

[Emily Hedeman]: Okay. Thank you, Danielle. So at this point, we're going to be closing the public comment period for this meeting. I'd like to give the applicant a response or an opportunity to respond to some of the comments that have been made, realizing that there is a significant number of comments. We'd like to hear some insights in response.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: OK, I'll do my best. First and foremost, this team is not the team who previously appeared before this city to propose luxury condominiums. And then I don't know if that team then changed their mind and said, well, in that case, we're going to do a sober home or we're going to do a shelter or whatever they're going to, that is not the person who's in front of you. That was some predecessor applicant who sold the property to my clients. my clients are coming in, this is their first proposal, so any animus directed towards them, some of the comments that were made towards them just in the last few minutes are unfortunate and inaccurate, first and foremost. Second of all, I'd love to debate the legal points that were made by the participants on this phone call. But I don't think this is the appropriate forum. I'll read you one one quote that might help people from one of the cases that I like that I just put my hands on. Teaching individuals a basic understanding on how to cope with everyday problems and to maintain oneself in a society to maintain oneself in a society is incontestably an education process. This is why, for example, sober homes would be a legal use here. Look, I live in a community. I used to be a city councilor a long time ago. We all live in communities. We understand that people have concerns about what's in their immediate midst. We get it. That is why there was a deliberate effort by this group to knock on doors and have conversations. I appreciate what Marge said. Marge said she wanted to get to know the neighbors a little bit better. She wanted to get this group to know this group a little bit better. This group agrees. This group wants to get to know this community better. I think what people will find is that it's the most dangerous word in the English language is them. Them. What people will find when they Dig into the issue of domestic violence and while he shared his own experiences and we appreciate that is that. people on this call and family members and friends and are the people who will be living in this property. And there are no properties like this anywhere because people don't want a homeless shelter in their backyard. Before this meeting, someone dropped a flyer to the different houses and said, please show up to stop a homeless shelter from coming into your neighborhood. Now I get it, people look at that, they get angry, they think someone's trying to put something over them and ruin their neighborhood. My clients knocked on doors and spoke to the abutters and asked if they might be willing, and not because we need parking. because there's a perception that we need parking. You've heard professionals who recently formed this company to work with us, and that's why that entity was fresh in the Secretary of State's office, not because we've created some elaborate scheme to somehow defraud the participants of this phone call to somehow bring novice people into this space to try to tell you that we want to pretend that we want to create a domestic violence shelter only so that we can bait and switch it and somehow sneak by the city of Medford that we're actually trying to build, what, a homeless shelter or build luxury housing, but we came in pretending So no, that's not the case here. You have seasoned professionals who've been in this work for decades, doing this work for decades. Taisha created an entity for this project here, the Halo House, to be the nonprofit entity that serves this community. The owners of the property, Andrew Litchfield and Steve Sueda, have own other types of this type of housing in their own capacity as real estate developers would own the actual facility and because of that there would be no tax break associated with it even though a non-profit is the tenant who rents the space out. And the goal here is to further the lives of these individuals who in many cases are the people that live in this very community. Let me try to hit some of the specific questions. I've mentioned the property taxes, they will be paid. Someone said that we're hiding the number of rooms, that before it was 40 and now it's 37. As I said, there are 37 rooms and three flex rooms for a total of 40. Those three flex rooms can be used as an office. They could be used as swing space. They could be used as a flexible space for the facility. So it's a total of 40 rooms. How many people will be in that room? Well, if you have a mother and an infant, that's gonna be two people in a room. If you have a mother and, as I said earlier, a kid, if that kid is, say, seven or eight, the kid will live in the room next door and there will be a door in between them. What is the total capacity of the building is a process that gets worked out between our architect and your building department. And your building department provides a number of what's legally allowed based on the construction level documents that are provided to your building department from our architect. Is the building handicap accessible? Of course it is. We have to meet the accessibility guidelines. This is a, I don't know, a million plus renovation that triggers a certain level of accessibility guidelines. Our architect fully understands that and comprehends that. Your building officials understand that. And there are different levels of that. This building is going to be completely sprinklered. those sprinklers will create a certain fire profession rating that currently doesn't exist in this building. Whether or not an elevator would be needed here, if an elevator would be mandatory due to some sort of handicap accessible, some AAA requirement, some accessibility requirement, then we would put elevators in there. But our understanding, our architect's understanding, who's very good, Eric Zacherson, does a lot of work in throughout Massachusetts, including the city of Boston, is does not believe that we need elevators in this space. We would otherwise put them in. You can achieve the accessibility guidelines by creating accessible units on the ground floor, which is what we're proposing, and then access to those areas on the ground floor. the fire lane, the other fire issues, the suppression systems, the upgrading of our systems. All of those things aren't something that we propose. Those are things that the Massachusetts State Building Code propose and the fire code proposes and that your building department enforces. And of course, we will have to comply with every single one of those things. But I think at the heart of this matter is this question of use. And when my client knocked on the doors of some neighbors to say, look, do you have this parcel that's sitting here empty? Would you rent it? It's a fair question. We're being asked at this meeting, we're being told at this meeting that this is all transportation matter, that this is all about parking and traffic, even though we've told you that in our professional experience, our clients do not have cars or bring cars. But we do see the value of having three or four spaces. It would be great to have that. We don't have that on this parcel. The priests didn't or the nuns didn't have that on that parcel. Yeah, they weren't driving places, but they had people coming there to help them to do things for the facility. Would be great to have it. The response that we received is that we would get parking if we agreed to do luxury condominiums. If we did luxury condominiums, then yeah, a deal could be had to create parking spaces, to use those parking spaces for this facility. But people don't want a homeless shelter next to them. That is the issue. That's what we're hearing. And I think it's so easy to say that this is a homeless shelter and to use that to stigmatize what's being proposed here. And that is exactly why we have laws on the books like the Dover Amendment that protect against these types of uses because of the prejudice that the use often entails. Will the kids go to school or will they have to Be homeschooled. The kids will have access to the school system. If the kid wants, if their parent wants to homeschool them, is that parent's right? Of course it is. There are parks in this community. Hickey Park is a park nearby. That's where these kids will likely go, and they'll be supervised accordingly. In fact, they'll be better supervised because of the resources that this facility has, in many cases, than in some of the cases that they're in right now, in an under-housed or an under-parent situation. Are they Americans or are they illegals? The need right now in this country is to provide a resource for battered women and their children. And I suspect that need is a worldwide need. I'll allow Ruth and Taisha to fill in the question on that question, to answer that question. No one's going to be thrown out of a shuttle bus. If the city doesn't want us to provide sidewalks on St. Clair, we won't provide sidewalk on St. Clair. The condominium did not provide a sidewalk on St. Clair. So I would think this domestic violence uh resource you know doesn't want to have to invest more money than it does that shouldn't have to invest it has no problem not creating a sidewalk on St. Clair if that's what the city wants us to do we will comply with whatever the city is asking us to do wants us to do a fire lane then there can be a fire lane there um there are certain requirements too and we're not suggesting that we're going to remove a fire plug or a fire hydrant, we of course would be fully compliant on all these things. I think that covers about about all off-site work. No one is going to be testing out commercial driving down St. Clair and up the other side streets. In many of these job destinations, the solar panel, those other types of things, that's why we have the shuttle. People will get on the shuttle and they'll be taken to these resources. Not all the resources are coming to us. Many, many are. But things like learning how to drive a commercial vehicle will not be done along the immediate streets of this community. They will be done in an off-site facility that we would send people to. I think, Tay, you should put that chat in the comment in the chat. And let me close just by turning it over to Ruth, if I could, or Taisha, to respond, because this is your life's work. You've been told that you've just set this up on a sham. I apologize to you for you having to hear that. I think you're entitled to a response.

[fZTCR91cjd8_SPEAKER_30]: So, Ruth, do you want to lead? I know definitely I have been dealing with and have housed hundreds of people. And the reason why I even formed the nonprofit is because this comes from my heart. I have worked with so many people and had to deal with situations like this, that it's better to house them, to control the environment, and to let the neighbors know that we're here and we care about them. It's not a ruse. We're not doing anything to profit because it's a nonprofit. You don't profit from a nonprofit. Even me as a tenant, I get a discount. versus if I was a profit to even rent the property. Everything from a nonprofit goes back into the nonprofit. I have partnered with other organizations fiscally to be my fiscal sponsors and to be my partners that have long successful rates. That's why I brought them here. I have Ruth on the line, which I will let her talk about her years of experience, but we're not trying to pull anything over the city of Medford. And Ruth, I will let you talk about everything else.

[SPEAKER_12]: Yeah, thank you, and thank you everyone for their testimonies. And I just, you know, I'm just taking it all in. So my name is Ruth Rollins. I've been working with community for over 30 years. I too am a survivor. I've been a domestic violence advocate for over 25 years and had the opportunity of running domestic violence shelters and supervising services. And I really just want to hold space for the people that had the courage on this call to talk about how they were impacted by domestic violence. And I pray that nobody on this call or their family member ever went through what domestic violence is. But I really wanna speak to the need. 35% of women and children have been impacted by domestic violence in their lifespan in Massachusetts. I understand major, major concerns, right? But what I heard is that, you know, I'll go back a little. In the last two years, domestic violence has tripled, tripled on the number of services, tripled on the number of people that have been impacted by domestic violence. There are shelters, but unfortunately, I would hate to be someone fleeing domestic violence in Massachusetts today. Due to immigration status, due to women being abused, due to men being abused, due to LGBTQ, you know, being abused, And that there are limited shelters that can support these families to the point that they're not even hotels that people can go in. So the need is there. And for me, there's been a lot of conversation in regards to and I say this with all due respect, not in my backyard, not in my backyard. But we may be the people, we never know when domestic violence hits our door, and we want to offer that same support as the support that we would need for our families. So I just wanted to share that. Safety is always, always, always a primary factor when you're working with domestic violence. Is it written out in stone? Is it perfect as of yet? No. It's always the safety of the person that's fleeing an abusive relationship and safety of the resident. So they have a whole plan that we're going to be working on in regards to working with the Medford Police, working with others that can support this, that we will succeed. In regards to services, my colleagues said a lot of different things. You know, Our first point of contact with services and support is to support and educate these survivors that are fleeing abusive relationships with trauma-informed care. So, with that being said, that's their first point of contact. So, it may be education. It may be tractor trailing. It may be, are people going to be pulling up in the parking lot? No. Our job is to empower them so they could be stable enough to break the cycle of violence for themselves and their children. There was a lot being said and I'm trying to cover everything, but in terms of program, it's on need basis. And it's not just, and when we talk about immigrants, yes, it's terrible. Domestic violence has no shade. I just want to say this, and this is based on all my years of experience. There is no shade. There is no race. There is, like, the goal is to support families so we can break the cycle of violence for their children. Is it perfect? No, but the need is there. And I challenge you guys to look into it in regards to services for domestic violence survivors. people are living in their cars, people don't have anywhere to go, people are living in an emergency room. So there's definitely a need. Is there some things that need to be ironed out? Most definitely. Is this a great opportunity to service women and children? And then if we really look up domestic violence or women's shelters, It's temporary placement. The goal is to stabilize them and to empower them so they can have long-term housing. And that's where all the programming will come in, all of the services would come in. So there is a lot of concern, I think. But for me, I really wanted to just speak to the need. I don't know about the parking. It sounds like it's a major issue. But I know the need is there. And that's what I just really want to speak to the safety and just the programming aspect of it. So I mean, that's all I have. But I just know I've been doing this a very long time. And I hate to say it and I say it with all due respect. We're in Boston and a lot of people from Method are coming to Boston to get services. So shame on us if we're not supporting those others as well. And it's dear to my heart. So I say that with respect. I say that with compassion and I pray that no one on this call have to ever experience going through a domestic violence and have nowhere to go.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: Well, Madam Chair, I'll pause there. I think we've given you the best we can. There was a mention about a gate. There's no gate that's swinging over anyone's property. That will not happen. Asbestos, anything like that, will have to be professionally handled if that's the case. Andrew Litchfield, Steve Suida, that's what they do. They're in the real estate industry. They deal with compromised buildings all the time. That's the work that they do. There's a process for handling that. and it'll be handled appropriately in concert with the Medford building departments and the appropriate public health agencies and what have you. I'll pause there, Madam Chair.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Michael, Ruth and Taisha. Appreciate your responses. I'm going to hand it over to Director Hunt.

[Alicia Hunt]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just actually I wanted to share one other piece of information for the board. It's less something that one would consider as part of your deliberation. So truly, I wanted to share it for the public. One of the concerns that I anticipated hearing were concerns about the schools and transportation and costs. So I actually reached out to our director of registration and transportation. She also manages all homeless transportation for the school system. And she said that Medford desperately needs a shelter. She is aware of families that are couch surfing in Medford, and it would be in very overcrowded situations that they do not They don't have a legal obligation to report if the child is not in danger. But there are people who could really desperately benefit from having a little bit more space and not being doubled, tripled up in families like that. And so I asked her about how that would impact the schools. And she said if there were school age children and they were homeless, then the way it works is that a parent would decide whether they want the child to go to the school system for the school, for the community where they are currently living, or the one that they were displaced from. Say it was somebody who had been living in Everett and was displaced, then the parent could ask to have them placed in either Medford or Everett. And then if transportation, if they ended up in Medford, that would just be just a regular student who gets regular transportation like everybody else. And if it was that they needed to be transported back somewhere, And the way it is effectively working today is that both communities share the cost of transportation for those students, usually vans, and that the state is reimbursing 80% of the cost. Sorry, she named a law for me, Vento something, but basically we get reimbursed 80% of the cost of those transportation.

[SPEAKER_12]: I just put it in a text.

[Alicia Hunt]: Oh, great, thank you. The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. And I just sort of thought that residents should have that information, even though it wouldn't be part of what the board would consider this evening, because I think there's a lot of misunderstanding or misinformation about that.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you, Alicia. I think we've as a board of have a lot to think about. Um, I believe that halo house can be a good neighbor. And I believe that all members of the public on this call are and have the intent of also being good neighbors. But what I'm hearing is that there's a lot of variables out there. that need to be worked out, as well as some community outreach, you know, beyond soliciting for parking spaces, which it sounds like, you know, that was some of the primary activity. I'm leaning towards a continuous continuance of this discussion to allow more time, but I do also want to open it up to the board for deliberation. The two questions that we're deliberating are, does this qualify as protected educational use under the Dover Amendment? And following that, what are reasonable regulations that should apply to this project? Should the requested relief from parking requirements and other dimensional standards be granted? What conditions of approval are needed to mitigate any adverse impacts of waiving requirements? So with that, I'm going to open it up to the board. for debate and deliberation. Annie, Ari, Adam, Peter.

[Ari Fishman]: I am going to think out loud, which is perhaps dangerous, but I think we've got it. I agree with many of the things that Emily just summarized. I do think that there is a strong case for this being a benefit to our community. I'm also hearing very clearly that there are substantial concerns about the details of the implementation. And I think that that's the role of a board like this is to create opportunity and to facilitate the collaboration of applicants and community to make something that's mutually beneficial for everyone. So a continuance to have that outreach to work through some of those details makes sense to me. I also have open but haven't been able to read because I was listening to this. As part of this discussion, kind of trying to do my own research on Dover Amendment. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm a research librarian. And it seems like what we've been told so far is accurate, but I think one of the benefits of a continuance is that we can confirm that with additional research. I don't, I think, yeah, I don't want to give up on this project, but it's clearly a lot more discussion to be had on how to make it work.

[Ayni Strang]: Thanks, Ari. I completely agree with Ari. I think that it's too important of a project not to have a continuance so we can discuss more fully some aspects of the project.

[Emily Hedeman]: Adam.

[Adam Behrens]: Yeah, I think I'd also just like to second those thoughts and maybe at the risk of also talking out loud a little bit. I think Michael Ross's point. of, you know, the purpose of an amendment like the Dover Amendment is because, you know, things like this belong in communities and there's often pushback from that. But I also think, you know, there's legitimate kind of concerns from the community. that outreach in time would build a better sense of trust between them. And without being a lawyer, and I think it's valid for us to do our diligence to make sure, yep, this does fall within Dover given the previous case law. my own kind of research on it and just looking at previous sort of cases and educational shelters, it seems likely that this falls under the purview of the Dover Amendment. But a continuance makes sense to not make something, especially, as folks have told, I think a lot of people are exasperated after the last day. We don't want to make a decision where we're tired We're sort of in whatever mood we're in. And then I think the other part is just kind of from the community outreach and trust, I've experienced just in different cities living next to these types of projects or facilities. I've never had anything but a very positive experience of them. I think they serve a very valuable role. And I think like the folks presenting, so I said, these are members of our community that oftentimes fall into a time of need. You know, and then the last point you know I think I don't personally feel prepared right now as a member of the board to, to really speak through all the tactical questions of, of the parking, and, you know, kind of the impact assessment and what exceptions would would would really be. like made there. And the thing I would sort of find helpful would just be a little bit kind of more concrete examples of similar projects like this, you know, just a little bit, just more concrete, like, like data points to the amount of traffic to expect. Again, from the effort, I think of like the mutual trust.

[Emily Hedeman]: Looks like Peter is also on the line. He is iPhone. I'm going to try to find him and ask to unmute. I see iPhone 5. We'll get the attendee list.

[Alicia Hunt]: There's an iPhone and an iPhone 5 guest. Madam Chair?

[Emily Hedeman]: I think it's just iPhone.

[Alicia Hunt]: I can ask him to unmute.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes.

[Alicia Hunt]: If you're, yeah. If you're dialed in, you would need to, is that Peter Calves?

[Peter Calves]: Yep, yep, that's me. Okay. Okay, sorry about that, had to change devices. Yeah, I think I do get a lot of the concern. And I do think there are, especially with the dimensional aspects, some real parsing that needs to be done to make sure that we understand what we're voting on and hopefully what we're approving. So I would... Well, I do think that at least my questions that I had earlier in the night about debt over applicability have been answered. I do think given other members concerned that anything that continues would be valid at this time. Okay.

[Emily Hedeman]: So,

[Ari Fishman]: Madam Chair, would it be appropriate for one of the members of the board to call a vote or to motion to vote for a continuance? I think we need to specify a date first.

[Alicia Hunt]: Right. Just so you're clear, you must continue to a date and time certain. So I'd recommend negotiating that with the applicants so that everybody can be present. And I think that it would be helpful if we could list a few of the things that we would want to have happen between now and then. Right. And I do want to say that our traffic comments were predicated on being a private way. And I would I do think that we need to figure out how to reconcile the state information that Peter had. We would welcome you to communicate with us offline with the local information that our traffic and engineering department had. because it really does make a difference into what we can and should ask of them if this is a public or a private way. And I'm very sorry that we couldn't, didn't manage to have that reconciled for this evening.

[Emily Hedeman]: So maybe we can summarize the information that we'd like for the continuance so the applicant can understand the scope. And then we can discuss dates. So I think we're still in board deliberations. Should we bring up a Word document to start drafting topics, Danielle?

[Danielle Evans]: I've lost my train of thought. I'm really tired. I was going to say that whatever meeting it's continued to, if we're looking for a sidewalk solution, I would like you know, finalize plans because it's difficult to put conditions on things that need to appear on plans because then it's open for interpretation and becomes hard to enforce. So I will add that the next meeting is going to be a very busy one. We have the tough storm site plan review and also the Mystic Avenue core district zoning amendment.

[Emily Hedeman]: What's the date of that meeting?

[Danielle Evans]: That's the 20th, just the next meeting.

[Emily Hedeman]: And what's the date of the following meeting, December 4. Okay.

[Ayni Strang]: I think December 4 sounds.

[Emily Hedeman]: We need to have the applicant confirm their availability. And I also think it would be good to kind of capture the scope of information we'd like at that next meeting, just so they understand, you know, is it a mountain? Is it a molehill? How much time do they need?

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: So our group would be happy to come to the December 4th meeting as a date certain. And what we would like to do is get with staff between now and then and work through the list that we could generate. And I would prefer to approach the board collectively with staff to have provided kind of the work product that we've come up with as a result of the comments that were brought here today. I think that there are legitimate comments that were raised. I think there were also some non-legitimate comments that were raised. And I think we have to be honest about that. And so I want to make sure that what we're being asked to do is in keeping with our rights as an applicant with this particular use.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yes, we do have a clear mandate for this board. There are certain items that are under our jurisdiction and other items that are not. So it is good to remain within those boundaries. That is your right as an applicant. So we will do that duty as a board to you as an applicant and also to the citizens of Medford. as a planning board. And I just got a question. Can we send more questions via email? Yes, please send any questions, any comments. We welcome and encourage them and thankful to everybody for staying on the line, providing their insight for this project. Thank you, Alicia. Sorry, Peter, go on.

[Peter Calves]: Yes, so just doing my third duties here on this. I've got a list of conditions. Danielle said something about finalizing the design plan and what we wanted to confirm the jurisdiction of St. Clair Street and what the transportation implications of that might be. And is there anything else that members of the board would like to see as condition for the continuing two days?

[Emily Hedeman]: So again, our regulations can be related to parking requirements, other dimensional standards, and then any conditions of approval that are needed to mitigate any adverse impacts of waiving requirements. So that captures a good amount of them. I would also encourage the applicant to address maybe some things that are outside the scope of this board, especially if there are photos or maps or other other pieces of information that will help the public understand some of your responses to these questions. I think that would be very beneficial for any future neighborhood relationships as appropriate. I did get a question through the chat, and this is something that I might need to float up to the city or it might be under the board's purview if the December 4th meeting is intended for the community and residents as well. The meetings are always open to community and residents, but I'm understanding that maybe there's an additional comment desire for that. Was that the question? Yeah, okay. Could we have another public comment period?

[Alicia Hunt]: Madam Chair, what is often done with particularly topics that are either long, big, or controversial is that you might say that you'd like to restrict the public comments to items that were not addressed at this meeting. So if they present new information and new things, then the public could comment on that, but that there would be no A reason for the board to hear the same comments that were already spoken this evening That they should restrict their comments to new information that becomes available I think that you could also contain that with if people feel that they didn't get to speak tonight But it's just they want to echo what's been here Please send us an email and then the board would have that that there are more people who feel the same way Yeah, but not that we would listen to 10 people say the same thing over and over.

[Emily Hedeman]: And just to clarify, you know, it was very helpful to hear the repetition of sentiments from the public this evening. So we really appreciate people coming on the line and, you know, sharing their their feedback and their expertise and their experience, along with the applicant sharing, you know, their, their vision for the site. So if One is, yeah.

[Adam Behrens]: One other question. We had the, we had the Dover amendment was the government was included I think and what Peter said. I think there was a comment from the public, which was also a valid comment. It's nice to get the lawyer's opinion, but I think as a council member, it would be nice to see the case law examples or the document itself, just independently triangulate so we as a board also concur with the lawyer opinion.

[SPEAKER_39]: uh just so we are also documents i mean i'm sorry to interrupt out of turn here ma'am chair through you but um the uh you know the the petition that we have a 24 page um you know granted some of that as an exhibit uh letter that we provided to the board that got into i must have missed the exhibit i'm sorry uh but maybe make a note um

[Adam Behrens]: that for the December 4th meeting, the board should explicitly go through the reference exhibit. And my apologies, Michael. I did not see the specific exhibit.

[ZQDZZh_VfdI_SPEAKER_40]: There's that Boston O'Neill report as well, nine pages. It's not just one little blip, as someone commented. So there's a pretty good deck of materials.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. I just see another comment about how much time will the community have to review material. We abide by open meeting law regulations, so I believe all meeting notices are posted at 48 hours in advance of meetings. And then we've shared a couple times the link to Let me see if I can pull it. The link to the applicant's information as submitted. So I can put that back in. Oh, I don't have it because I left and came back. Alicia, could you drop that link in again?

[Alicia Hunt]: Yes. Madam Chair, two items. One, if the board wants, I can request a formal written opinion from our lawyer. on the matters of this case, on it being a Dover. And the other is that the owners of the property, Andrew Litchfield and Steve Suda, would like to share their contact information with the public, since while they knock on doors, they said a lot of people don't answer. So I'm going to drop that in the chat for here. But actually, if they're amenable, then I will put we can put that into a small Word document in with the public files, contact information for the owners, if they would like us to do it that way as well for people to reach them.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah, and I'm the applicant for putting that information out there and being willing to hear directly from the public. And I'd encourage you to share any feedback or any progress with city staff as well as the board. Okay, cool. So thank you, Alicia, for dropping that in. I did get another question. Is the next meeting December 4th? That is the date that we're proposing to continue to. We have to do a formal motion. It sounds like the applicant is supportive of that date. Seeing some nods. Annie, did you have a comment or?

[Ayni Strang]: No, I would be happy to make the motion.

[Emily Hedeman]: Okay.

[Ayni Strang]: I would like to make a motion that on December 4th, we continue the discussion on this very important topic.

[Emily Hedeman]: And do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you, Peter. So the motion in front of us is to continue the document.

[Ayni Strang]: Discussions on the Hollow House?

[Emily Hedeman]: To continue the discussion on 21 St. Clair Road, a site plan review for a Dover amendment use to December 4th without prejudice. We're going to do a roll call vote. Jackie McPherson? Peter Calves? Aye. Ari Fishman. Aye. Sabrina Alpino. Adam Behrens.

[Peter Calves]: Aye.

[Emily Hedeman]: Annie Strang. Aye. Ben LaValle. Aye. And myself, Emily Hedeman, is an I for continuing. I do see some more comments coming through the chat. I would encourage the public to send those comments to the OCD website or share it with the applicant directly. They have made that very generous offer. So I would encourage members of the public to pursue those two methods.

[Adam Behrens]: Sorry, Emily, just one clarifying. In the Google Drive shared by Alicia, I think that was the Google Drive that I looked at and I had trouble finding the Dover Amendment document that Michael was talking about.

[Emily Hedeman]: Why don't we maybe work through that content?

[Adam Behrens]: Okay, I just wanted to call out because it seemed like that was a thing the public was also interested in.

[Emily Hedeman]: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that'll be a good thing to clarify. Thank you for bringing that up. Okay, so with that, we will see the applicant for 21 St Clair on December 4. We thank all members of the public for participating in the public hearing. It means a lot. This is a great way to be locally involved. So thank you. And we will move on to our next agenda item, which is approval of minutes. Let's just stick around for that fascinating discussion.

[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you, everyone.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. So I'd like to ask if any board members have any comments or suggested edits for the October 9th, 2024 draft minutes.

[Ayni Strang]: I do not.

[Unidentified]: I don't.

[Ari Fishman]: I move to accept them.

[Emily Hedeman]: Do we have a second?

[Ayni Strang]: I second.

[Emily Hedeman]: Thank you. So the motion in front of us is to approve the board minutes for the October 9, 2024 meeting. We're going to do a roll call vote. I'm just going to do it as I see people on screen. Annie Strang. Approved. Adam Behrens. uh approved yes peter calls approved re fishman approved um and the rest of the the board members are absent should i still go through their names no okay great thank you uh the next item on our agenda is zoning updates uh does the planning staff have any zoning updates that they'd like to share with us Approaching the 10 o'clock hour.

[Alicia Hunt]: I'm almost too tired to do that. November 20 is a public hearing. If you want to review any of that with me in advance, I'm happy to do that. We do anticipate trying to move forward with Salem Street pretty quickly in December as well. So, but I think that's none of that is new for you. You will see that it includes just a line that you have to have a green score. We are still working through the details of green score with the consultant. So that is actually gonna have to come kind of after the fact, but it'll come quickly in December too.

[Adam Behrens]: And that's just Mystic Avenue, Alicia?

[Alicia Hunt]: It is a complete rezoning of Mystic Ave. It also includes definitions that we've never used in our zoning before.

[Danielle Evans]: Do you want me to drop a link to- In the CD board file, you can find the language for the new Mystic Avenue corridor district along with the map. and the public hearing notes.

[Alicia Hunt]: So Adam, not the Google Drive that I was sharing to the public, but the one that would be in Danielle's emails too. Yeah, got it.

[Ayni Strang]: That's where I've been going, what Danielle sends and those files that she...

[Danielle Evans]: There's public facing files and then there's things that I provide to the board, like draft conditions, staff memos, things that are not the application materials. So to prepare for a meeting, definitely look at the folder that I send out.

[Adam Behrens]: but the, so I haven't created.

[Danielle Evans]: So I haven't created a folder for the next meeting yet. So it will be the public one in the city board filings because the public notice ran today and therefore all of that had to be revealed.

[Emily Hedeman]: Great. Any other business? I did get one other question. When the recording will be posted, do we post these recordings?

[Alicia Hunt]: This was live on TV. OK. So it just takes a short while for it to get rendered, and then it's up on the MCM site.

[Emily Hedeman]: OK. And that's Medford Community Media.

[Alicia Hunt]: Yeah, it's MedfordTV.org. OK.

[Emily Hedeman]: Great, thank you, Alicia. So if there's no other business, do we have a call for adjournment? I move to adjourn. I second. Thank you. I'm going to do as I see you all on screen. So the motion before us is to adjourn our November 6th meeting. This will be a roll call vote. Annie Strang? Aye. Adam Behrens?

[Ayni Strang]: Aye.

[Emily Hedeman]: Peter cops. I. Are you Fishman. I. And I am Lee had a man, and also an I, and I'm realizing I might not have I did the minutes approval myself.

[Adam Behrens]: He did not.

[Emily Hedeman]: I did not. And I. Okay, I was dying for that one. We can talk about it already. We have it. Yes. Well, thank you, members of the board. Thank you, members of the public, city staff. This was a very, very meaningful meeting and I appreciate everybody's energy and effort this evening. Have a nice night and take care of yourselves. Good night.

Emily Lazzaro total time: 1.85 minutes total words: 133	George Scarpelli total time: 4.85 minutes total words: 162