AI-generated transcript of Community Development Board 08-11-21

[Andre Leroux]: Good evening, everybody. My name is Andre LaRue. As chair of the Medford Community Development Board, I call the August 11th, 2021 meeting to order. Pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021, this hearing of the Medford Community Development Board will be conducted by a remote means. Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so by accessing the meeting link contained herein. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted and only public participation in any public hearing during this meeting shall be by remote means only. Some reminders, to participate during the meeting outside of the Zoom platform, questions and comments may be emailed to OCD at Medford-MA.gov, that's OCD at Medford-MA.gov, or submitted via phone to 781-393-2480. That's 781-393-2480. The meeting will be streamed live via Medford Community Media on channels Comcast 22 and Verizon 43. All votes will be roll call votes. So please introduce yourself each time you speak. I'd like to take a roll call attendance of the members. Let me call you by name and then just say present. Christy Dowd.

[Jenny Graham]: Present.

[Andre Leroux]: Blumberg. Deanna Peabody. And myself present chair. Just remain name myself here. That Great. So we have a small group of members today. We have a couple are out on vacation, but we do have a quorum with four. So if any, any votes that we take today would have to be unanimous. We have the option of continuing items to a future meeting if that becomes an issue. So I just want to give people a heads up about that. First item on the agenda is the approval of minutes from the July meeting. And any questions or comments, feedback, edits by any of the members about the minutes?

[David Blumberg]: Andre, this is David. Clearly, there was a lot of effort that was put into the minutes. I just haven't had a chance to go through them and give them the attention that they really deserve. credit to the city staff for putting as much into them this month as they did. I thank them for that. But I think at this time, considering as well, we have four members to continue that would probably be the best move at this time.

[Andre Leroux]: We have a motion to continue approval of the July minutes until the next meeting. Is there a second?

[Deanna Peabody]: This is Deanna. I'll second.

[Andre Leroux]: All those opposed, there'll be, I mean, in favor, I'll take the roll call. Christy Dowd?

[Jenny Graham]: Aye.

[Andre Leroux]: David Blumberg? Aye. Anna Peabody?

[Adam Hurtubise]: Aye.

[Andre Leroux]: And I'm an aye as well. So unanimously, the minutes, approval of the minutes are continued to the next meeting. Thanks, David. And thank you, Amanda and staff for those detailed notes, because they are really really good.

[Amanda Centrella]: All credit goes to Yvette on that one.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you, Yvette. Next item on the agenda is the request for permit extension from BJ's Wholesale Club at 278 Middlesex Ave and 0 Middlesex Ave. I believe we have Mark Vaughn of Reimer Brownstein, LLP representing BJ's, excuse me if I mispronounced that, you can correct me. And if you could, let's see if the staff can get you unmuted.

[afyYb4sUUnA_SPEAKER_13]: I am here.

[Andre Leroux]: Great. Thank you, Mark.

[afyYb4sUUnA_SPEAKER_13]: Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. It's nice to see you all again. It's been a while, but if you recall, I represent BJ's Wholesale Club in connection with their proposed redevelopment at their existing facility on Middlesex Avenue. Not to recreate history here, but we spent a lot of time about a year ago or so with the board getting special permit site plan approval for putting in a self-service fueling station and associated site improvements. ended up getting that permit from the board. I believe it was unanimous with one abstention, maybe. But since that time, we've been working through some other approvals. As you may be aware, we did seek a fuel storage permit from the city council, and that was denied by the city council. However, BJ has filed a an appeal of that denial and that's what the Superior Court and is working its way through the process so I think this is really just a housekeeping item if I could Mister chairman of the context that under your zoning ordinances. You do have a provision that a special permit. Granted under the provisions of zoning would lapse within one year. Including such time required to pursue or wait the determination of the appeal. referred to in section 94-38. If a substantial use thereof is not soon or commenced except for good cause or in the case of a permit for construction, if construction is not begun by such date except for good cause. So obviously we're not in a position to commence construction just given the ongoing appeal. So we have submitted a, I spoke with Alicia to request if we could just have the record document that the expiration for the special permit would not lapse for until a year after the full and final judicial resolution of the fuel storage permit. I think under the statute alone, it is considered told, but just from housekeeping and to avoid any ambiguity in the future, we thought the better course of action would just be to document things appropriately your board since you did spend a fair amount of time on this in the past, so thank you.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you, Attorney Vaughn. Yes, the board certainly spent a lot of time on this project. We appreciate all your good work on it. We were a little surprised by the events that happened afterwards. Alicia, do we need to take an actual vote on this?

[Alicia Hunt]: So I just wanted to comment that it's pretty, the request, the need for the request is pretty unusual. The request was, we sort of poked and said, well, what did Medford do last time something like this happened? And we didn't have that example. So we checked with our city solicitor, the city lawyer, and Paul Moki, the building commissioner, and they both said, this seems like exactly what that, that phrase good cause is for in the ordinance, but that it would be, it was unclear whether I should give that extension administratively or the board should vote. So we said, let's just bring it to the board and ask them to just vote to extend it or to toll it until the administrative appeal is resolved. So they would have one year after the resolution of the appeal to actually start construction.

[Andre Leroux]: It's unclear whether we actually need to approve it. So perhaps some motion along the lines of endorsing the permit extension would be appropriate. That'd be great.

[David Blumberg]: Andre, this is David. I have a question. Just to clarify, is the effect of the tolling, or what Mr. Vaughan is suggesting, is it one year after this issue that's in front of some judiciary? When that's resolved, is it one year from that date, or is it, for instance, one year from our decision, but the period is told, or it just doesn't run during the period of the litigation over the city council's denial. So if four months ran before the city council said no, would you have eight months afterwards, or do you have the full 12 months after that decision comes back?

[Andre Leroux]: I'm an attorney myself. I don't have that answer, but go ahead, Attorney Vaughn. I'm sure you have an opinion.

[afyYb4sUUnA_SPEAKER_13]: Yeah, respectfully, we would ask that it be a year after the resolution of the appeal, just so that we would then have sufficient time to mobilize and be able to move forward. So if that would be the request, which I think makes sense, because we're probably not going to be in a position to just put shovels in the ground the day after the resolution.

[David Blumberg]: Okay, and if I could follow up then.

[Andre Leroux]: Yes, please. And also, do you have any concerns with that, David?

[David Blumberg]: I guess it sort of makes sense. It makes sense to me if it's all sort of tied into the same approval. I could definitely see that. I guess my follow-up to Mr. Vaughn was just, are there other potential hurdles like this that BJ's is anticipating facing after this issue is resolved, presumably in your favor? Could we see this issue again, or do you think this, after this point, you're pretty close to being able to go forward with the project?

[afyYb4sUUnA_SPEAKER_13]: Yeah, I think that that was the only permit that we had remaining, Mr. Bloomberg. We did end up getting a superseding order of conditions for the wetlands filing, so I don't believe that there's other permits and approvals out there that would be problematic in that regard. Okay. Thank you.

[Jenny Graham]: This is Christy. I just, I hate to complicate things more, but I was the abstention in the original approval. So just in terms of correct process requests, can I participate in a recommendation tonight on this?

[Andre Leroux]: I don't see why not. I think it's a separate vote.

[Jenny Graham]: Okay. Just wanted to make sure. I just didn't want to invalidate anything. You know, I did make a recommendation. Yeah.

[Andre Leroux]: Any other questions or is there a motion on the floor to endorse the permanent extension for a year after resolution of the appeal?

[David Blumberg]: Andre, David. I'd like to present a motion to endorse the requests to provide one full year following judicial determination of the city council denial before our decision lapses. I probably said that wrong.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you, David. Is there a second?

[Deanna Peabody]: I'll second.

[Andre Leroux]: Roll call vote. Christy Dowd?

[Deanna Peabody]: Aye.

[Andre Leroux]: David Blumberg? Aye. Deanna Peabody? Aye. And I'm an aye as well. The motion unanimously passes.

[afyYb4sUUnA_SPEAKER_13]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and board members. And again, I hope you enjoy the rest of the summer and appreciate your time. Thank you. Same to you and best of luck. Thank you. Okay. Bye-bye.

[Andre Leroux]: Next item on the agenda is a public hearing for a special permit site plan review application for 23 Sycamore Avenue. I'll read the public hearing notice now. City of Medford. Medford Community Development Board shall conduct a public hearing on Wednesday, August 11th, 2021 at 6 p.m. via Zoom remote video conferencing relative to a special permit site plan review application submitted by Oxford Properties Group, DBA 23 Sycamore owner LLC to perform partial demolition and interior renovations of a building at 23 Sycamore Avenue to be occupied as a research and testing facility. This property is located in an industrial zoning district, and therefore the proposed use is allowed at this site. A copy of the application may be viewed in the office of planning development and sustainability room 308 or on the city's website at www.medfordma.org under the planning department sub tab. And you can click on current CD board filings to find that. I believe we have a proponent is here represented by Valerie Moore of Nutter McLennan and Fish LLP and can initiate the presentation with her team. If she could be unmuted.

[Valerie Moore]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Before proceeding with the hearing, because we are down a few board members tonight, can you confirm for me whether Medford has adopted the Mullen rule such that an absent board member could watch the recording of this and then be able to participate in a subsequent hearing?

[Andre Leroux]: Alicia, do we have that?

[Alicia Hunt]: That's a citywide adoption. that has been adopted. I know other boards, I have experience with other boards doing that. I believe this board has done this in the past as well.

[Valerie Moore]: Thank you very much. With that, I think we are comfortable going forward then. I'm Valerie Moore from Nutter, McLennan & Fish, and I'm here tonight on behalf of Oxford Properties with their proposal for the redevelopment of the site at 23 Sycamore Avenue. 23 Sycamore Avenue is an existing cold storage warehouse that was constructed in the late 1980s. As part of this proposal, we'll be in the rather unusual position of taking a currently non-conforming building and making it more conforming by taking down parts of it that currently exceed the allowable lot coverage and exceed the allowable setbacks. on the property or before the board this evening, seeking a site plan, special permit, because we are proposing to change the use of the facility from the cold storage warehouse that it's been for the past several decades into a current good manufacturing practices facility. There's no other zoning relief required. So this will be the only relief that's required for the project to move forward. And with that, I will turn it over to Matt Haverty from Oxford Properties to tell you a little bit more about them.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Hello, team. I'm not sure. Do I need to be unmuted? Can you guys hear me?

[Andre Leroux]: Oh, we can hear you.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Oh, great. All right. Well, thank you very much, Valerie. And thank you, everyone, for allowing us to present to you today. We're very happy to be here in front of this board and to be working with the city of Medford. So far, the experience has been very collaborative in communication and we've appreciated every step of that process. Oxford Properties is very excited about what potential this site has and like Valerie mentioned, it is a little atypical in the fact that we actually want to make the site a little better from how you actually experience it in terms of taking away square footage and trying to make it more of a functioning site that works for these purposes. Just quickly, we have a couple slides here. We'll talk a little bit about Oxford real quick, and then I'll talk a little bit about GMP facilities, but I don't want to bore you guys, so I'll cut through kind of a couple of the slides quickly. They're a little dense. If you guys have any questions, obviously ask me at any time, but I don't want to bore you. So we usually leave with the fact that Oxford Properties Group is actually wholly owned subsidiary of OMERS, which is the Ontario Municipal Employee Retirement System, which has over 500,000 municipal employees in Toronto area with their retirement plan. So we always talk about the pension promise and what it means to have long-term investments, to hold those investments and really to create value within that over the long-term life of the property. We have over $70 billion of assets globally, 150 million square feet through a mix of multifamily, life science, office, retail, industrial, hotels, Our original headquarters is Toronto and remains our main headquarters. Our North America headquarters and the man that runs North America is out of our Boston office, which is where we are all out of. But we have offices across the globe in Sydney, Singapore, Luxembourg, and London. We can go to the next one. As you can imagine, As many have started to look at, life science has really been a focus for us for actually a long time. It's been relatively infancy compared to some others that focused on that for the last 25, 30 years. But we really started to get into it and put a lot of capital behind it in 2016. And we believe it's very similar to how we run our office assets in that we believe in creating an ecosystem in our assets. We believe that you know, it's not just important to have these large companies that sit in these spaces. You need to start with the incubator spaces, create opportunities for these young companies to get in, to grow into other areas, whether within your portfolio or others, to make room and try to create that kind of culture around what they talk about here is a lot of, you know, like campus style things in life science. And that's really what we do on all of our different, and all of our distant asset classes. That's what we truly believe. So in 2016, we started with some, you know, debt financing and biomed. 2017, we bought a property in Boston that we're developing as 350,000 square feet of R&D lab. In 2019, we started picking up more of the lab product, we bought 42 acres in the seaport. We are in the middle of doing master planning on that right now that would be currently contemplated for 50% of the 6 million square feet to be some form of life science company use. But we also, in the short term, we've done a lot of R&D uses in the current buildings. And then we've been really focusing, kind of like I mentioned before, this ecosystem that we're trying to create is that You know, you get with the R&D folks that start early, they start testing some of their science, they start manufacturing it in a small component inside their R&D labs, but then when they start really breaking through, they need to go to a place that is either outsourcing GMP, like good manufacturing practice production, or they need to create big facilities for themselves to do that. So we believe that by bringing those closer together and creating this, like we talked about an ecosystem of R&D, GMP, it really benefits everyone in the process. So these are just a sampling of projects that we have across the globe and that we've been running for quite a long time. So we can go to the next one. So GMP facilities, you'll hear this term used a lot. The real term that they like to be, you know, if you get into the scientist side of it, is really current good manufacturing practices. And the reason they say that is that the current part is that these practices change significantly through different evolutions throughout the year. And you always have to design to the current good manufacturing practice level. So typically anybody that does drugs, biologics, medical devices, and other therapies for any human use where they are manufactured, that's these facilities. Just a kind of interesting note, something that we learned while learning more and more about this product over the last five years, even if it's something like a cosmetic, that says that they have proven that they can reduce wrinkles or age-defying type cosmetic, they need to be produced in a current good manufacturing facility. So just kind of interesting that anything that says there's a benefit to your life or to your, by using the product, it has to be done in accordance with these regulated under 21 CFR 210. The FDA regulates, has the right to inspect them at any time. And then if you are manufacturing to other countries, say France, you have to actually abide by their CGMP regulations in addition to the USA's. These typically range from early clinical to launch and manufacturing. So just a quick kind of synopsis. Phase one is first in man. It's this very small group of patients that people are just testing their science on. That does not happen in the type of facility that we are showing you today. Phase two, you're typically getting to hundreds of patients. It's again, you're basically taking the highest standard of care that is currently done to treat this, what you're trying to solve for, and you're comparing it against that. And then you get into dosing, which is still done typically in a small pilot GMP facility inside your research and development office, where it's really up to thousands of patients. But when we come in these facilities that are really a CGMP facilities, it's the launch in commercial manufacturing. So this is when somebody has got approved, they need to build a facility. It takes typically a year to just about a year and a half to get them commissioned after they've been built. So make sure that they actually are adhering to these practices and then they're distributing large doses. Next slide. So how are they different? You guys have started to see a lot of life science R and D facilities come your way. These are slightly different in the fact that they are utility intensive and they require high reliability. So, you know, in a lab, a typical lab, you may have 15 Watts per square foot for power that is needed only on that small portion of lab that is in that building. Whereas in the building like this, you'll have 25 Watts per square foot. So you have a significant amount of power that's required. you need dedicated security access control. Those are similar, but where it differs is the lockers, the airlocks, the clean rooms. They are very specific about separating, even within the building, what is the clean area. So when we talk about these buildings, there was an interesting quote in the city of Boston. I had a meeting last week and there was an interesting quote that these buildings are actually cleaner than any other building in the city, like for the entire neighborhood, because they are required to follow certain practices within the building that don't allow it to get outside of these clean rooms. and then there's more layers between that and the outside world. Highly trained staff, waste is closely managed, and they're cleaner than any lab. So they're classified as cleanliness, which is a high level. The benefit of GMP tenants is an increased job market. So we talk about high quality jobs with educated personnel, but there's also the significant impact of the blue collar workers, right? The people that you're working with the scientists, but they are working in the manufacturing components of this facility. So it really has a good benefit to the local job market. Good neighbors, no noise, and we'll show you why, low odors and low emissions. These companies are focused on health. They're trying to solve for many of the health issues that are out there today. And they like to make sure that that resonates with the people that they have working for them. So they try to provide facilities that are a step above in terms of health and well-being. And then always they want to have extra potential, right, for expansion. So you see these clusters that start to come up. They want to have opportunities to grow locally so that they don't have to, you know, really jump around and go to different job, you know, workforces. So I think it's great. So some of the things you'll see what SGA will present shortly is that the design features are a large floor plate that can be very flexible. They have ever-changing technologies, a very tall volume. So at this building, we have 40 feet clear, which is what makes it desirable. And what happens is, and one of the great benefits of the neighborhood is that they like to house all of their equipment for these units and for everything inside the building. So if you can imagine a 40 foot high building 20 feet, we're going to put a mezzanine and there'll be actually units that are standing in there instead of adding units to the rooftop because they want to have quick maintenance to get right to them. Any lost minute is significant loss in productivity and potentially a loss of their science. So they want to have those units inside the building if possible. So that's very important to them. Sustainable features are really important to them. High performance envelopes. You know, we have critical components going on in there. Structure, you'll see this with everybody, but large column spacing, even larger than what you want in the R&D world. You want more than just the 33, you'd like to have larger than that. Flow loading, they like to have at a minimum 150 pounds per square foot. And then floor vibration, typical like a lab building, they would want to have good floor vibration ratings. So on the MEP side, like I mentioned, they have dedicated recirculating clean room air handling system with HEPA filters, and the room is pressurized. So essentially, when you walk in, you have to be, anything that goes in, I guess I would just say it's the most sterile equipment. When you see these people, and SGA will talk to it, it's an extremely sterile silence. And then they have standby power that is required to make sure there is no interruption and no loss of product. What you typically see, and SGA will talk to this, is raw materials are brought in, They go into material storage, and they go to material prep. They go through a clean corridor. Before they enter the clean room suite, the return corridor is actually clean as well. And then they go into package and labeling, and they ship out. And one of the benefits of what we have at 23 Sycamore is a significant amount of loading docks that allows for this separation to be even more pronounced. So good moments for that.

[Adam Hurtubise]: Next slide.

[SPEAKER_15]: Sorry.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: And then why here, right? So obviously Boston and Cambridge, the Seaport and Cambridge are really booming in terms of research and development. And what we find is that the CEO headquarters really wants to be within 60 minutes of a car ride to get to their GMP facility or CGMP facility. We have a lot of developments that we've got ongoing in the 128-495 belt, but what we really believe is that Medford and the surrounding cities locally to Boston are much more attractive. And I think if you look at even, you know, today in the newspaper at Boston Globe, and we've confidentially had some talks, but Greenlight Bio, a Medford company, right, is a research and development company that just had a huge breakthrough in the amount of science they will be able to do in the near future. You guys have seen companies that have been growing within your city, We want to provide them with the outlet to stay within that city or at least be close if they're in Somerville or Cambridge. We want somebody to be able to choose Medford as a place that, you know, when I leave my office at 125 Summer in Boston, it takes me seven minutes to get out of my car at 23 Sycamore. And that's something that none of these CEOs have, that proximity. So that's why it's really important for us to look into these cities. And Medford is quite honestly, We talked to Victor and his team before. Bedford is one that is very high on our list. We consider it to be a diamond in the rough right now in this world. And we think it's a perfect opportunity for it. So John, maybe I'll turn it over to you to go through the real details.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Thanks, Pat. We were going to start outside.

[SPEAKER_19]: You start the site for us. Jump in there. Next slide please thanks thanks John. My name is Ken staff here. The civil engineer working in this project. And so try to get you familiar with the site. The sick more of his off of Riverside. And 23 sycamore is located just about mid block. In to the east is the and I was a Bush facility. and the rest of the neighborhood is generally industrial. The site itself is about 3.3 acres. Much of that is the main site covered by the building. So as Valerie said, we don't currently meet the coverage, lot coverage allowances, and by demolishing portions of the buildings, we'll bring that into compliance. The other portion of the site is along the railroad right-of-way that used to serve this, site here. So that's a railroad spur that served the site and part of it serves the Anheuser-Busch, but that extends to the north from the site and is included in that 3.3 acres. We're not planning to do anything with that rail spur and we are trying to do our best to stay outside of that. I think there's some other photos, John, if you want to go through those. Next slide. So these are just some photos showing the existing site, and I think this one does a pretty good job of showing, go back one, showing the portion of the building that's gonna be demolished to make way for the parking lot for the site. So yeah, right there, John. So if you're looking at this, this is the older portion of the building with the four loading docks and some small office space up front. This is built right up to the abutting property to the north, right up against that fence line. And this portion will be demolished right beyond that brick building. The taller facade in the rear is the newer cold storage facility, which is to remain in place. So the existing footprint on site, the building is about 85,000 square feet. The building, the portion that they're gonna demolish, it will be demolished. It's about 25,000 square feet. And it's gonna open up the site for parking. So as, as Matt said, we're really trying to make the site more functional as a facility here that'll service the community and the folks working here. So I want to go ahead and jump ahead to the site plan itself.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, I'm sorry. It's okay. This is jumping around on me a little bit, so let me just try to advance you to the site plan.

[SPEAKER_19]: Yeah.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Just some of the existing photos that Ken was describing.

[SPEAKER_19]: I think one thing you'll see from those photos is that the site is pretty well built out to the edges. And what we're trying to do as part of this is kind of pull it back, give ourselves a little bit more breathing room with the abutting properties with Sycamore Ave and try to open up and create a better project altogether. So here's the current site plan. This has been updated since the original submission based on just the progress on the project itself and then responding to comments from planning staff and city staff, various different comments on the plans themselves. So as I said, to the north of the building, the left side of the plan here, to the north of the building, that's the portion that'll be demolished to make way for the parking lot, and it'll create the access point to the building as well, because there's really, there's no real entrance, and John can talk to that a little bit more, but there's really no entrance to the facility. So we're looking to create about 100 parking lot, or 100 space parking lot, which will have one-way circulation through the lot, clearly defined by the arrows, counterclockwise through the site, one entrance in, one entrance out, that'll provide decent circulation into the site, The parking, 100 spaces, would allow for up to, based on the city zoning, you know, you'd require one space for two employees. So that would allow up to 200 employees. And I think John had prepared a memo kind of stating that that would be the maximum you'd see here. It'd actually be a little bit less than 200 employees. So there's more than adequate parking to service the facility in those who'll be working here. The entrance to the site will be building itself is is tucked back into the site a little way so we tried to create connection to the parking lot to Sycamore Avenue to bring folks into the site so there's pedestrian connections from Sycamore Avenue to the site. And connecting to that to that entrance. Some of the other improvements I think we've looked at is and this is again some since we've submitted the plans have been some updates to the site plans. And we're just trying to improve upon it. So one of the things that we looked at was the original plan, the parking was pretty close to Sycamore Ave and it was really tight. There wasn't much room we could do with anything for landscaping or buffering for the parking along Sycamore Avenue in the new parking field. Part of that was as a generator, existing generator that is needed for the site. We work through and are relocating that generator into one of the loading bays, because as they said, we have plenty of loading bays here. You know, the existing cold storage facility had 12 loading bays. There'd be eight remaining in the portion of the facility that we have. That's still more than what's needed. City requires three per zoning. We're going to provide six. So by moving that generator into the loading bay, It allowed us to do some things up at the Sycamore Ave. Driveways to enhance and improve the entrance experience. And I'll let Nicole talk about that a little bit later. Some of the changes that I think we've made as a result of comments back from various departments is, at least from the layout perspective, We've provided additional signage noting the one-way circulation. We've added in some electric vehicle charging station and parking spaces. We've added two spaces for electric vehicles. And one of the things that kind of changed when we relocated that generator was the loading dock area did not need to be as wide as it is. So today, If you look down Sycamore Avenue from the southern edge of the loading dock to the northern edge. There's just a sea of payments over a 150 feet from from edge to edge. We're able to you know in the original plan to reduce that down to about a 120 feet wide and we're able to reduce it even further down to about a 100 feet creating a little bit tighter. Curve cut there but at the same time also creating additional screening and landscape potential across the front of the building in these locations. And it also helps shorten up the pedestrian crossing through the loading dock area, which we've shown at the request, shown a crosswalk that's a little bit more visible than what we'd shown originally. So the ladder type crosswalk to get pedestrians to and from. And I would say that the other thing we've been able to do is create a sidewalk all the way across our frontage to help connect to the existing sidewalk that kind of ends at the Eastern, sorry, East Boston Savings Bank site. And we carry that across our frontage. So basically there's now a sidewalk that extends all the way down Sycamore Avenue. You know, as we head South or to the right of the plan, we've eliminated the parking field that was in front of the building at that location. There was about eight spaces there. not very effective for us given the location, the building entrance. And so we were able to take this area and as Matt said, there's a very utility intensive development. And so We've been able to reconfigure some of the utilities and some of the comments we received from the departments were, you know, focusing on sewer water and making sure that we were providing the right configurations for each of those. And the plans have been updated to reflect those comments to address the sewer and water issues. There's also, yeah, so we can flip to the plan. There's also a need for an upgrade in electricity service to the site. There'll be additional transformers on-site feeding from the existing utility lines feeding the site. We said the upgrade to the water system, new sewer lines, and a new gas service to service the site. There's also, because of the lab facility or that component, there's a need for gases and so there's a there's there will be tanks located at the front of the building. And these tanks are typical with lab spaces. They'll be, you know, oxygen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen, all things that are used in the lab. And they'll be stored there. We've worked to, you know, try to mask those as best we can, push them up against the building, meeting some of the minimum setbacks to the building, and creating a screen wall across that frontage, and then opening up some area between the screen wall and Sycamore Avenue for some landscaping. And again, I'll let Nicole kind of dig into that a little bit deeper. And then last but not least, the stormwater, you know, the site has existing stormwater, much of the building flows to, much of the existing building to remain flows to the south plan right here and is discharge into a swale detention system and is treated. So now the portion of it discharges to a detention system in the loading area. So then we need to, what we needed to do is look at the new parking field. So it's no longer rooftop, it's parking. So it's a little bit more, you know, potential for stormwater treatment. So we've incorporated an infiltration system that collects the runoff from the parking area and provides treatment up to an inch through infiltration. We have some preliminary numbers on the infiltration rates of the underlying soils. The actual location of the system is in the building. So until that building is torn down, we were not able to do test pits in there to get the confirmation. But everything's been designed with the lowest case. the lowest potential infiltration rates, you know, allow for infiltration. So we're, we're treating over an inch of runoff from that parking area before it discharges out to the Sycamore out of drain system. And so that, that, that meets the MS4 standards in the city of Bedford standards for treatment. And so that's, you know, a brief overview on the, the site plans themselves. I hope I captured all the different changes that we've made as a result of the peer review comments, which I think were helpful. So with that, I'll turn it over to John. No, I'm sorry. I'll turn it over to Ryan so we can talk a little bit about traffic.

[HK3G1-bENjA_SPEAKER_06]: Thanks, Ken. Hi, everybody. My name's Ryan White. I'm a senior transportation engineer with VHB, and I led the transportation effort for this project. I want to give you a very brief overview of the traffic and parking analysis that was done to support this project. Really, as part of this project, we completed and submitted a transportation impact study to the engineering division. This has been reviewed. and appropriate updates, as Ken just mentioned, to the site plan or responses to those comments were submitted. The change in building use is expected to produce a slight modification to both the number and types of trips to the site, really, as it changes from a warehouse use to a manufacturing use. And I do just want to note that the traffic counts that were used as baseline conditions for this We're all taken from non-COVID historical accounts to take out any influences of the last 18 months or so. Overall, the project is expected to have a minimal impact on the area roadways. producing about 20 net new trips to the area network during the peak hour, so about a trip every three minutes or so to the overall area network. While this is an increase in the total number of trips generated by the site, due to the change in the use of the site, the number of truck trips are expected to decrease from the existing use that's on site, and we are confident that the six loading bays that are proposed will be able to accommodate the expected load. And then as Ken mentioned, all parking will be accommodated on site with the expanded parking lot that is provided. However, as mentioned by all the changes to the site plan with the bike racks that are provided with the new sidewalk that's provided on the sidewalk connection to the front door of this building and the enhanced crosswalks, I think all these changes are really meant to promote the use of alternative modes to the site, although we've assumed a worst case condition in the analysis where everyone does drive. the proponent is very, very much interested in promoting the use of those alternative modes, as Todd had mentioned, in a side of making sure that people that do want to ride bikes or take transit to this location do have the ability to do so. And with that, let me hand this over to the architects to talk about the nice renderings and design of this building.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Hey, Ryan, just to add on that a little bit, you know, Oxford is very committed to sustainability and many different opportunities to make it so that people are using their bikes to transit. Much like these companies, we are, I would say, at the forefront of those in Boston and globally. So what we propose here is really the minimum of what we intend to do. We expect to do more with that tenant. We want to encourage them to do more, but just want to let you know that that's top of the mind as well. I think when we first looked at this property in the beginning, You know, we looked at how it had like some sidewalks that weren't continuous and things like that. Those are very important to us. So I just want to make that clear that we share your same concerns and we want to make sure that we're bettering the property that we have. Sorry, go ahead.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Thank you, Matt. And thank you, everyone. My name is John Sullivan, architect with SGA, with Architects for the Project, working alongside Oxford and the project team. You know, excited to share some of the concepts that we've been able to develop collectively. And I was just gonna start off, I know we've shared some existing imagery, and I think it's important, again, to just clarify, start with showing the building in its context, and really highlighting, if you can see my cursor, this portion of the building being demolished. So the building in its current form really takes up almost the entirety of the site. This will be demolished, leaving about a 60,000 square foot footprint. you know, which we think has great bones and, you know, really lends itself to this use in the right location. So, you know, a lot of potential and Ken had described, you know, some of the edge conditions here that are, you know, it's a lot of pavement. There's really no delineation between, you know, public realm and, you know, in the edge of the site. So we have some exciting landscape concepts to share as well. terms of the building itself. This is just an existing, you know, an existing plan of the of the building building in its current form again it's called storage warehouse. You know this this portion of the building here to the page to the left of the page is you know, is coming down, which leaves us, you know, it's rare probably that you see buildings coming in to become smaller in that way from a footprint standpoint, but it leaves us with a really good square, with a really good floor plate for, you know, for GMP use and just wide flexible spaces, you know, to allow the science to occur. So just to try to highlight the demolition strategy. And then looking at, you know, how we're thinking about the plan, you know, so we're trying to make this building, you know, very attractive to a tenant that, you know, that will see the potential in this space and see this as a place where they can, you know, achieve their scientific mission. So the floor plate itself is really meant to be very wide open and very flexible. You know, this is a big cold storage warehouse, so it's like that in its current form. And that's something that we intend to preserve. And then we'll add in, we'll insert structure to support some of the mechanical uses that will happen within the building. But I think it is important to highlight a little bit of what Matt talked about in terms of how material moves in and out through the building and where some of the uses occur. So again, we have the six loading docks that are being maintained along the street. And that lends itself to having kind of a central place where, you know, material can come in, and then it goes through a very strict process before it enters into really the center zone where the clean rooms will occur and that's where the research and the production will happen. And then material comes out, you know, again through a very controlled process back into know, an exiting load series of loading docks and then out of the site. So it's really towards the middle of the plan here is where the clean rooms are and that's where the production happens. There's some warehousing space. The loading dock is, you know, is important in terms of its location. And that really leaves the east side of the site or the area to the north available for office use. And there's going to be workers that are doing work in the clean rooms that have space, you know, office space to return to that we think is going to happen here. So Again, the building has, you know, it's very strong from a structural standpoint. It has great open column bays. It has a lot of height, and it really does lend itself to this use. This facade, by way of the demolition, will need to be repurposed, so we have some images to share there. But we're also intending to add in windows along different edges of the building to support the use inside. And again, this is our main entrance that you'll see. And then we showed a second level plan so this is a little bit of a mixed mix plan to Matt's point what's unique about these buildings and different from a typical lab building is that you know they're high volume spaces but within that within that space there's a floor added to support all of the mechanical needs that the tenant will. be providing. It's specific to their use, but what they look for is a wide open space in this mezzanine level to provide their specific controlled mechanical equipment within the building. So that's what you see here in this gray zone. And then what's left up above is also a second level of office space. Again, this may flex a little bit depending on the tenant's exact needs, but we feel like this is really flexible for the types of companies that will work here. And then just running around the building. So, you know, what you see on the upper elevation is, you know, what you would see from Sycamore Ave. So it's, again, it's a much smaller building compared to what it is currently. But this is really a cleaned up version of that front facade. And the goal is really to, you know, provide a coating, clean it up, really treat it with landscaping and screening. And again, just, you know, respond to how the building is now organized. The main opportunity for facade intervention is really along the north facade, which faces the parking lot. So we have a rendering to share of this facade, but this facade is entirely new. We're adding in windows in some of the science space, but also in some of the office space. This is a main entry where we have, you know, a larger glassy element to really welcome people to the site and express it in a way that speaks to science and speaks to technology. And then, you know, through, you know, material and color, you know, really a way to break down this longer facade into something that we think is very welcoming as people are going to approach the site. And then just moving around the other sides of the site again, this is an existing building so these interventions are meant to be, you know, minor in a way, but by way of the program inside of adding in this is the. This is the east side of the site, kind of facing the rear of the site from Sycamore Avenue. And by adding in the office space on two levels, that gives us an opportunity to punch in some windows, provide some vertical elements. It really does provide a rhythm around this back facade. Again, this is meant to facilitate the use, but also to improve the existing building. And then some of that language carries along to the side of the site. So, you know, minimal interventions but we think positive ones, and then on the north side of the site that's where we know that's where we really had the opportunity to create a new, a new feeling for for this building so that's what you see here, you know, this is, you know, gives you a sense of. the new facade that faces the parking. This is really tied into the way people would be entering the building every day as employees or visitors or people coming from their lab space in nearby cities. You know, the goal here is to break down this longer facade with these vertical windows and this wrapping element that really captures and kind of terminates the entry and main arrival point. So this is meant to be glassy, a really open expression to to welcome people into the space and supported by some of the planting, ramping, and landscape interventions that are happening around it. And then you can see some of the material changes as we push out towards the street to form a little bit more of a visual marker. So we're excited by this. We feel like it's something that science companies will respond well to. It speaks to technology, and it does really afford us an opportunity to create a really positive experience as people arrive on site. So with that, I will pass it over to our colleagues at Copley-Wolf to talk about some of the site improvements.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: All right. Hello. Can you hear me okay? Great. My name's Nicole. I'm with Copley-Wolf. I'm the landscape designer working on this project. And what I'll do is take you on a, just a quick entry sequence tour of how things are working on the site. So since we are working with an industrial area and we do have quite a bit of utilitarian activity happening at the front of the site, we'll start here at the entry at Sycamore Avenue. We are looking at how we can start to screen this area. So we have quite a bit happening with the tank farm, the transformers, and the generator. We're looking at bringing in evergreen screening shrubs, we're looking at bringing in lower plantings that start to give a bit of a softening edge, and then additionally bringing in some graphic screening walls in front of the tank farm that's then also buffered by more shrubs, perennials of that nature. As you cross the loading zone area, we get to our main entry and we have another screen wall. These screen walls are also opportunities for graphic signage for some of the tenants. So it helps to liven up the space and starts to speak to the facade and the architectural elements that are happening with the building, making that landscape architecture connection. As you come to our parking lot entry, You're welcomed by a monument sign with planting and lighting. Coming into our parking lot area, we do start to bring in more of our parking lighting, as well as a fence element along the left side of the page here, just abutting to the next door neighbor there. As you come in further, we've got several areas where we can bring in more of the parking lot trees, That's a big piece of how we're going to start to bring a little bit more shade into this area. That's one of the nice things about being able to work with the removed building is it is affording us the opportunity to bring in quite a bit more planting than what is currently there. As you come to the main entry of the building, we start to set off this space with different paver patterns. And the main piece of this is also how you get into the building. There's about a three and a half foot change in height from parking lot level into the building. So we have a series of stairs, as well as an ADA accessible ramp. That ramp is comprised of walls, as well as plantings that help to welcome you into the space, as well as a few bench seating options. When you start to go around to the back of the site, this area is where we have an existing railroad spur. The tracks are not something that we're going to be working with, but we do want to bring in more opportunities for ornamental trees, larger trees where there's space to start to bring in more shade opportunities and ecosystem services with cooling and a little bit more habitat in the area. So next slide, please. When this starts to speak to a little bit of the materiality of the space, we are looking at, as I had mentioned, for our entry sequence with the paving options, how do we set this apart from a lot of the more concrete spaces to make that an entry that's welcoming, looking at a little bit of an upgraded presence of pavers, bicycle racks, so that, as mentioned, we can start to encourage definitely more modes of transportation, This is lower left is a sample of the fencing that we could be using. And we're also looking at decorative concrete board form walls in this area, kind of to soften things up, warm it up a touch. And our bench, this is just a nod to that rustic industrial look that we're looking at in this area. Next slide, please. And lastly, this is just a sampling of some of the plants that we're starting to consider for the site. We do have both some larger areas, we want to bring in shade trees evergreen screening and some smaller ornamental trees. I think that as we're at the outer edges of the site, we'll see some of the larger plantings that are a little bit more loose. And as we get closer into the main entry with the monument sign and the stair and entry ramp, we'll get into some of our smaller varieties that have a little bit more form and a little bit more compactness to them. Our hope is that we can bring in quite a bit of native plants. bring in those ecosystem services, a little bit more habitat to the area, and they just help to soften the look and make it a lively space. And with that, I will hand it back to the team.

[SPEAKER_15]: Go ahead, Valerie.

[Valerie Moore]: Thank you, Nicole. And I think that concludes our presentation and we'd be happy to answer any questions that the board has.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. Appreciate the team's presentations and At this time, I'd like to, in terms of the order of the public hearing, I'd like to invite a couple of the city staff who are with us tonight to give some of their feedback and then to take questions and comments from the board, and then we'll open up the public hearing to public participation. So, I think we have, I don't know if Tim McGivern is, yep, Tim is here and Todd Blake. I'm wondering if Tim, you might provide some feedback. I don't know if you've had the chance to kind of assimilate any of the changes that have been made, but we'd love to hear your feedback about the utility situation.

[Tim McGivern]: Sure. Hi, Andre. Good morning, members. So I did get a chance to quickly see the revised drawings and it looks like, and I think Ken from BHB went over. some of the changes that I pointed out that I wanted to see. So that was good to see that proactiveness. From a utility standpoint, I didn't have any major comments. Really, they just needed to reconfigure the way they had the water service set up. And then, you know, some minor tweaks to the stormwater and some details for the plans, things like that. And I also noticed that they shortened up that curb cut from 120 feet to about 100. So that was a concern I had as well. So I'm glad to see that. And then I did want to just bring to the attention that Sigma Avenue is a dead end waterline. I don't think much can be done in this project, but it's worth noting, I think, which is why I put it in my review, that this spur parcel is You know it doesn't look like it's used I don't know if there is a use for it, but if there is ever any potential need for increasing water supply quality or anything like that, then this would be the owner of that spur parcel spur parcel and there's a potential connection over in Benjamin circle. But there's another landowner in Benjamin Circle that would need to be involved with that too. So it's just something to know that is there as far as development goes in this area. And just sort of bring it to the attention of the landowner as well for any future talks that may involve. It would benefit, you know, something that would benefit everybody that's connected to the water system. But besides that, I didn't have really nothing, you know, nothing major besides typical things. They calculated their sanitary flow using portable water, which is fine, but I just need the calculation done in a different way to confirm that they are under certain thresholds for things like II and other elements. So, but besides that, pretty straightforward. And this looks like a good project and excited to see it.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you Mister mcgivorn it's a Blake I'm wondering if you could speak a little bit to the transportation. Aspect of the project and changes that have been made.

[Todd Blake]: Sure thank you Mister chair. Yeah, as the project proponent mentioned there's some additional new trips added to the network. You know, about 20 in each peak hour and then I think it's an increase of about 130% daily. So as a result, I recommended some mitigation. You know, the proponents did a good job of revising the site plan with some minor tweaks based on some of the comments that I provided, like the electric charging stations, making sure the bicycle parking is enough, and also recommendations regarding covering the bicycle parking and looking into that. In terms of recommendations off-site, I had provided two options essentially one providing some bicycle infrastructure via striping and signage on Riverside Ave in the block you know nearest the development or to provide increased pedestrian access to the transit stops nearby by providing accessible wheelchair ramps and crosswalk markings across Sycamore as well as across Riverside. The crosswalk across Riverside would be subject to traffic commission approval, but they've been pretty supportive of that sort of thing. And it would line up very well with this development and the two transit stops that exist on Riverside Ave. So I think the comment response by the proponent had indicated that they were favoring that ladder option, the crosswalk option versus the bike lane option. But I think they're two good improvements to try to improve, increase the amount of non-vehicle mode share to the site. And it does help the overall community as well as them.

[Andre Leroux]: And Todd, does that also include a crosswalk across, I don't believe there's a crosswalk there right now across Sycamore Ave, so that pedestrians walking along Riverside Ave crossing the Sycamore opening? Yeah, it would also be stripes.

[Todd Blake]: I believe I wrote it as such to provide that crosswalk continuing the sidewalk along Riverside Ave crossing Sycamore as well as one crossing Riverside. Correct.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. We have a couple of other city staffers here. I see Victor Schrader, Economic Development Director. I don't know, Victor, do you want to say anything?

[Victor Schrader]: Oh, thank you, Andre. Oxford's been great to work with. Their team's been great to work with. It's nice to have a quality developer that's thinking through the types of things that we want to see as properties are improved. So it's been very positive and, as Matt said, collaborative. So we appreciate that. On the life science side, this is something I think the board has heard. from us, the staff, is thinking about this industry more as an opportunity for growth in Medford. And so just unrelated directly to this project, but tangential is some conversations that the Board of Health is having that our department's working on to upgrade some... use the word regulation loosely, just some, you know, some engagement with this industry as it grows in Medford. There really is very limited oversight on the books today. So the Board of Health is looking at some opportunities to just ask folks to register with the Board of Health, let us know what they're doing, and potentially create a sort of an advisory group to the Board of Health related to life science. And so we're supporting that and we'll certainly let Oxford, the team know, and others that are interested in developing life science at Medford, make them aware of these types of policy changes. So I think that's a positive thing. Most of our neighbors in the area, in the region, have policies on the books like this. We're just kind of catching up in a way, so.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you, Mr. Schrader. Alicia Hunt, I don't know if you want to say anything directly. You don't have to, or if there's anybody else from the city that wants to say something before we go to the board.

[Alicia Hunt]: Thank you, Andre. I do, uh, I don't know if the proponents know that my particular specialty besides being the director is actually sustainability. Um, I noted several times the mention of sustainable, and I took that to mean, and I want to make sure I was clear, uh, energy efficiency, because it was referred to as sustainable in order to reduce the size of mechanical equipment. So was I correct in understanding that during the presentation that you were going for very efficient building?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, that is correct, Alicia. We understand, you know, in talking to you previously, like it still sticks in our mind that solar is an important part of, you know, what we've talked about. We are, I wish I had the stat here, we just globally, we're one of the first, one of the first organizations to be considered like sustainable and well fit for all our properties as a global practice. So I think We are going to be working, and I understand we're a core and shell, and we need to wait for our tenant to kind of help enforce that they do this as well. But we'll be working hand in hand with you to make sure that we do the most efficient building and that we're pushing those practices as much as possible. Like we did mention, the mechanicals on this roof should be pretty light, which allows for a good opportunity to do that. So I think we're looking forward to working with you and your team on that project.

[Alicia Hunt]: That'd be great. Right. I we've we work closely with Cambridge on some of the guidelines that in consideration around you know net zero buildings and I'm fully aware that life science is the last place to go net zero because of the heavy energy intensive use of the buildings. And that is, we're sort of following the Cambridge's conversations with that. So I'm very understanding that we can't go, we're not prepared to go net zero right off the bat, but that's, you know, we are looking at out 2030, 2050 kind of stuff and to be future proofing our buildings here. So we do appreciate it. And frankly our transport, I often have comments about transportation but our transportation director is so thorough that I could not possibly improve on what he's already mentioned here. I think A question that will pop up, I noticed your willingness to include EV parking, which I think is great. So whether you guys have a standard for how you do that, whether it is proprietary to the employees, if there's opportunities for other people to use those charging stations, if the building is closed at night, stuff like how that might work. Mostly, I'm curious. It's the kind of question we do get from residents.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: That's a great question, and I think we'll work to address it better, but I'll give you a quick answer is that most of our EV stations have been inside of buildings and parking garages that allow for us to allow for it to be secure. So I think we would be open to that thought as long as we could do it in a safe and secure manner to allow for that not to just be an area that, you know, becomes a danger zone for anybody. So we want to make sure we do that in the right way, but I think there's a way to do it.

[Alicia Hunt]: I noticed that the way you could imagine that there might be neighbors who could walk in from there from the backs, but it's unclear to me whether or not there would be walking connections or if this would just be too far, practically speaking. I mean, you're one building away from houses, but the road doesn't connect through. So I just put it out there as something to consider. We've been getting requests to start to locate EV charging stations in more parts of the city. We're exploring creative ways to do that.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, that's great. I mean, the more use of it, the more practical and that's what it's there for. So we're open to that.

[Alicia Hunt]: And we do, I have personal experience with knowing of people who have charging stations at work and therefore purchase an electric vehicle. So I do know that that concept works.

[Andre Leroux]: So how many EV stations are being planned?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Two currently, right?

[SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, that's correct. Two right now. And there's some potential for increasing that. Yeah. I think the challenge is we are, it is still a tight site and you know, you do need that infrastructure. So, um, trying not to impact the parking count, uh, becomes a challenge and then also not taking away some of the landscaping that we put back in here. Um, but yeah, there's, there's potential opportunities for some additional spots for, um, EV charging stations.

[Alicia Hunt]: So I don't believe that making them EV takes away from their count in terms of zoning for parking. We're exploring in some of our public lots having multiple chargers where maybe two spots say EV only and other spots that are served or servable by the EV charging is not restricted to EV only. In order to have that flexibility, do you have two staff with electric vehicles or do you have four staff? And if you only have two, then the other spots can be used by other vehicles. So it's something that we're actually looking at doing in some of our public lots.

[SPEAKER_19]: And it's not necessarily the count that I'm concerned about. We don't have a lot of areas where I can actually put the charging station itself, so it could have to go into the parking area, which then would take away potential parking spaces. But yeah, there would be preference for EV, but typically, if nobody has an electric car, then the space could potentially be parked in otherwise.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: And I just say that the tenant's gonna drive and we're gonna work with them to drive when we do secure a tenant, they're gonna wanna do these things as well. So hopefully we're bringing on a tenant early in this process while we're still working on all of our design to incorporate that. So it's something we will push as well, but we wanted to show the commitment and the response to Todd's comments and the team to make sure that we are addressing at minimum what we should be addressing, but we'll be pushing for more.

[Andre Leroux]: just director Han, while we have used, I believe this, this building is also subject to the solar ordinance. And, um, is there their plans to kind of install the solar, uh, right at the beginning?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: So just, just a quick answer on that for my part, if you were asking me, sorry, but, um, so the one thing we had talked about in the beginning is that we need to confirm, we don't want to, With solar, there's a lot of lease and requirements to keep their space, like you don't want to ever move them, right? And so we want to confirm with the tenant that they're not putting certain equipment up there so then we can decide where to place it. So I think it's what we had talked about the beginning of what we had hoped would be possible is, you know, we go through this process as a core and shell, but when the tenant comes in with us, we address all those items because then we'll know exactly where we have space for it, which I think will be abundant. But I would hate to put solar in. We've actually, we purchased a building in the seaport. They had an abundance of solar and they wanted to convert to life science and they thought they had done it right. We needed to add a bunch of dunnage and chillers and all this stuff. This is different than this type of building. But my only point is that it was a nightmare trying to reduce the amount of solar and get the same type of power out of it by having these units to take away from the sunlight and the glare and all that stuff. We want to avoid that by being a little more thoughtful, and we just can't do that without the tenant at this point. So I just, we are committed to it, and I don't want you to think that's an empty promise. It's definitely a promise. You're recording this meeting, so you can go back to these minutes at some point. But I just can't answer that in a way that would be smart at this point.

[Andre Leroux]: Right, I don't believe we have to see where they're gonna go, but there is an ordinance that's gonna need to be followed, which is, I believe, 25% of the, roof. Is that correct, Director Hunt?

[Alicia Hunt]: I believe it's 50%. The early requirement is to do a solar assessment. But part of that is knowing where the equipment is going to go, what roof space is required for equipment, but then doing the solar assessment and letting us know what you can do. And then moving forward with that. Hopefully you can get a tenant committed before we get too far down this process.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, we're committed to doing all this, the assessment and everything. We just want to make sure it's smart. So, um, and I don't want to say that this is the tenant's problem. It's not, it's, it's ours, right? It's just, we don't know it until the tenant comes there.

[Alicia Hunt]: So it's helpful having an owner who's understanding and on board as opposed to a tenant who wants to do it. And the owner that is not interested.

[Andre Leroux]: I have a few questions, but I'm going to open it up to the board members so that they can, they can get their questions first. So, Board members, anyone want to jump in? Yes, David Blumberg.

[David Blumberg]: Sure, Andre. Thank you. In the materials, there are mentions of the proposed greenway. Could Alicia, maybe someone just give us a little background? I mean, I just didn't see from the terrain the possibility of this linking up with much of anything, but maybe you can educate me or someone can educate me on the background with the with the property and the proposed greenway?

[Alicia Hunt]: So there is a vision. So the end of that rail line, that spur that's behind them, that actually is an old rail line that continues to go. And the line itself is still, the space is still physically clear. Around the Bush property, under Route 28, next to BJ's, And the property owner, so it's not immediate to BJ's, there's water next to BJ's, as you're all well aware. But on the other side of that is the rail line. And the property owner there is actually building new multifamily housing, is also very interested in there being a greenway along his property. So he has left space for that in his plan. And it then continues actually to cross Route 28. And there's an existing rail spur there that I actually walked a couple of times that then comes to the orange line. And we thought that it was was actually quite excellent because it crossed the orange line at a land bridge that was had no rail use on top of it when we started exploring this up four years ago, and then one of the rail companies started running a line on the land bridge, but there's a lot of interest in exploring what can be done there. It goes then across to River's Edge, where the property owner, John Priato, he actually walked this spur with me many years ago. to look at whether we could use it to open up the East Medford neighborhood to connect to the Malden River by his properties. And so that's one end of it. And behind this building is the other end of an existing, mostly abandoned rail spur.

[David Blumberg]: Okay, that's interesting. It just looked like from the terrain that where it's close to this building, it was just sort of dead end there without an access to,

[Alicia Hunt]: That is the dead end behind this building. It's the other direction where there's a lot of vision.

[David Blumberg]: Okay. Got it. Okay. Thank you for the background. I appreciate that. The signage is our site plan review. Should it include a view of the proposed signage for the building or is that subject to separate city approval?

[Alicia Hunt]: that goes to the city council, I believe, but maybe there's a certain amount of zoning that's allowed as of essentially as of right. If it, if they do signage that fits within our current zoning, then our office just signs off on it. And if they want more signing that signage, then what's allowed by right, they have to go to city council.

[David Blumberg]: Okay. Okay. I just wanted to say just, I guess, generally my sense of the market for buildings like this these days is just so much demand right now for warehousing space, which I think would bring a lot of truck traffic, a lot of ins and outs to a warehouse. So I think the city and the community would benefit. in a great part by this sort of a reuse of this property as opposed to what I think would otherwise happen right now, given the market demands. So I just wanted to share that if we have members of the community watching, I think they should feel better about this use than its current use or what the other alternatives might be. I wondered if the tank pads, I mean, it's sort of, I guess, Nothing you can really do about this as a design team, but it does seem like the back of the house is out front on this building. You have the nice entrance sort of in the back. Do we have an image that shows us the screening that was mentioned that would sort of block the tank area from the view of Sycamore Ave? And then there was some graphics that were mentioned to soften the view, maybe block the view into the loading area as well. I just didn't remember seeing a nice image on those two fronts.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: We don't have a rendering that captures those views. We share some precedence as to kind of what we're hoping to achieve and working through in terms of the feel of that screening. And it's important to us, you said it well, that the back of house kind of comes to the front in some ways because it needs to. So we feel very strongly about providing a nice screen edge there and having that be part of that entry sequence into the site. but we don't have that designed to a detailed level yet. And that's something we can certainly work with people on. Okay.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: David, just one of the things, we've been partners with SGA for a while, but one of the things that really had our teams come together a lot was what they did at the links in Watertown. And I feel like they did a really good job of repurposing a building, if you ever have a chance to see it, but really like there's generators across the street in the parking lot, right. As you're coming in and that's screened by some nice, like, you know, higher end kind of wood, um, sliding and fencing and things like that. They did a really good job of making it not feel like you're going through a tank farm or anything like that. Um, and that's, that's one of the reasons we partnered with SGA. Cause I think they get creative around those and it doesn't just look like, you know, some awful chain link fence in front of it. It's really got some purpose behind it. So hopefully it'll look nice when we're done with it.

[SPEAKER_15]: Okay, that sounds good.

[Andre Leroux]: And I just jump on that David just because you raised that issue and yeah that's a very big concern of mine is that sort of the southwestern corner which would be what the front of the building is as you're approaching it from the street and And I would really like to see something done with that facade, either continuing the, you know, the window treatments, even if they're false windows, or potentially using those huge walls for some kind of, you know, mural or, you know, public art. I think that would be a great opportunity. Otherwise, just leaving it the way that it is, I think, would be unfortunate.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: So we'd put anything on the side of the building if cities would let us. Typically, we're not asked to do that. So I'm sure John and his team could come up with something creative there. We were trying to put a lot of focus on the areas we could control, which is really making that entry so important. And I think John and his team are very focused on trying to make that a better experience as you're coming up Sycamore. So it's not, you know, we're trying to solve for a better building within the community, but we're also trying to solve for selling this to a tenant to make them attractive to come here. And they don't want to be going by a tank farm that they create every day either. So we need to make that look a little better. We can spend some time on that.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, I think one of the, you know, a couple of things we're trying to balance, but to Matt's point where, you know, we really want this building to have a nice, pleasant experience for people, you know, that are approaching it and appealing for tenants to make it, you know, successful. So I think, you know, we felt like we could clean it up and keep it somewhat neutral for tenants until we know who that tenant is and maybe what their branding looks like and, you know, how that may start to work with it. The screening, you know, kind of back to the screening elements, I think that those are wonderful opportunities for public art or something kind of fun and sculptural and something that kind of ties into the building. So we certainly, we want to reduce the view of some of the equipment, but we certainly see those as opportunities to make it a better building and a better project and incorporate something fun and, you know, specific to the site. So very much appreciate the comments.

[Andre Leroux]: John, what did you think about the idea of kind of like continuing in some way the window treatments, even if they're not actually windows?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: I think there may be, I mean, we need to look at it with the group. I think there may be an opportunity. We've used those vertical elements to organize the windows, and maybe some of those vertical elements could find their way towards the front of the building and, you know, kind of speak to that rhythm and provide a little bit of continuity as you turn the corner. Or maybe we carry some material a little bit further around the corner that we're starting, you know, to use for cladding on the side we're providing the new facade. So I do think there's some, opportunity there. That said, it's a really long facade, and it does step back a little bit. So I think we'd want to be smart about making those interventions where they kind of help the most in terms of what you'd see. And it may be some interventions that kind of lead you to where you actually physically enter the site, and that's where there's more expression. But I definitely think there's some opportunity there.

[Andre Leroux]: just struggling a little bit with how we can, you know, condition the project to ensure that we get the, you know, the quality site design that we want, you know, while maintaining the flexibility that you're looking for, um, since you don't have a tenant yet. So it's just, just going through my mind right now.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, absolutely. And I mean, I know Matt feels this way too, but we're, you know, we're committed to making this a great building. Um, So we're open to exploring those ideas.

[Andre Leroux]: Are there other board members who want to jump in? Christy or Deanna? Oh, go ahead. Sorry, I did interrupt you. Sorry, David. Yes.

[David Blumberg]: I just said a few more if it's okay. And that is, I was a little surprised only a couple of spots, but I think my guess is that the type of tenant you're looking to attract to this building is probably going to ask much more of you on that front. And there's probably a lot of Well, some comfort that we should get from thinking through that next tenant will be at this building because they're gonna be, I think, aware of the sort of the back of the house issues that we're talking about right now. The parking itself and the number of spaces, is it being driven by zoning? Is it being driven by your sense of what the market is looking for in terms of satisfying the employee counts? Maybe it's both.

[SPEAKER_15]: It is both, but I don't know if Ken or, who wants to talk to that one?

[SPEAKER_19]: I mean, obviously, yes, zoning is driving this a little bit, but I think as we talk about the potential number of employees here, we could handle around 200, that would put us at the 100 spaces that would be needed just to handle the employees here. So I think it's, you know, I think it's yes, zoning, but it's also market driven. And they seem to be aligning on this site.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: So yeah, I'll just compliment that with the fact that, you know, we have, you know, we've loosely marketed this and, and the first question, surprisingly, I thought it would be ceiling height and things like that. First question, how many parking spots do you get to have? Because they can't see the parking right when we walk up there. And, and they're kind of pushing us, there's been a few that have pushed us to say, well, 100 is not enough. And we're like, well, there's no real valid reason to go beyond that. So we have properties in Framingham that are GNP facilities, and they're at this ratio currently, and it seems to work pretty well. So I think we just kind of fell into it by both of those kind of converging at that 100. But it is something that's very important to them. So I'm not

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, I actually had that question. Same question. If you, even if you have 200 employees, I mean, how many are actually on site at any one time?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah. You know, they, they actually use this if you can believe it. So for their investors and think they like to have in tours come in because they want to continue to raise funding. Like they use this as like a chance to showcase kind of their, what they're capable of at some point. So they have the workers that are there, but they also like to have some spots where people can come in. So it, there is no great answer other than the fact that everybody's looking for more than this. And we, we derive to the fact that, all right, let's find out how many people actually working here. That's 200. That's at 50% living on, you know, 0.5 per person. And we came to a hundred and it, you know, we were quite honestly, we were pushing pretty hard to get to the a hundred because we were at like 85 to 86. When we originally looked at this, we had to really tighten it up to make it proper. So, um, I don't know this we've, we're getting pushed out and framing it as well. They're asking us to build a new building and they're really pushing us to do above ground infrastructure parking, which is not preferred up there. Um, but they really wish they really are pushing the parking and they are using it. I will say it's full even during these COVID times, it is full the parking lot.

[Andre Leroux]: We tend to be a board that is, uh, pushes down on parking.

[Deanna Peabody]: I was also wondering the same thing, like, uh, Would it be expected that all 200 employees would be like working during the day or is it expected that this would be like a, you know, where there would be night shifts and that people would be there at night?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: It's predominantly day. I think the traffic counts show that, right? Sorry, I wasn't asking you, just on our team, but it's predominantly day traffic and day usage.

[Deanna Peabody]: I was wondering if we have any like other buildings that are similar size in the area. And if we know what their like parking ratio, how many employees drive to work versus take the, I don't know, Todd, if you have any sense of that.

[Todd Blake]: And not of this particular type of use, I would rely on the proponent to come up with comps for that. But that's a great question. I had that initial question as well. Are there a number of shifts or is it just one shift? And then if it's not a number of shifts, what are the ratios? But the ratios in Medford, there's some data, census data that show ratios in Medford. And then the other things that that's why we're pushing, as you know, pushing developers and proponents to advocate for other alternative modes so that we're not just, you know, one could argue that Medford's not the same as Framingham, right? So it's a little closer to Boston. So there's a few more options. So hopefully, but that was, that stood out to me as well, but based on what they provided, it seemed like.

[Deanna Peabody]: Yeah. Hopefully that works, but it might be useful to identify like shared parking opportunities in the area. If, if there is more of a demand than the number of spaces.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, I was thinking particularly along the northern edge of the parking lot where you have faces onto the other parking lot and the other industrial property. It's not very attractive, so I wanted to get a little bit more clarity about what you're planning for screening there and You know, hey, I wouldn't mind taking, you know, five of the spaces and turning them into like tree islands so you could get more trees on that edge.

[Deanna Peabody]: And then I had one additional question. There's like a hatched area in the parking lot, I think on the northern edge. I was wondering what that was.

[SPEAKER_19]: It's for fire department access. So the fire department wants people to come into the site and maneuver without having to stop or back up. And it's a very tight, you know, from where the building is to the property line, it's very tight. And so very large ladder truck or tower, you know, aerial tower comes in. It needs all of that room to maneuver, and the fire department requested that we make it so that the truck can maneuver through the site. Victor was at the meeting, and they were pretty adamant.

[Deanna Peabody]: Should that be labeled like fire lane or?

[SPEAKER_19]: We could call that fire lane no parking.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: One of the things just important to note to your point, Andre, is that existing right now is some pretty bad delineation between the two property lines. It's like bent up guardrail. I'm just looking at it right now. Chain link fence that's completely dilapidated. We're actually raising the land by like, I forget how many feet it is. Campbell, we're bringing it up to that entrance because the slab is actually elevated. So we're bringing it up and we're gonna create a condition that is definitely more favorable along that line. But again, I don't know what we do there, like in terms of like going beyond that, some kind of, you know, sophisticated better fencing system. I don't know what the other, like I'm just trying to figure out what are we solving for there? Is it more the view of people from our parking lot looking at their building parking lot, or is it the other way?

[Andre Leroux]: I mean, I'd be, from my perspective, in terms of putting more vegetation in, it'd be, you know, reducing the asphalt heat island effect, getting, you know, more permeability.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Okay, so you're thinking more like if there was a line of vegetation along that, I'm sorry, I just misunderstood that.

[Andre Leroux]: Well, I was thinking, I mean, ideally, and I understand this is not kind of where you're going with it. I mean, I would love to take, you know, several of those parking spots, you know, every few parking spots and turn it into a tree Island so that you can get a lot more, uh, you know, green cover of the, of the parking lot. And I think it'd also be a lot more attractive for the parking lot as well, but I think what you've been saying is that you're hearing that there are people pushing to have more than 100 spots.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, we recently had somebody from Bedford come to us and ask for significantly more. We may have been disqualified because of it. it's uh we're trying to push the story as well like you know when you talk about um you know Todd made the recommendations like covered bike park and things like that those are things we intend to do anyways but we're trying to push that sustainability item um we can only push so far i guess is my only thing i would say and we are going to continue to push hard but again how do we assure you of that um how do you write a condition to make us assure that i'm not sure i just we want to say we're responsible but we also want to we do wanna be able to lease this at some point too.

[Andre Leroux]: Todd Blake, I see that you have, oops, sorry, Ken. Let's take Todd and then go back to you.

[Todd Blake]: Yeah, I was going to respond to something Andre said, but quickly, Matt, something you could do to promote bicycle usage is also have shower type facilities inside the building. I don't know if you would have that anyways for this type of use, but by having that, sometimes that encourages cycling, especially for people with a long cycling commute. But to get back to Andre's point about the parking and adding some green space, there may be an opportunity I see on the plan So the proponent does show 19 foot spaces in three of the four aisles and 17 in another. So 17 is compact and 19 does meet our zoning code. But my experience in other parking lots, you could make the 19, 18 and it would still work. And then if you did that at all three aisles, you'd gain three feet of, you know, I know it's not much Andre, but three feet of landscaping capability, either down along the whole length, along the middle or along that left edge there.

[SPEAKER_19]: And that's something that we've talked about. I think we would need to look at that. I think the challenge still is the fire truck maneuvering through the site. So even if I shrunk those parking spaces up, it kind of impacts it. So it's something we looked at. The thing that I was going to say is, you know, we made an effort to try to push the landscaping out towards Sycamore Avenue to create the entrance, you know, to create a better entrance, create a better feel along Sycamore Avenue. for the site. One option could be a little bit of a redistribution of like we have the larger landscape islands. And I know Nicole's not going to be thrilled me, but we have the larger landscape island here. At the entrance, we could put two parking spaces in there and maybe two create an island of two spaces more centered on the, to help break up that a little bit more so you could put something more central. So we're just, we're still getting the hundred spaces, but we're redistributing the landscaping through the parking lot a little bit better.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: And I would just say on top of that, like where you're showing that, you know, the entry with the signage and the increased vegetation that currently, you know, two generators reside there and taking some of the comments, we decided let's move the generator, which is a substantial cost over to the, the loading dock area because in both cases, just because we thought that we were trying to solve for as much, you know, we went from a building coverage to parking lot coverage, and we wanted to make as much vegetation as possible. So we're open, obviously, to different suggestions. I mean, we were willing to put a significant cost to do that. It's just a matter of we want to try to solve for, I think, a lot of different aspects of what you're saying. Even just to your point, Todd, are you saying, if I'm looking at this plan, would it shrink from left to Would it shrink a little bit left and right, meaning the space's length will become shorter? Is that what you're saying?

[SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, that's what he's saying.

[Todd Blake]: Yeah. Yeah, correct. It looks like you may be able to gain three feet, but I do understand there's still maneuverability up at the corner. Yeah, if you squeeze, basically shift the parking aisles in the central parking out to the right towards the building by three feet, you can then move the parking edge on the left by three feet and have a three foot buffer of landscape or in the middle, down the middle. But as others mentioned, if you shave off some on the entrance and put it somewhere in the middle, Alicia, please help me here, that may help with the heat zone of the parking lot by spreading the trees out slightly versus having a big swath of pavement in the middle as well.

[Alicia Hunt]: wouldn't hurt as long as the island was big enough for the trees were planted in a well to really support larger trees so like a small island if it was done as a tree well, so there was room under the parking lot for the roots to expand if water from the parking lot was allowed to go into the tree well. That's something that Cambridge has been working with a lot. That could then support a larger tree, which would give you shade, as opposed to a tiny island with only a tiny bit of water that hits that tree. You'd have some shade problems. I would defer to an arborist as to whether or not you could make it work.

[Andre Leroux]: I mean, it sounds like it's just shifting it around. So I'm not saying that that's necessarily what we wanna do. I was trying to see if there's anything additive, particularly for large shade trees. I'm wondering if you could just talk a little bit again about the landscaper, if Nicole could speak a little bit more about where there will be kind of large trees. I can't really tell from this site plan here.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: Sure, so right now we're looking at the main entry where the monument sign is for some larger trees, the tree wells in the parking lot, and then several spots around the page right area where we've got a little bit more distance with the building. Obviously, we'd need to be working with how the openings to the building are working so that we're not just blocking windows and views and light that are coming in. But those are the areas that we're looking at trying to bring in some of the larger trees and possibly in this tank farm area as well. The other piece that we are aware of, just keeping in mind, is visibility for the loading dock and the entry and exits for the parking area. So that's something that we've been in discussion with on how do we make sure that we've got safety sightlines kept in mind with that as well. But as you know, as to what Alicia was saying about trying to bring in more permeability with larger trees in these medians, that is definitely something that we could look at and explore further with how to have more root expansion under this parking lot area and taking up some of the stormwater that happens in those areas. That's something that we've done quite a bit of.

[Andre Leroux]: And is there, are you landscaping on the railroad spur? I know you're not moving the rails, but it looks like there's landscaping on the spur.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: It's really trees, you know, adding trees where we have space to add trees. There's not a lot of room. So in some areas that would be smaller trees or it'd really just be maintaining or adding to the turf grass that's back there because we're not anticipating a lot of activity back in this space, but it's really more to add in whatever ecosystem services we can where we've got the space.

[Andre Leroux]: I'm still a little confused about the tank farm. Is the tank farm service from the inside or the outside? And how tall is it? We don't have, we didn't really see a rendering from that side. So I'm confused about like how the, the signage and the concrete walkway and the plantings, how that's all working together.

[SPEAKER_14]: Hi, Tom Joyner with AHA Consulting Engineers. So right now the tanks are being, we're planning three spots, and as Ken mentioned, typical gases that are needed for this type of operation are nitrogen, oxygen, and CO2, they can be of varying size. You know, there could be a facility that actually doesn't need any, that they work with indoor tanks. But, you know, these tanks could be of the size that are six foot diameter and 12 feet tall or higher, depending on what their bulk need is. But in general, that's, you know, order of magnitude of what we would see out there.

[Andre Leroux]: So is this, again, another element that's going to depend on the tenant, and could potentially be no tank farm, or is there... What's going to be there?

[SPEAKER_14]: Yeah, I mean, from a planning standpoint, what Oxford's doing is trying to anticipate what this type of manufacturing tenant would need. And so for space planning, it is location for bulk tank and for filling. So these things would be filled by tanker trucks that actually could park. In within the loading dock area and bring hoses over to the tanks to fill them. And then you would have piping in behind the tank that you know we've taken and comes into the building for for the process utility.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, that was one of my questions whether a tanker truck would have to like get right up there where the, you know, this site plan says there's going to be planting.

[SPEAKER_14]: Yeah, they typically all come with with long hoses that can can fill from from a distance.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: And just to kind of give a little sense of scale, that's about a 15 foot depth of planting before you get to the screen from the back of the sidewalk. So it is a good opportunity for some decent size planting buffering.

[Andre Leroux]: And John, I don't know if you're the one doing this, but what is the treatment right now for the edge of the parking lot on the, North side.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Right here, this, and Nicole, you may be able to help also. This is, I mean, it is tight. We're kind of right up against the edge, and that's just meant to be kind of a fence condition. Right. And I think you could talk about different ways to treat that fence. You know, we're going to want a nicer edge for that, you know, for that side of the site. But that's kind of what we have. space for in that end.

[Andre Leroux]: Right. Now, I guess I was just wondering whether you had something already planned there or if it was, you know, is it going to match some of the, like the nice cladding you had on the, on the rendering?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: I think what we have initially thrown out for some ideas is the corrugated aluminum fence that we had a precedent image of, but this is definitely something that we would want it to speak to the facade and the architecture and and definitely coordinate with how that's working as well as with the other screens.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, and that's been the thought for some of these other screens that are kind of more to the front of the site is that this, particularly this one here near the loading and near the tank could be a similar material that we've started to use on the facade. So there's some connection to the building and then an opportunity to provide graphics or you know, color or some art as you had referenced before. But that was the thought that, you know, maybe this one in particular and this one start to speak to the building facade. So that gives you some of those continuous moments around the site as you work kind of deeper into the site towards the entry.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. Sorry, one more question. This is more about the probably a traffic question and great question. So with the loading dock area. Now, I appreciate the fact that you've narrowed that opening to about 100 feet. You also mentioned that the parking area is actually going to be regraded. It's going to be a little higher than what it is right now, I think. So I guess my question is, generally, when we review projects with this board, when there are driveways, we require the pedestrian crossing to be at grade. And I'm wondering, here, it doesn't look like that's the case, because it's a six door loading dock, industrial area. And I'm just wondering whether with some of the grade changes that would be possible to do that.

[SPEAKER_19]: So across the loading dock, there won't be any grade change. If anything, we've enhanced the pedestrian connection by creating the sidewalk that isn't there today and creating that opportunity. It will be at grade with the existing, with Sycamore Avenue and the loading area. As you enter into the site, we use more of a traditional driveway apron so that the sidewalk is sitting up and continuous across the driveway and you ramp up into the site. That was suggested by Todd. So we've incorporated that into the design. So it keeps a more continuous pedestrian connection through there. But the parking lot, we're matching into the grades at Sycamore Avenue. The parking lot is generally gonna be the same grade as the loading area, the existing loading area for the existing building. It'll be generally that same area. I think what we're talking about towards the back, we ramp up a little bit, but we still have a great difference between the parking and the finished floor elevation of the space where you have to get up that three and a half feet, and hence the stairs and ramp system at the entrance.

[Andre Leroux]: Board members, do you have additional questions?

[David Blumberg]: I had a couple more, Andre.

[Andre Leroux]: Yes, David, go ahead.

[David Blumberg]: What I guess is sort of a comment to throw out there, maybe it's for Matt's consideration more than anyone else, but given the proximity to Wellington, it may be that that tenant that occupies the whole building would find it advantageous to have some sort of shuttle service that would be able to pick up employees who are coming out of the city on the Orange Line. to work in the mornings, evenings. I've seen that work in some other of our suburban office parks. So something to consider there.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: That's great, David. We bought property at 645 Summer in the seaport. We organize and manage a shuttle service. Inevitably, the tenant ends up paying through the operation costs, but it's something, again, that we like to connect people to transportation, right? Because we want to make sure that's easy for them. But I 100% agree. We did that about two years ago there, and it's been very successful so far. That's great. Yeah. Thank you for the suggestion.

[David Blumberg]: Sure. On the building entry, which I find quite attractive, I wonder, are there opportunities, I know it was mentioned that you're still considering the combination and exact pavers that might be used there, but for some more permeable surfaces, is there an opportunity for maybe some smaller ornamental trees there also to give a little green flavor to the entry?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Let Nicole take that. She's the expert.

[Andre Leroux]: We do have a question from an audience member on Zoom asking about permeable pavement for the parking area in general.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: I mean, I think it's a great question. I think some of it comes down to like vehicular traffic on all the permeable pavers, it tends to be a little bit easier when you've got areas where it's more pedestrian traffic. But I think it's, I'm always a fan of permeable pavers if we can get them in there. So I think it's something that would be great for conversation, but definitely consider in pedestrian areas.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, I would say the same thing. We have a building in the back bay in Boston where we We had it over drive lanes. It goes around the entire perimeter of Back Bay. We did permeable pavers on the outside. The drive lanes haven't held up as well as we would hope, but the pedestrian portions of it have been very good. So we're open-minded to that.

[Andre Leroux]: And the clarification from the audience member is that she was thinking of porous pavement. porous asphalt, not pavers.

[Alicia Hunt]: So something that I've seen in some places, actually, Lexington DPW's parking lot comes to mind, is that they use porous pavement and porous asphalt for the parking spots and regular asphalt for the drive lane. And that way to the untrained eye, it's just continuous asphalt. For somebody who's been given a green tour of their lot, you can actually see the difference in that way, because they spoke actually, because you're right, porous pavement does not hold up as well in the drive lanes.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Well, I don't know what you've seen on that, We personally haven't done porous pavement in our parking lots and our facilities, but I'd have to look and see how they hold up, what's the maintenance, what's the, you know, how, what, you know, with snow removal, all that stuff. I just have to look at that to see if that's something that makes sense for the longevity of the project. But again, I mean, we're looking for better ways to do things every day if there's something It'd be great. I mean, I think I just saw the note come across from stormwater management, which I think is a great point. We take it seriously. We can expand on what we're doing for stormwater if we need to.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: Matt, I'll add in, Copley Wolf has done some of this, like a project similar at UConn, if that's something that we want to discuss and put out there. And I imagine Ken has some more thoughts in terms of the infiltration rates that they've been calculating.

[SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, I was going to jump in on that. So thanks. Thanks, Nicole. Yeah, I think that'll be the one big issue here is that the infiltration rates that we're preliminarily seeing out on the site aren't that great. So the benefit that we would have gotten from a porous pavement by letting it infiltrate into the ground isn't going to be there. I'm going to have to put based on what I'm seeing now, you know, we're probably we probably have to under drain the porous pavement so we can eliminate some of the frosty potential because the water is going to hold there. So we'll have to look at it a little bit more once we get some additional once we can take that building down and go out and do some additional testing. Hopefully we get better results than what we saw initially. And then go from there and look at what the opportunities may be.

[Andre Leroux]: Do other board members have questions? David, do you still have a couple more?

[David Blumberg]: I don't know if anyone answered my sort of general comment about the building entry and maybe some additional landscaping or more greenery and less hard surfaces there as we enter the building. Maybe the possibility of some trees there as well.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: Sure. Part of what we're working with is the need to have space for our accessibility ramp. And so being able to have the width for the walls and the slope that we need to make that rise happen and fitting it into a pretty tight space. The major constraint we had was that with our traffic analysis and the need for fire access. Um, everything got pretty condensed. Um, so I, I will always put a tree in if I can. Um, but I need root ball space and I need accessibility space and I need fire truck space. So it's a little bit, it's a little bit limited, um, up in that area.

[David Blumberg]: Okay. Thank you, Andrea. I'll pass the baton back. Thank you.

[Andre Leroux]: Uh, Blake, you have your hand raised.

[Todd Blake]: Yeah, thank you Mister chair is just going to come into something you brought about the crosswalk across the loading base. So I was trying to look at the existing grades based on Street view and It doesn't appear that there's anything necessarily prohibiting them from necessarily proposing I think what you're suggesting Mister chair about sidewalk cement crossing versus painted crossing in other projects we usually Tim I usually suggest one or the other continue the sidewalk at the sidewalk grade and have a typical sidewalk driveway apron or if it's designed with pavement as more of a street opening to have a crosswalk So unless there's some grading issue that I'm not seeing, it doesn't seem like there's anything preventing them from doing what you're suggesting, if you prefer that.

[SPEAKER_14]: Thank you.

[Andre Leroux]: Christy or Deanne?

[Tim McGivern]: Tim, is that? Yeah, I do. Thank you, Andrea. I just wanted to talk about the porous asphalt piece of it. As Ken mentioned, they're going to have to wait, see what they have in soil. But I'm open to that. And as far as maintenance and things like that, I highly recommend the cured concrete porous product that's removable for cleaning up. Those are really nice. But of course, it's something that I'm willing to talk to you guys about if that's something you're interested in doing for stormwater for your site. So we want to make sure the soil is right. Ken's point is clear.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you, Engineer McGovern. Christy or Deanna, any questions?

[Jenny Graham]: This is Christy. I don't have any questions. I think all the questions that the board members and the city staff have raised and the comments have been great, and I have nothing more to add to that. I just have a statement that I appreciate the presentation. I thought it was very well done and thorough, and I support the project. I think it's a no-brainer.

[Deanna Peabody]: I have no further questions.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. Let me open the public participation portion of the hearing. Is there anybody on the Zoom who would like to speak? And let me just get the information so you could also, if you're watching remotely, participate. Again, if you are watching from home, you can submit questions and comments by email to OCD at Medford-MA.gov. That's OCD at Medford-MA.gov. Or you can call 781-393-4222. 2480. That's 781-393-2480. And there'll be a city staff who will respond to you and make sure that we get your comments. So while we wait a couple of minutes to see if we get anybody there, is there anybody here on the Zoom call who would like to speak? So in the meantime, let me just take a minute to ask the proponent if the pedestrian crossing, how do you have the sidewalk crossing in front of the loading dock treated right now? Could you just clarify that one more time?

[SPEAKER_19]: Sure. It's a painted crosswalk across the driveway apron. So it's just the asphalt continues from Sycamore Avenue into the site. And it's a, Just a painted crosswalk at this point.

[Andre Leroux]: You have a problem with putting in. Not a graded one across, but a different kind of a treatment that continues the sidewalk, even if it's at the street grade.

[SPEAKER_19]: So basically, if we continue the sidewalk at whatever the slope is of the driveway, but continuous without having to do the apron up, I think we could be amenable to that. I don't want to speak for Matt, but my one concern was truck maneuverability in and out. But if it's at grade, that's an excellent solution. Okay, yeah, I understand.

[SPEAKER_15]: But yeah, we'd definitely be open-minded to doing that.

[Andre Leroux]: Great, thank you. All right, Amanda, have we gotten any comments or questions from the public?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: I think somebody just said yes, Bill, that she has a question.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. Espel, I don't know if that is that your first name. Maybe the city staff can unmute you. And just a reminder to state your name and address for the record before you ask your question.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, so my name is Erin Bell, and I am 108 Otis Street. And as Oxford looks for new tenants, just in terms of development in Medford, what do you see from that area? just kind of being a little bit familiar with the area, having, wondering, you know, what you're seeing with this, knowing the storage units and kind of what else is on that street. Um, so is the question about like who is looking at these or is it more, um, like the tenants you're looking at and then what do you see maybe in five years for Medford for that area? Um, you know, as, as a Tufts alumni and kind of seeing the, uh, 200 Boston Ave, and things like that. Just wondering kind of what you see with the growth, especially as we see the expansion of Harvard, which kind of pushed so much up to Somerville and Medford and just from the town and kind of your interest in this, especially as you're looking at tenants.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, absolutely. So I would say that when you first looking at this space in terms of just GMP in Boston, right? And nationally, we talked about it a little earlier. We look at like an hour within the city limits, right? And then you start to pressure test that a little bit. And what we see for this space is I really do believe that Medford has some unique opportunity to become a leader in this type of life science, as well as life science just in general. So we believe that, there's going to be a cluster here and we'd like to own as much of a cluster as possible because we've talked about that ecosystem a little bit. We really do want that ecosystem to thrive. We can't just have one small component of the ecosystem. We want to have everything and be able to really, um, you know, both for us, our tenants in the surrounding neighborhood, be able to, to allow these, you know, these companies to grow, um, and remain in this area. Um, because there's the other option is not good for anybody. I don't think so. What we've seen is that I think before us having something this close, there weren't many offerings inside of 128. And we've seen a lot of interest just from the speculation of us saying, hey, we may have a site. There's been a lot of interest in looking at this site. And I think others are taking notice in this area. And I do believe, and hopefully it's us as well, that there'll be a lot more proposals in front of you in the near future for this type of product, as well as R&D, which you guys have already seen a lot of. but we are, we are what we like to say, bullish on Medford. Um, so, uh, we do believe it has the unique qualities and the city that is, um, conscientious and willing to work with you to, to understand, Hey, these are our, our concerns. Okay. If we address these, let's, let's work together to move forward. And I think, you know, cities really, I mean, uh, companies really embrace that. So that's probably a long winded way of saying that we just really given that. So, um, Hopefully we can prove it out to you in the next year and five years from now, there's a great ecosystem and cluster that's existing in Medford.

[SPEAKER_00]: I appreciate your answer, Matt. It's actually my parents' address, but I also will confess I'm the porous pavement person. I know, I saw that.

[SPEAKER_15]: I was looking forward to your question.

[SPEAKER_00]: So I am a structural engineer and doing research in porous asphalt. I am a faculty, so that was something that I always think of when I see parking decks is porous asphalt, and especially from a stormwater management standpoint, because whenever there's a big storm, people always think it was, it's their flooding problem. It's not their flooding problem. You had a stormwater management problem. That's why you have a problem. So I will confess, but thank you very much for your answer.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: No, I appreciate that. And quite honestly, separate from this, whatever you learn, send it to me if you can, if you get my contact information through this, because like I said, we're globally looking at things to try to be better, both our product and the environment. And we do want to get, even to Alicia's point, we do want to get to net zero on these type of projects, which is going to be coming sooner than we think. So anyways, we're trying to be responsible, but.

[SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, I appreciate and respect that. I'm always looking for ways that there's a nexus between energy and our usage and our need. Side note, I have a tidal turbine on a bridge in New Hampshire. So I look at nexus between transportation and energy and sustainability as well.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Man, I'm about to contact you after this. That's my other question. Sorry, I was just gonna say that's why not having these in person anymore is so detrimental.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: Recording stopped.

[Andre Leroux]: Did you want to continue the recording?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: Recording in progress.

[Amanda Centrella]: Sorry about that. I don't know how that happened.

[Andre Leroux]: Thanks. Any other questions by members of the public?

[Amanda Centrella]: I don't believe any emails or calls have come in.

[Andre Leroux]: I do have one other thing that occurred to me, Matt. So with the kinds of tenants coming in and this being manufacturing, I'm wondering if you could address a little bit more how trash and waste is going to be handled on the site, and is it possible that there would be any medical or biohazard material?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: No, I knew you would ask that question and I wish I was an expert in that portion of it. Um, I, I don't know if anybody else on our team can talk to it, but I'll quickly just state that, um, we have many different types of assets in our portfolio globally, and these are considered to be the most cleanliness rated ones for anything that we've ever had because they are so regulated by the FDA. So many people think these facilities are going to be dirty, and they have all this waste and things like that. You see none of it as a neighbor or as an operator or a landlord. But maybe some of my team can actually intelligently say why that's the case, because I'm not the person that can do that. I apologize. I can get your documentation further later on it, but I don't know if, John, you have anything you can opine on that.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: No, I was just going to kind of echo what you have said, Matt, just that because there's such a high level of regulation for how these spaces work, all of the material that's coming out of the spaces goes through such a process before it gets to, you know, gets to the loading dock door that, again, you know, we do a lot of, you know, just research buildings, which are also, you know, highly regulated and also extremely safe, but just the amount of process that's associated with this type of space is just elevated so that all of that material is very controlled. And again, I'm sure there are others that can say that better than me, but that's been our experience with how these GMP buildings are starting to work.

[Valerie Moore]: I would just add that in our application materials, it does say that we would be contracting with a private waste hauler for waste removal and to the extent that a specialized hauler is needed. hauler is necessary for any biohazard material or medical waste, then the appropriate contractor would be engaged. So it wouldn't be a burden to the city.

[Andre Leroux]: And with that waste disposal, is that happening through the loading docks or is that some other?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, so they have a designated area on what we would call the the outflow side, right? They have six lock docks, they may have three for incoming, three for outloading. But I think it's important to note, just to John and I's point that, you know, all because it's so regulated within the facility, this waste will actually sit in their facility, and it's completely contained, right within their facility, because it has to be so, so separated from anything. So it's just another competence, the fact that these people do the process all the way through to the storage part. They wait for the waste truck to come up, they load the waste truck and it goes. But we've been operating these for a few years now and I've never seen visibly any evidence of the waste. But again, I'm not, I should get somebody to send a statement over about that.

[Andre Leroux]: But no, I mean, as far as I can tell, there's no external like dumpster or container or anything.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: There is a compactor, a typical compactor, but that's more for just general waste, like what an office and lab would be. Right, John?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, that's right. And that's located on the site next to the generator adjacent to the loading base.

[Andre Leroux]: So I think we should try to summarize some of the things that we've discussed. I don't know if Amanda, you have notes that you can start us off with.

[Amanda Centrella]: Yes, let me pull them up here. So I apologize in advance if I didn't capture these in the most eloquent way or if I've miscaptured them. So feel free everyone to chime in and we can adjust as necessary. So I have a condition here to provide design graphics or art for the front facade of the building or explore design for the facade of the building. Utilize tree wells to capture stormwater from parking lot and support larger shade trees. Include language outlining expectations regarding the tank and screening that staff can review. Consider permeable paver in pedestrian areas and explore the use of porous pavement for parking spots and normal asphalt for drive lanes. continue the sidewalk across the driveway in front of the tank farm. And Alicia's adding an edited version here, just waiting for her to finish typing. Oh, Todd had mentioned the potential for increasing pedestrian access by inclusion of accessibility wheelchair ramps and crosswalks along Riverside Ave and crossing Sycamore Ave. and compliance with Medford Solar Ordinance.

[Alicia Hunt]: So one thing we usually state is incorporation of department head letters. We didn't really discuss some of them. We really focused on the ones where there were responses. I'm just sort of briefly looking at the Board of Health seem to have submitted a letter that is just standard thing that I assume that there's no concerns or questions about any of their statements, that they're all just standard construction, rodent control type stuff.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, let me just phrase it as a little bit differently. I mean, is there anything in the department headletters that you have trouble complying with?

[Valerie Moore]: Can I just add, we never received a Board of Health comment letter. It wasn't shared with the applicant. So if you could forward that to us so that we can at least briefly review it to make sure we know what we're implying to you.

[Amanda Centrella]: I apologize. Let me do that right away.

[Alicia Hunt]: I will tell you that as I skimmed through it, my impression was that it was all standard dust remediation, noise remediation during construction stuff. adequate drainage plan for groundwater management. Solid waste, that there must be a solid waste plan provided to the Board of Health for approval. Permit must be obtained for all dumpsters. Removal and disposal practices must comply with dumpster regulations. Receptacles must be kept clean and sanitary. Temporary septic. Installation of temporary septic port-a-potties for construction. Protection of existing businesses. Conditions must be kept sanitary for existing businesses. Plan has to be submitted to the Board of Health. They require a list of 24 by 7 contacts to notify during demolition and construction. These are basically standard demolition items. There must be a Board of Health inspection afterwards. It's under additional concerns Thorough information regarding the actual scope of operations should be submitted to the health department for review and approval. Any and all biomedical processes may be subject to additional requirements from the department. As more information the project has submitted, additional concerns and requirements may be imposed. Sorry, I just saw one that I hadn't seen in their letters before. Green space to allow drainage and reduce the heat index on the property must be included with tree coverage available. Sorry, that was new for Department of Health letter. Permeable pavement should be used for drainage purposes. That's the Board of Health letter. I assume you saw the fire department letter, right? Cause you did, you responded to that one.

[Andre Leroux]: Right. So, um, you know, the Board of Health, like the green space one and the permeable pavement, that was all in additional concerns. So it's, uh, I wouldn't necessarily call those requirements. I think those are, you know, to the extent viable, the ones that are more requirements of the integrated pest management, you know, identification of any underground storage tanks or hazardous materials, the dust remediation, noise remediation, drainage plan, solid waste, porta-potties, and then submitting a plan to keep the condition sanitary during the demolition process.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: And those make sense to us. I think you mentioned I'm sorry, do I have an echo now? Sorry. I think you mentioned that a few that were actually related specifically to what the tenant process would be. And I think, you know, Andre, I think there's a couple of good points you made. There's a couple items, like how do you condition this? But I'm wondering, and I think Valerie's gonna talk to it as well, but is there a way to condition a little bit to the tenant, right? Because we won't be able to tell you what the use is, but we also won't be able to get a tenant unless we, get a core and shell to a certain extent, right? So I would imagine there's some components like the tank farm, the actual, how we do that screening, things like that, as well as Board of Health, which we would imagine would be addressed at the tenant time that we can condition. The only one I think that maybe we need to just talk about a little bit and how do we condition is the facade, which I think was a concern to you. And I think we want to do something better for this facade. I just don't, not positive what that is yet, but I do think we could resolve it pretty quickly here. I don't know what it needs to be. I'm a little hesitant to make it look like the rest of the building because it is a loading docked area that will never quite match up. I liked your idea about whether it's artwork or something that makes that just feel like a better building coming across. I'm not sure, John, if you had any thoughts while we've been sitting here.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_09]: I certainly think maybe that I don't know how it ties into the process, but something that we can review downstream as staff or with the group. But I think that there are ways to bring some of those materials around and turn the corner or extend some of those elements on the facade itself. you know, opportunities for art on the screen walls or on some of those other elements I think could be, you know, could be interesting. I mean, I love the idea of a mural on some portion of the building. It's just hard to know exactly what that right thing would be until we know exactly how the building's being used and who's in it. But I think kind of short of that, there could certainly be some ways to carry some of the materiality around some corners and extend it onto that Sycamore facade too. you know, give it a more kind of consistent appearance towards the street that it has when it starts to turn around the other side. Yeah.

[Valerie Moore]: To that point, I think perhaps the way to solve for that is a condition that once we've identified a tenant before we pull a permit for a tenant fit out that perhaps the staff could further review the design that we would submit additional detail of the the facade and the tank screening at that point. If we get a 10 that doesn't require any tanks and perhaps we're able to integrate more landscaping at that point but we won't we won't know that at this stage of permitting.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, I'm a question for either the director Hans or even Victor have You dealt with these situations before where you had the spec development and then you have the tenants require some additional kind of design feedback loop. And what's the best way to handle that? I think as Ms. Morris suggested, I'm happy to you know, to have a condition that would have the proponent come back at a future time just for, you know, feedback and final approval of the, you know, of the design. I don't have to, you know, figure out the language, but I would like the board to be able to actually see it, not just staff.

[Valerie Moore]: Could I suggest that that proceed through a public meeting rather than a public hearing, and that it be just a simple board approval rather than... Yeah.

[Andre Leroux]: Absolutely, not a public hearing.

[Alicia Hunt]: I think that's something that could work. Right. I was just sort of thinking about the logistics of it. I will say that I don't have enough experience with these personally to be able to say what has worked for us in the past. I don't know if Victor would from a different from his previous position. I think newer to the city than I am, but We don't, so they will be issued another building permit for tenant fit out. That does not necessarily run through our office. Um, we wouldn't sign off on it. So one of the things that I'm sort of thinking about is how do we put a flag in there that the building department is aware that actually in this case it does need to run through our office for tenant fit out. Um, I'm sure it's something that we can figure out. I do wanna ask, it sounds like the board would be willing to include, potentially approve this tonight with a number of conditions that a proponent will do this, will do that. And I just wanna, would it be easier for the proponent to review some of this stuff and come back next month with like this is exactly what we're doing versus we could get the approvals through this evening. I just I want to be clear because I feel like a lot of a number of these things are fairly nebulous and I like to have very concrete conditions that when somebody's asking for their occupancy permit or building permit, I'm walking out there with the list saying, did you do this check? Did you do that? Versus an owner saying to me, well, I thought you meant this. And we're saying, but we thought we meant this because it's not clear enough. So I just, I sort of want to raise that to make sure we're all on the same page for these.

[Andre Leroux]: I mean, Director Hunt, I agree with you about the specifics, but I probably they're not going to have a tenant in the next month. So I don't know if it makes doesn't make sense to continue it that way. I think we're going to have to just figure out how to word the conditions in a way that there is a feedback loop and that when they have You know, I mean, we're not a board that's going to like pull the rug out from, from, from under you at all. We just want to, I think, see the final product. And once you have those final designs and provide, you know, some, you know, feedback and endorsement at that time.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: And I could be, oh, sorry. Sorry. Go ahead.

[Valerie Moore]: I think that we can address that through a condition that just requires that prior to pulling a tenant fit out permit that we come back and appear before this board at a regularly scheduled public meeting for the board's subsequent approval of it sounds like parts of the facade and the screening. and the feasibility of permeable paving, some of these sort of more open-ended items that I don't think we're in a position to refine at this point, and we probably won't be able to refine them until we're able to take down part of the building and start to do some of the site work and the shell work that goes into this. We've seen this done in other communities certainly, so it's we can work a condition to address that.

[Alicia Hunt]: And actually, could you sort of help me with the process that you're anticipating here? Obviously, you don't know our details, but there's a permit. We're looking at demolition here. Normally, we're looking at construction. So this is going to issue a demolition permit. Are you going to be looking for an occupancy permit before you come for a fit-out permit?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Oh, it's actually, so we're looking for a construction permit, but we're looking for a demolition permit for the portion of the building, construction obviously to build like the mezzanine and to create that entire entry. And then we would not have a certificate of occupancy until a tenant came, right? It would be some form of a temporary or a substantial completion with the city until the tenant is in the space, obviously with fire department sign off and things of that nature to make sure it's a safe building. Um, but yeah that's that's what we'll be looking for right Valerie, that summarize that.

[Valerie Moore]: That's exactly right. So the, the interior that I work for the tenant would require another building permit, and obviously, once we've identified a tenant, it's not a process to have their designs ready to pull that permit so there'll be plenty of time built into the schedule for us to appear at a public meeting and we'll work with the staff obviously to make sure that that works for you and adequate notices provided.

[Alicia Hunt]: Great, that's sort of what I wanted to ensure that there wouldn't be. the opportunity to accidentally fly under the radar, issue all the permits, suddenly, and that you had already gotten. So my office, I'll sign off on occupancy permits. And if you know that I'm not signing off on occupancy permit, unless you've come back in front of us for these other items, that's actually the check in the system that is very helpful. to be aware that you're aware that there's that check. Actually, Tim also has to sign off on occupancy permits, so he'll also be aware of some of these details. and that's sort of the the thing we we that the worst is when somebody comes to us for an occupancy permit and they think they've done everything and we say but remember this list of conditions that was issued three years ago you actually haven't met all of them and we're not signing the occupancy permit until you come back and and meet the list of conditions so

[Andre Leroux]: So I guess the, but is the point at which you come back to us before the, after the demolition permit, before the building permit, or is it before the occupancy permit? Because some of the things may, I mean, would that, wouldn't it affect the building permit at all? Some of the screening maybe?

[Alicia Hunt]: There are going to be two building permits. The one that's the big, the big, larger things. And then there's going to be a more detailed building permit once they've identified a tenant. Did I get that correct, Matt?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: It is, but I can see where Andre's going as well, is that, you know, in the core and shell, you want to address maybe the facade or the screening, right? So we are proposing to have the screening, which may or may not be needed, and the facade we need to iron out. The other components I think are all addressable. Like, I think we've already agreed that the crosswalk should be done, so that would just be a condition we do. UVA ramps that, you know, traffic brought up was really, sorry, I was just looking for them and my screen disappeared. So that traffic brought up that we're going to address as well. You know, I would think that one of the conditions would actually be the solar, right? You'd want to say, like, we need to do the feasibility and look at, sorry, Todd, there you are. So those are pretty easy to be addressable. Our intention is the following, right? We need to get approval so we feel comfortable demoing and starting procuring this project because we need to bring this to market by next summer, which then the tenant, we need to try to bring in a tenant in the next three to four months to really get ramped up on their design. And in that period, before they file, it's going to take them a while to file. Best case, they're probably filing a year from now, right, with all the design they have to do. That period between the four months to a year is really where we bring in and understand their requirements and come back to the board and say, all right, we're building all this short of these two things that we were kind of leaving to go, but we were ready to proceed with that portion of it. because we aren't going to be going for a CFO for our core and shell. We're going to be required to meet the conditions that we agreed to. Does that make sense on the facade and on the screen wall? I can't get anything signed off or done until then, I guess. I'm probably confusing you.

[Andre Leroux]: I don't know, Matt. Were you agreeing with me or with Alicia on that?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: It was kind of in between, but what I was trying to say is that We're gonna, we will know generally who the tenant is before we are even at the stage where we're completing the corn shell. But the two components I think that are, one is the tank farm, which I actually don't think is much of a component other than just, if you don't need it, they're not gonna have it, right? We're just gonna make it look prettier. It's really down to the facade, right? And so how do we make sure that that facade is addressed in a way that makes sense? I think we want to understand what the tenant is, and a month after that, we're coming back to you to present, and it's well in advance of them filing for a permit, so that we can get the work done before they actually start their work.

[Andre Leroux]: But you'll need your first building permit before that.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: We will, yep. Yeah, we'll need the building permit to get the mezzanine and all that going, because it's such a long lead item.

[Andre Leroux]: We'll word it that before, you know, before final facade design, you know, work is done, you'll come back to the board.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yep. Maybe just on that elevation, if that makes sense, just because the rest of it requires some long lead items as well with the glass. That'd be great.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, I think it's really the west elevation.

[SPEAKER_15]: Correct.

[Andre Leroux]: Well, there's the piece of the south.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: That'll wrap. Yeah. Yeah. You can condition it as such, as long as we've got kind of what we generally think is approved as part of this, that we can further that design while we think we'll be in good shape.

[Andre Leroux]: Okay. And I, and I agree. I think there is a lot of these conditions we have agreed on. We can just, clarify them. I do want to say generally we have something in there saying that, you know, the other, if we don't have a specific condition about it or address it particularly, then we say, you know, that the proponent has, will comply with the department's letters. I think in this case, we have to kind of exempt the historical commission letter from that because there, You know, they're not, they're sort of opining on design, but that's not in their jurisdiction. So we'll leave that aside.

[Alicia Hunt]: We can handle that by saying that the proponent will comply with engineering, traffic, health, fire department letters per their, per proponent's response letters. And we can incorporate the proponent's response letters. we just don't mention the ones that we're not holding them to?

[Andre Leroux]: Well, the one thing that the Historic Commission did bring up, which we didn't ask, was whether there's an opportunity to create a little you know, a seating area, some kind of amenity over in the green space towards the rail. I don't know if there's enough room for that or if you thought about that.

[Valerie Moore]: So if I could add on the rail, it is a really confined space and it is also still considered a railroad right-of-way by the state. So to add a seating area or structures would require approval from the Mass. Department of Transportation, which is something we don't currently require. So we haven't been planning to add such a seating area at this time. That said, if the city were to advance plans for the Greenway and it were to extend into this area, certainly at that time, because if you'd be working through the process of terminating the railroad right-of-way to do that, then that would present the opportunity for the applicant at that time to consider adding seating areas and other elements that would make that a more exciting greenway space.

[Alicia Hunt]: I'm wondering if it would be beneficial to the city and amenable to the proponent to include a condition that says that the, that the proponent is amenable, you know, is willing to work with the city on any future Greenway development of the rail line so that eight years from now, 10 years from now, somebody could pull that out and say, Hey, you know, Matt's not here anymore. John's these guys aren't here anymore, but they said they'd work with us on it.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: I mean, you can see. When we talked about it earlier, I mean, we basically positioned our entrance on that side so that it allows for that to be a potential in the future. I think we would hope it does become a potential in the future. So if you want a condition that we will, you know, be open and work with that, that's not an issue. I think we'd fully embrace that because that's another form of transportation that gets down to us and allows for another real amenity. Like I said earlier, SGA did links and links has a direct connection to like a old railway that's created into a into a bike way that it really does tell us I'm kind of that holistic design.

[SPEAKER_15]: Experience so. Thank you for that.

[Andre Leroux]: So maybe something along the lines of the proponent. So participate in any planning effort.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, I mean you should really. Okay, I mean, as I said, if I'm not here, good luck with that guy trying to figure it out, you know, but no, that's great.

[Todd Blake]: Happy to.

[Andre Leroux]: Blake, Director of Traffic, you had your hand up.

[Todd Blake]: If they really want a seating area bench, we could have a placeholder put the bench out on Riverside Ave for the trains to stop until they determine that's needed later.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: I don't know. Is there a need for a bench? I'm sorry.

[Andre Leroux]: I don't know if that was a joke, Todd.

[Todd Blake]: I couldn't tell you that. It was a joke, but we can always add more transit amenities, so feel free to add some more.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: We'll try, but I don't know if I can get to a bench on Riverside, randomly faceted in, but we want to work with you guys as much as we can. But I'm hoping that us, I don't know if this is solving it. I'm hoping that us creating a lot of bike parking stuff will drive this a little further and maybe hopefully the greenway will extend and they'll see that there's a bunch of people biking and they need a better route. So hopefully that's the case.

[Andre Leroux]: And actually, Todd, I have one question about the crosswalk on Riverside. Is that just restriping the one at the intersection? You're not talking about a new crosswalk, are we?

[Todd Blake]: Yeah, it would be new. So across Sycamore, it would be striping it where it should be. Across Riverside would be a brand new one to facilitate crossings from anyone from the dead end of Sycamore to get across the street to utilize the bus stop on the other side.

[Andre Leroux]: So you probably have to put like a pedestrian priority sign in the middle somewhere.

[Todd Blake]: I don't know. Yeah, if the traffic commission approved it would involve accessible ramp on either side because it's required for any new crosswalk. And then standard aluminum metal warning signs would be as well, W11-2, the fluorescent yellow green pedestrian walkway signs. And then if the chair or the CD board thinks that's A concern of theirs, you could also suggest including enhanced elements such as flashing border or something like that as well. But it seems like you may be suggesting a median in the middle, which isn't necessarily a bad idea, but the lane structure, the lane configuration on Riverside Ave has the opportunity, has the potential to include bike lane both directions in this segment. So we wouldn't necessarily want to preclude that by adding a median.

[Andre Leroux]: I wasn't thinking about a median, I was just thinking about, if people are crossing not at a light, then it could be dangerous.

[Todd Blake]: Yeah, you could also consider on the parking side opposite Sycamore, you could consider a bump out for that wheelchair ramp so that it's more visible to the drivers driving by, and the crossing distance would become shorter as well. So on the south side of Riverside, there's a parking shoulder, but on the north side, there's no parking. So if you added a crosswalk and added a bump out on the south side, it would reduce the crossing distance a little bit and provide better sight lines.

[Andre Leroux]: Does the proponent have any thoughts about this?

[Deanna Peabody]: I think it's a good idea. I don't think people will walk down to the signal to get to the, to cross, to get back to the bus stop.

[Andre Leroux]: Just to be clear. So we're talking about, I think the, I mean, the only place that makes sense, I think to put it in would be from the West sidewalk of Sycamore to the East sidewalk of Linden street, because putting it over more From the other side, you get into the parking entrance, right? There's like a parking, which I don't think is used. It's walled off right now or fenced off, but it seems tricky. I'm just looking at it in Google Maps here.

[Todd Blake]: It could be from the... East side of Sycamore directly across Riverside, essentially being a mid block crossing on, you know, in one half and an in section on the other, or even between the two driveways so that the property I think you're referring to on the east side, basically was meant to connect. folks that want to utilize the transit stops when they're either returning to, you know, coming to work or returning home. And as Deanna pointed out, this is roughly mid-block, so are people really going to, from Sycamore, travel to Locust or Commercial to press the button across? They're likely going to just cross there where the transit stop is anyways, so to make that as safe as possible.

[HK3G1-bENjA_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, Todd, I think we completely agree with you. I think we're just going to have to work with the Traffic Commission to figure out the appropriate signage to make motorists aware that the mid-block crossing is occurring here and exactly what curb ramps that we want to match up. I think it's something that's worthwhile, especially to further encourage transit use to this location and support safe and direct crossings to those facilities.

[Todd Blake]: The interesting thing is Andre that the team moved the bus stop. It used to be closer to Locust Street, the one westbound, but they moved it because they needed to get into the left lane at Locust anyway, so.

[Andre Leroux]: Right, OK. So the language, I guess, that's in the Todd Blake's letter is amenable then to the proponent. We can just go with that.

[SPEAKER_15]: Yes. Yeah, absolutely.

[Andre Leroux]: Great. And any concerns with any of the conditions that Amanda had read off?

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: I had the facade, the tree wells, I think we addressed in the fact that, I'm not sure, I think that was David's point, right? I don't think we We don't have much to put trees there. Unfortunately, it's not much land there. So I think that may be something we can't work on David.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, we can take that one out. I think that's that's correct.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: The tank screening obviously tenant kind of driven porous pavement will will explore it. I'm not sure. I think it's more of an exploration, right?

[Andre Leroux]: Just to look at the- Yeah, I think that would be the condition to be explore the use of porous pavement on the parking areas.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, and the sidewalk along across the loading dock, we agree that that makes sense to do it.

[Andre Leroux]: The way you stated- That's street grade, but with concrete.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Correct. Yeah. Yeah, that works. And that's just David's comments. I mean, Todd's comments. I think, yeah, we're 100% on board with those conditions.

[Andre Leroux]: Board members, did we miss anything?

[David Blumberg]: Andre, was there something to the potential shifting the landscaping in the parking lot to perhaps create a landscaping area, and also the idea of the length of the parking spaces along that fence line?

[Andre Leroux]: Um, I guess my, my, you know, Todd said that we might be able to squeeze three feet out. And, uh, for me, it just seemed like a washed and didn't really seem worth doing and shifting, you know, they have a nicely landscaped entrance right now. Shifting that to the interior didn't seem to add a lot. Okay.

[David Blumberg]: I don't disagree with that. I just wanted to make sure we hadn't reached some other conclusion on that.

[Andre Leroux]: Yeah. Thank you. All right, well, with this list of conditions, and I think we should just have some language in there saying that the chair will work with the community development staff to finalize the wording. We could accept a motion to approve the special permit with site plan review, including conditions for this project. Is there a board member that would like to so move?

[Deanna Peabody]: Andre, I'll so move that motion.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. Thank you, Deanna. Is there a second?

[David Blumberg]: I can second, Andre. It's David.

[Andre Leroux]: David? All right, roll call vote. Christy Dowd.

[Jenny Graham]: Aye.

[Andre Leroux]: David Blumberg. Aye. Anna Peabody.

[Deanna Peabody]: Aye.

[Andre Leroux]: And I'm an aye as well. Special permit with site plan review is approved.

[SPEAKER_15]: Awesome.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Thank you so much, everybody. This has obviously been an enjoyable experience and a good discussion, so I appreciate your flexibility on a kind of new way of moving through a process. So we, uh, this isn't the last you see of us, obviously we'll be back hopefully sooner than anybody hopes, um, to see you guys. So thank you.

[Andre Leroux]: Well, thank you. It's really, uh, I think everybody agrees. That's a great project. Brings a lot of jobs to the community, different kinds of jobs. So we're excited about it. Awesome.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Great. I hope everybody has a great night.

[Andre Leroux]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_06]: Thank you guys.

[KdVL9syClrc_SPEAKER_00]: Thank you, good night. Thank you.

[Andre Leroux]: All right, so CD board members, we're not quite done, but since we only have four of us, I'm going to suggest we continue the discussion of the rules and regulations one more time.

[Jenny Graham]: I think that's fair. Yeah, I feel like more of us need to be here.

[Andre Leroux]: Christy, would you make that motion?

[Jenny Graham]: I will make that motion to continue. until we have more board members at the next meeting to review the rules and ranks.

[David Blumberg]: Thank you. I'd like to second that.

[Andre Leroux]: Roll call vote. Christy down.

[Adam Hurtubise]: Hi.

[Andre Leroux]: David Blumberg. Hi. Hi. I'm an eye as well. Thank you. That's unanimously continued.

[Deanna Peabody]: Do we have a date yet for the next meeting? And I might have a couple.

[Alicia Hunt]: Is that the next? Yes. Under miscellaneous and other updates, that's one of the bullet items there.

[Amanda Centrella]: Yes. And actually, before we get to that, I wanted to give a brief update about a previous filing that had come in, because it kind of ties into our scheduling. So let me just pull up my notes here. But 200 Boston Avenue. is reconsidering a bit their project. And they've spoken with staff here, and we've consulted with the building commissioner in kind of figuring out what the process ought to be moving forward. But they are, yeah, I think reimagining a slightly smaller project. And had kind of heard what the board had been saying about some of their concerns as well as I think a change in circumstances with a potential tenant. So just wanted to give you a heads up that that will be coming before you, excuse me. Another time, and it will be kind of reconceived as a new project. it won't need to be going, or sorry, it will be still going to the ZBA. So the board here will be in charge of putting forth some recommendations or even just continuing the existing recommendations that were already kind of discussed. It'll be a slightly expedited process from normal, and And so I want to make sure that, and this, this is why it ties into some of the scheduling, if we talk about September, kind of just want to make sure that we're not overloading the agenda, and also kind of getting things within a certain timeframe. So yeah, and I guess maybe I would just invite Victor, if there's anything else you felt like might be relevant to share about the nature of the changes for this project.

[Andre Leroux]: Amanda, just to be clear, we would still have to do a public hearing, right?

[Amanda Centrella]: It would be a public meeting, yes. So we would still have to do a public meeting. We would still put out a courtesy notice to abutters. much of the process is kind of the same as before, with like a little bit of time shaved off for review, because the project itself is kind of similar in conception to what was already put before the board, but less of an impact. So a lot of the materials still provide like updated plans, and then kind of a memo detailing changes with traffic or parking.

[Victor Schrader]: Yeah, that's a great summary, Amanda. Andre, the process actually wouldn't change. We don't expect. We are asking Cummings to refile with the building commissioner. He'll issue a new permit refusal, but we don't anticipate a change in the steps. So it would come to you for a recommendation and then move on to ZBA, which would be the special permit.

[Andre Leroux]: It's a significantly smaller project is my understanding.

[Victor Schrader]: Yeah, it is. It looks similar to the original design. Smaller garage, smaller gross leaseable, and smaller retail. So it's We do want them to update some of the material, obviously present a new package to you all so that you can have your input. But as Amanda said, because it's not dramatically different, we don't expect the need for the typical kind of time frame around internal staff review, because everyone's looked at it recently, and it shouldn't shouldn't require a whole lot of time and attention to move it forward. So if we can expedite it, then we'll follow the normal process. But we are trying to work with them to move it along if we can.

[Andre Leroux]: So Amanda, in terms of the scheduling,

[Amanda Centrella]: Yes, so with that in mind, I kind of wanted to just ask the board what their thoughts were on, so there are, as I know, of two filings that could or should be happening in September for review. I wasn't sure if we wanted to include both of them in one meeting or if it would make sense to split those up into separate meetings within September. But two dates that I wanted to float by y'all were September 15th and September 22nd.

[Victor Schrader]: And the other filing is 16 Foster Court, which has come in with their formal proposal.

[Andre Leroux]: How many units is that?

[Amanda Centrella]: Nine, eight.

[Andre Leroux]: Have they changed their plans much?

[Victor Schrader]: Yeah, they have. They they definitely incorporated the many of the recommendations that came out of the last, the preview meeting with the board. Um is it dramatically changed? No. But certainly, you

[Andre Leroux]: I could do either one, Amanda. 15th is a little bit of a preference for me.

[Alicia Hunt]: Is there any thought to doing two separate meetings? Or do we think that both of those will be short enough to have them in one meeting together that it's fine? I just want to be explicit about it. And at this point, it's too late that we wouldn't add anything else to the agenda. And if there was anything big coming in, we'd know about it. We could get an A&R or something that could slip in.

[Andre Leroux]: I mean, I feel like we're not going to be changing our conditions much for the Cummings one. The Foster Court could be a longer conversation, but we have seen it before, so there's that advantage. So I don't mind doing both of them together, because I don't think the Cummings one is going to be going to take a long time. Board members, it's your pleasure.

[Deanna Peabody]: That works for me, doing both on the same.

[David Blumberg]: Sounds good to me, too.

[Amanda Centrella]: Yeah, same. Would the 15th be amenable to you all? Yes.

[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes, that looks fine.

[David Blumberg]: Yes.

[Amanda Centrella]: Great. And yeah, maybe I'll just, we'll say that works, and I'll confirm with other board members who aren't present, but we'll say the 15th.

[Andre Leroux]: I finished before by nine, so Alicia, you have 60 seconds for any updates.

[Alicia Hunt]: The have two things on one was the what you just said, so the other update was I just wanted to sorry I wrote this down and now it's on the other screen. I apologize.

[Andre Leroux]: It's the climate adaptation plan. Is that right?

[Alicia Hunt]: Thank you. You have the, you have our notes open and I can't get that window. Two screens here. Um, so we sent around some of them, my staff working on the climate plan, sent around the draft strategies, the community development board members. And this is basically it's in preview mode. And if any of you want to put the mid comments or feedback on them, Now, before it goes public, if you want to submit stuff within the next week, we can do that. We're happy to get that input. Don't feel that this is your only input chance. Basically, the process is that in early September, we're going to release a full draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan with all the strategies and actions in it and take public comment. And we expect to be open for public comment for at least two months. So there'll be plenty of time to review it and to provide feedback. I've been particularly asking departments such as Tim's and Todd's that have very direct connections to it to look at strategies before we go public so that we're not publishing anything that they then have serious concerns with. So I don't know if any members, we didn't hear anything back from the DEVELOP planning board. So I just sort of wanted to mention that, that if you want to review it, if you want to provide input before we go public, this is the chance.

[Andre Leroux]: Thanks, Alicia. Appreciate that. And maybe, you know, Amanda, you could just send out an email reminder to the board, especially since we're missing members.

[Alicia Hunt]: Yeah, I am. Amanda, if you help me remember, I'll look in my email. I should have, I was copied on all the messages, so I should actually have the message that went to the board about this, that I can resend it to everybody, sort of reminding you all. When we met today on the plan, I said I'd mention it to you guys tonight, in case anybody wanted to do that.

[Andre Leroux]: Great, thank you. Well, thanks, everybody. Do we have a... Go ahead, David.

[David Blumberg]: No questions. Any updates on our seventh member and terms and that sort of stuff to share?

[Alicia Hunt]: Sorry, I discussed... I sent the mayor some information, discussed with her briefly the membership in July, and then I went on a two-week vacation. And so I have not... I've been back since Monday. I haven't had a chance to follow up with her, and she didn't act on it while I was away. So that's why it seems like nothing has happened.

[Andre Leroux]: It's also August. Things slow down. Sure.

[Alicia Hunt]: Yeah, we're working. I apologize. We're also working on hiring. A lot of new positions were approved in the city budget. There is churn going on in the municipal employment world. This may be happening in all fields everywhere, but the number of openings and people leaving municipalities to go to other municipalities, like we just left the city engineer to Cambridge, not Tim, but like one of his staff. So we're kind of a bit overwhelmed by the churn that's occurring with staff.

[David Blumberg]: My other question is on the progress on zoning. I've been trying to keep up with it. The last viewing I did was, I believe, from the July 24th meeting with Mark Mabrowski, and obviously, Alicia, you were contributing at that. I don't know if there was one subsequent to that, if you can remember and let me know, I'm feeling already a little bit of stress and a little sweat about what this is going to look like when it comes back to us, because I keep hearing the city council talking about how they're relying on us to air this thing out and provide feedback. I don't know how much time we're going to have to deal with it, and that's what gets me a little nervous.

[Alicia Hunt]: And you said it was the July meetings, the one that you remember that.

[David Blumberg]: 24th is, that's the date that I recall being, this is like the last one that I could find on demand, so to speak.

[Alicia Hunt]: I was just checking my notes. Yeah, we got an update in June and they met on it in July.

[David Blumberg]: This one went over wireless and it went over the definition of family.

[Alicia Hunt]: Yeah, that's the last meeting that they held.

[David Blumberg]: Victor spoke about O2 at the same time.

[Alicia Hunt]: Yeah, they have not notified me of another meeting.

[David Blumberg]: Okay. It seems like Mark is always pushing to get a draft turned around, but they don't always come back with a meeting that's as prompt as perhaps his turnaround is.

[Adam Hurtubise]: Right.

[David Blumberg]: But you don't have a sense of when that's going to come to us or how long will we be allowed to kind of deal with it?

[Alicia Hunt]: Well, so I would look at it this way with if they were first zoning to us, we have a short window of time to open a public hearing. But there's nothing that says when we have to close the public hearing. They also have to open a public hearing in sort of that same amount of time. It's a very odd work in the law. But they obviously can't do anything until they hear back from us. My expectation is that if we have a couple of public hearings, we continue it, that would be I'm anticipating that. I can't imagine, you know, they have 15 meetings on this. We obviously can't have one public hearing in one night and that's it. We'll open a public hearing. We'll have a short window to open the public hearing, but then I anticipate we would meet multiple times on it. I just don't see any other way. It's massive.

[Andre Leroux]: Anything else.

[Alicia Hunt]: I'll just add that I assume that everybody has pays attention to the news and that with the evolution of this pandemic. We are not talking about in person meetings anytime soon. And if anybody, if a member of the committee feels that we should be meeting in person, there are members of the public who feel that they want us to adjust how we're doing business, it would be helpful for us to hear that directly in this office, because we have not gotten any feedback from anybody saying we wish the Community Development Board meetings were in person. If that changes, we'll discuss it. But with the numbers going back up, we are not talking about holding in-person meetings.

[Andre Leroux]: I think virtual meetings actually work well for this board, especially given the presentations and the ability of people to hear and see the proponents. Well, it's been another long evening, so I'm going to entertain a motion to adjourn, if someone would like to make that motion.

[David Blumberg]: Andre, David, I'd like to make a motion to adjourn tonight's meeting.

[Andre Leroux]: Is there a second?

[Deanna Peabody]: Yeah, I'll second.

[Andre Leroux]: Roll call vote. Christy Dowd?

Jenny Graham total time: 1.04 minutes total words: 109