* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:04]
          ALRIGHT, GOOD 
          [ROLL CALL]
AFTERNOON EVERYONE. 
          I AM GONNA CALL TODAY'S ORDINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING TO ORDER. 
          THE CALL OF TODAY'S MEETING IS, UH, ON A ZONING PETITION BY DOUGLAS PREE P BROWN ATAL TO AMEND CAMBRIDGE ZONING ORDINANCE IN ARTICLES 2 5 6 11 IN 19 WITH THE INTENT OF AMENDING HEIGHT, SETBACK, AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, ADDING A STEP BACK AND BUILDING DEPTH AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS, AND ADDING MINIMUM OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES IN RESIDENCY ONE DISTRICTS, INCLUDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY AS WELL AS REDUCING THE PROJECT REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT THRESHOLD FROM 75,000 TO 20,000 SQUARE FEET FOR RESIDENTIAL USES IN RESIDENCY ONE DISTRICTS AMONG OTHER CHANGES. 
          THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS PRESENT. 
          COUNCILOR ZUBIE, PRESENT VICE MAYOR PRESENT COUNCIL OF FLAHERTY. 
          PRESENT. 
          PRESENT. 
          COUNCIL MCGOVERN. 
          PRESENT. 
          COUNSELOR NOLAN, ABSENT. 
          COUNCILOR SIMMONS. 
          ABSENT. 
          COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER. 
          PRESENT. 
          PRESENT. 
          COUNCILOR ZUI. 
          ABSENT MAYOR SIDIKI. 
          PRESENT. 
          PRESENT. 
          YOU HAVE SIX MEMBERS RECORDED AS PRESENT, AND THREE RECORDED AS ABSENT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          THE, UH, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER TWO OF THE ACTS OF 2025, ADOPTED BY MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL COURT AND APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR, THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO USE REMOTE PARTICIPATION AT MEETINGS OF THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS COMMITTEES. 
          PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDS THIS MEETING AND MAKES IT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR FUTURE VIEWING. 
          THIRD PARTIES MAY ALSO BE AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDING THIS MEETING. 
          IN ADDITION TO HAVING MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL PARTICIPATE REMOTELY, WE HAVE ALSO SET UP ZOOM, TELECONFERENCE, EXCUSE ME, FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES AND SIGN UP AS AVAILABLE UNTIL 1:00 PM IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE VISIT THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION OF THE CITY'S WEBPAGE. 
          INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOW TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK ARE POSTED THERE. 
          ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED SIGNUP PROCEDURE, YOU'LL RECEIVE A LINK TO THE ZOOM MEETING. 
          YOU CAN ALSO EMAIL WRITTEN COMMENTS FOR RECORD TO THE CITY CLERK AT CITY CLERK@CAMBRIDGEMA.GOV. 
          TO WATCH THE MEETING, PLEASE TUNE INTO CHANNEL 22 OR VISIT THE OPEN MEETING PORTAL OF THE CITY'S WEBSITE. 
          WITH THAT, ALL OF TODAY'S VOTES, IF ANY, WILL BE BY ROLL CALL COUNCILOR EY PRESENT. 
          COUNCILOR ZUI IS RECORDED AS PRESENT. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          UH, ALSO NOTE THAT THIS, SINCE THIS IS A ZONING PO PETITION, UH, PETITION EXPIRES, AND THE EXPIRY DATE IS OCTOBER 19TH, UH, 2026. 
          SO, IN UH, TERMS OF 
          [CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA]
ORDER OPERATIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING, WE'LL FIRST HAVE A PRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER WHO I BELIEVE IS ON BY ZOOM. 
          WE WILL THEN GO TO CITY STAFF FOR, UH, COMMENTS ON THE PETITION, UH, UH, THEN GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          UM, AND THEN AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT, WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          COUNCILOR NOLAN PRESENT. 
          COUNCILOR NOLAN IS RECORDED AS PRESENT. 
          GREAT. 
          UH, WITH THAT, UH, 
          [COMMUNICATIONS]
I LEAVE THE PETITIONER, MR. BROWN IS ON ZOOM. 
          UM, MR. BROWN, ARE YOU ABLE TO SHARE YOUR PRESENTATION? I'M, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? WE CANNOT HEAR YOU IN THE CHAMBER. 
          GIVE US JUST A MINUTE. 
          SORRY. 
          GIVE US JUST A SECOND. 
          IT NEEDS TO SWITCH OUR, WHERE THE AUDIO'S COMING FROM. 
          COUNCILOR SIMMONS. 
          PRESENT. 
          UH, MR. RON, COULD YOU TRY AGAIN? CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YEAH, NOW WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          UH, PLEASE PROCEED. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          UM, THANK YOU, UM, FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. 
          I KNOW IT'S, UH, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER, UM, BUT I, I, I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR ALSO FOR MOVING THIS DISCUSSION ALONG. 
          UM, UH, WE, THE PETITIONERS APPRECIATE IT. 
          UH, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS KIND OF BRIEF. 
          UM, YOU ALREADY HAVE THE PETITION AND YOU HAVE CD'S RESPONSE TO IT, UM, AND I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH IT POINT BY POINT. 
          UM, BUT I REALLY WOULD RATHER TO TALK ABOUT MY MOTIVATIONS IN FILING IT AND ALSO PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATIONS AS YOU GUYS WISH. 
          UM, BUT FIRST I WOULD SAY CONGRATULATIONS ON 
          [00:05:01]
ACHIEVING THE GOAL OF LEGALIZING MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. 
          I THINK THAT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING, AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG SUCCESS. 
          UM, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW IS MORE AROUND THE DETAILS AND THE IMPLEMENTATION, BUT I THINK THAT GOAL IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE SUPPORTED AND, AND MOST PEOPLE IN THE CITY HAVE SUPPORTED. 
          UM, I THINK THERE'S ALSO A RECOGNITION THOUGH THAT, UM, IT'S NOT PERFECT THAT WE MAY NEED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES. 
          AND SO I SEE THIS REALLY AS A FIRST STEP IN A PROCESS OF CONSTANTLY SORT OF REFINING AND IMPROVING IT. 
          UM, BUT I ALSO, THAT THE CHANGES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW ARE SPECIFICALLY IN THE RES C ONE, WHICH IS THE NEW ZONE. 
          AND SO IT SORT OF MAKES SENSE THAT WE'RE STILL DIALING THAT IN AND THAT CHANGES MAY BE NECESSARY. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL START THE PRESENTATION. 
          UM, SO FIRST ABOUT ME. 
          I'VE HEARD LOTS OF ONLINE THEORIES. 
          UH, I'VE BEEN A LONG TIME CAMBRIDGE RESIDENT, UH, A, A PROPERTY OWNER RENOVATOR, HAVE THREE KIDS, UM, BEEN A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER, BLOCK PARTIES, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OFFICER COACHING, UM, AND A CONCERNED CITIZEN. 
          AND, UM, YES, I AM FROM CONNECTICUT. 
          THERE'S BEEN SOME SPECULATION. 
          UM, I THINK I'VE BEEN INVOLVED SORT OF WITH LOCAL POLITICS PROBABLY FOR NOW 15 YEARS. 
          UM, AND, UH, THERE WAS ALSO SOME QUESTIONS ONLINE ABOUT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THIS PROCESS? WHAT'S THE CITIZEN'S PETITION THING AND IS THIS A VALID, UH, WAY OF, OF DOING BUSINESS? UM, SO THERE'S A LITTLE BACKGROUND. 
          CITIZENS PETITIONS HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR FOREVER. 
          THEY'RE ARE ACTUALLY A PRETTY IMPORTANT DRIVER OF ZONING REFORM. 
          IF YOU GO BACK AS FAR AS I HAVE RECORDS FOR, WHICH IS 1998, THERE'S BEEN OVER 300 ZONING PETITIONS FILED. 
          AND HERE'S THE BREAKDOWN. 
          AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE, THE SINGLE LARGEST CATEGORY IS ACTUALLY CITIZENS PETITIONS. 
          UM, OVER THE LAST 28 YEARS HAS BEEN MORE CITIZENS PETITIONS FILED THAN ALL THE PETITIONS FILED BY CDD AND THE CITY COUNCIL COMBINED. 
          UM, AND AMONG THOSE, UM, CLOSE TO 35%, MR. BROWN, SORRY TO INTERRUPT. 
          TRYING TO SHOW, UM, SLIDES OF SHOW THEY'RE NOT SHOWING UP ON THE SCREEN YET. 
          OH, YEAH. 
          UM, SORRY, LET ME SHARE THAT. 
          I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          NO WORRIES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          HERE'S WHAT YOU NEED TO SEE. 
          HOW'S THAT? YES, WE'RE ON THE ABOUT CITIZENS PETITION SLIDE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, YEAH, SO IT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE QUITE COMMON. 
          UM, PROBABLY THREE, FOUR OF THEM A YEAR. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, CLOSE TO 40 OF THEM HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY ADOPTED. 
          MANY OTHERS HAVE, UH, HAVE NOT NECESSARILY BEEN ADOPTED OUTRIGHT, BUT HAVE LED TO CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED THROUGH OTHER SOURCES. 
          I, HERE'S SOME OF THE ONES THAT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN PREVIOUSLY. 
          SO, UM, I WAS A CO-AUTHOR WITH PATRICK BARRETT OF THE A DU IN BASEMENT PETITION BACK IN 2015, WHICH PASSED, UH, MIKE NGO AND I WORKED ON CLIMATE RESILIENCE ZONING, WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY PLACED ON FILE, BUT, BUT THEN BECAME A PLANNING BOARD PETITION AND WAS PASSED. 
          UH, I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE MORATORIUM AND ILL WIFE, WHICH ULTIMATELY LED TO A NEW WORKING GROUP, UH, WHICH I SERVED ON. 
          UM, THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING PETITION WAS ONE THAT YOU GUYS REJECTED BACK IN 2023. 
          ONE OF THE CORE PRINCIPLES OF THAT WAS LEGALIZING MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY. 
          AND I ALSO HELPED, UH, JOE RONAN WITH HIS VERSION OF THE SAME MULTIFAMILY ZONING PETITION. 
          BOTH OF THOSE PETITIONS HAVE CONCEPTS THAT ULTIMATELY WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE MFHO. 
          SO I, I WOULD SAY JUST IN SUMMING THAT UP, I'M NOT NECESSARILY, UH, ANTI-DEVELOPMENT. 
          UM, AND THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY SOME, UH, ATTEMPT TO, UH, STONEWALL OR HIJACK A PROCESS. 
          UH, HERE'S WHY I ACTUALLY PROPOSED THE AMENDMENTS. 
          FIRST OFF, WE'VE, WE'VE SEEN ENOUGH, UH, WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY, THERE'S SERIOUS CONCERNS THAT ARE BEING EXPRESSED IN PRETTY MUCH EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND THERE'S A CON, THERE'S A FEELING THAT CHANGE CAN'T REALLY WAIT. 
          THAT THERE, THERE'S HARM ACTUALLY OCCURRING NOW, AND THEREFORE DISCUSSIONS NEED TO START NOW. 
          UM, TO FRAME THE, THE FUTURE CONVERSATIONS, I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT THAT WE SORT OF PRESENT THE, THE IMMEDIATE CONCERNS, WHICH IS WHAT MY PETITION IS BUILT AROUND, IS ADDRESSING THE, THE AREAS WHERE IT SEEMS LIKE THE, THE, THE ISSUES ARE ARISING. 
          UM, 
          [00:10:01]
I WOULD POINT OUT THAT ONE OF THE CORE PROBLEMS IS THAT IN THE PAST WE HAD FLOOR AREA RATIO AS A DEVELOPMENT CONTROL THAT, UM, LIMITED THE OVERALL SIZE OF WHAT CAN BE BUILT OUTSIDE OF SETBACKS AND HEIGHT AND OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, WITH THE ELIMINATION OF THAT, IT HAS REALLY OPENED UP A FLOODGATE TO THE SIZE OF PROJECTS THAT ARE PERMITTED. 
          NOW, THE, UM, MULTIPLE REALLY OVER THE, AT LEAST IN MY ZONE WHERE I LIVE, WHICH WAS RES B UM, NOW PERMITS 12 TIMES MORE DEVELOPMENT THAN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED. 
          AND I THINK MY CONCERN ISN'T WITH THE IDEA THAT THAT OF GROWTH, BUT WITH THE EXCESSIVE SCALE OF THE GROWTH THAT'S NOW ALLOWED. 
          UM, WE'VE ALREADY STARTED TO SEE THIS HAPPENING ALL OVER THE CITY, WHICH IS PARCELS BEING PURCHASED AND TORN DOWN, AND IN MANY CASES TORN DOWN WITHOUT ANY PLAN TO BE BUILT YET. 
          UH, WITHIN MY, WITHIN TWO BLOCKS OF MY HOUSE, I HAVE MULTIPLE, UM, EMPTY LOTS WHERE HOUSES HAVE BEEN TORN DOWN, NOTHING HAS BEEN BUILT IN THE LAST YEAR, AND THE COMMUNITY'S NOT EVEN REALLY SURE WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THOSE PARCELS. 
          I, UM, HERE'S A CASE STUDY THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER BY SHANNON FINLEY, UM, AND IT SORT OF GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT PERMITS THAT ARE BEING ISSUED AND WHAT'S BEING TORN DOWN AND WHAT'S REPLACING IT. 
          AND SHE DID A STUDY OF 85 BUILDINGS THAT HAD DEMOLITION PERMITS ISSUED. 
          AND WHAT SHE FOUND IS ACROSS THOSE 85, UH, 85 HOUSES, THERE WERE 192 RENTAL UNITS THAT WERE ELIMINATED BY THOSE DEMOLITIONS. 
          AND THAT WITHIN THAT, IF YOU REMOVE THE OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENCE, THAT'S 150 RENTAL UNITS. 
          UM, WHEN YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT WHAT WILL REPLACE THEM, THIS IS THE NET. 
          SO ON THE LEFT, WE'RE LOSING 150 UNITS ON THE RIGHT, WE'RE ADDING INCLUSIONARY UNITS, AFFORDABLE UNITS, UM, AND WE'RE ADDING MARKET RATE UNITS, WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN HERE. 
          BUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUE OF AFFORDABILITY, THESE RED AND GREEN UNITS ARE THE, ARE THE RESULT. 
          SO ON THE LEFT, WE ARE ELIMINATING 150 WHAT ARE LIKELY MIDDLE INCOME UNITS, AND WE'RE REPLACING THEM WITH A SMALLER NUMBER, 89 UNITS THAT ARE LOW INCOME. 
          AND SO ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS, REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH MARKET RATE HOUSING YOU'RE BUILDING, YOU'RE LOSING UNITS IN THE LOW AND MIDDLE INCOME CATEGORY, AND SPECIFICALLY YOU'RE LOSING ALL OF YOUR MIDDLE INCOME UNITS. 
          SO WHAT'S REPLACING IT IS LOW INCOME UNITS AND MARKET RATE UNITS. 
          AND SO THIS IS ONE OF THE REAL CONCERNS IS THAT WE'RE TEARING DOWN EXISTING HOMES, INCLUDING A PARCEL DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME, AND WE'RE REPLACING IT WITH NOT SIMILAR PROJECTS. 
          SO WE'RE REPLACING IT WITH A DIFFERENT TYPE OF HOUSING, WHICH IS LOW INCOME AND MARKET RATE, NOT MIDDLE INCOME. 
          AND THAT'S CONCERNING. 
          SO WHAT I SET OUT TO DO IS TO MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS AND THE BASIC PRINCIPLES ARE AS FOLLOWS. 
          FIRST OFF, WHATEVER WE DO SHOULD ADHERE TO ALL OF THE MASTER PLANNING EFFORTS THAT WE'VE DONE PREVIOUSLY. 
          YOU KNOW, UH, EIGHT YEARS AGO WE DID A MASTER PLAN. 
          IT WAS A THREE YEAR PROCESS, AND WE MADE CERTAIN, UM, DECISIONS OFF OF THAT, WHICH ARE, ARE STILL VALID TO MY WAY OF SEEING. 
          UM, THERE'S ALSO A CORE FEELING THAT THE WHOLE IDEA OF ZONING IS TO PROVIDE PREDICTABILITY SO THAT BUYERS AND SELLERS UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE BUYING AND SELLING OWNERS AND NEIGHBORS UNDERSTAND WHAT CAN BE BUILT AND WHAT CAN'T. 
          THE CITY ITSELF CAN PREDICT FUTURE GROWTH AND, AND POPULATION. 
          SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DON'T CREATE ZONING THAT IS, UH, SO PERMISSIVE THAT YOU REALLY HAVE NO WAY OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT COULD BE BUILT IN ANY ONE TIME, IN ANY ONE LOCATION. 
          UM, I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT ANY ZONING CHANGES WE DECIDE TO MAKE, THE GOAL IS ALWAYS THAT THEY'RE THE MINIMUM NECESSARY TO FIX THE PROBLEM. 
          SO IF WE IDENTIFY A PROBLEM, WHAT'S THE MINIMUM ZONING CHANGE THAT'S NECESSARY TO FIX IT? UM, SOME OTHER THINGS I'LL NOTE THOUGH IS I, I BELIEVE PERSONALLY THAT INCREMENTAL GROWTH IS BETTER THAN WHOLESALE DEMOLITION. 
          UM, I WOULD RATHER WORK WITH WHAT WE HAVE AND EXPAND IT THAN TEAR EVERYTHING DOWN AND REPLACE IT. 
          UM, I, SO, AND I THINK THIS IS 
          [00:15:01]
AN ISSUE THAT RESONATED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD, IS I BELIEVE THAT IT, IT MATTERS TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. 
          AND IT, WE'VE SEEN TIME AND AGAIN THAT SOME OF THESE NEW PROJECTS ARE NOT FUNCTIONING AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR WOULD. 
          UM, AND THAT'S BOTH IN WHAT'S BEING BUILT AND ALSO IN HOW ABOUT HOW THEY'RE GOING ABOUT DOING IT. 
          UM, SO FINALLY, I'LL JUST SAY THIS IS REALLY A CON CONVERSATION ABOUT OPTIONS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN, YOU CAN LOOK AT WHAT I'VE PROPOSED AND SAY, I DON'T LIKE ANY OF IT. 
          YOU CAN SAY, I LIKE SOME OF IT. 
          YOU CAN SAY, I'D LIKE TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO IT. 
          UM, I'M NOT, I'M NOT STUCK IN THE SAND HERE TO SAY THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE. 
          UM, BUT I THINK WE KNOW ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT SOME THINGS ARE GONNA HAVE TO BE ADJUSTED. 
          UM, GOING BACK TO THE IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, CORE PRINCIPLES AND PRIOR PLANNING, IT, IT WAS ALWAYS PART OF THE ENVISION PROCESS THAT, UM, WE WOULD BE RESPECTFUL OF THE CURRENT SCALE AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AS WE EXPANDED. 
          YOU SEE THIS TIME AND AGAIN THROUGH THE ENVISION DOCUMENTS, UM, THAT WE WANT TO VALUE HISTORIC RESOURCES, THAT WE WANT TO PRESERVE EXISTING PATTERNS, AND THAT WE ENCOURAGE REUSE OF BUILDINGS. 
          AND THAT IS REALLY NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING. 
          UM, ULTIMATELY THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE ENVISION PLAN STATE THAT WE WANNA TRY TO RETAIN AS MUCH OF THE EXISTING FABRIC AS WE CAN. 
          AND I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE ENDED UP WITH THE NEW ZONING. 
          SO HERE, THE, HERE ARE THE AREAS THAT ARE ADDRESSED IN MY PETITION, WHICH IS HEIGHT. 
          UM, AND BY THE WAY, CDD DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB OF SUMMING UP THE CHANGES, UM, THAT I PROPOSED. 
          SO ONE IS AROUND HEIGHT, SETBACKS AND RELATED ISSUES OF STEP BACKS AND SIDEWALL LENGTH, UM, OPEN SPACE PARKING, AND THEN DESIGN REVIEW FOR REALLY LARGER PROJECTS. 
          HERE'S WHAT I'M NOT PROPOSING. 
          WERE CHANGED, WE'RE, I'M NOT PROPOSING, UM, THAT WE, UH, ELIMINATE, UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY, I MEAN, I, I'M PROPOSING THAT WE KEEP MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WERE ELIMINATED. 
          SO WE ELIMINATED A LOT AREA PER UNIT AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND A MINIMUM, MINIMUM LOT WIDTH. 
          I'M PROPOSING WE STAY WITH THAT, OKAY. 
          THAT WAS ALL ADDITIONAL BUREAUCRATIC OVERHEAD THAT WE DON'T NEED. 
          UM, I'M ALSO PROPOSING THAT WE, WE NOT BRING BACK THE FAR LIMITATIONS, AT LEAST FOR THE MOMENT, THOUGH, THAT MAY ULTIMATELY HAVE TO BE, UH, ON THE TABLE. 
          UH, I'M NOT ADDING ANY LIMITS ON HOW MANY UNITS YOU CAN BUILD OR HOW BIG THEY CAN BE. 
          I'M NOT MODIFYING WHAT WE'RE DOING ABOUT HEIGHT ALONG CORRIDORS AND IN SQUARES. 
          THESE REALLY ARE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE RES C ONE DISTRICT NOT OUTSIDE IT. 
          AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT LOSING UNITS EVERY, I KEEP HEARING ONLINE THAT I'M PROPOSING THAT WE, WE GO BACKWARD, THAT I'M ANTI HOUSING, THAT WE LOSE UNITS, WE THROUGH ALL THIS PROCESS CONTINUE TO GAIN UNITS. 
          MULTIFAMILY HOUSING STILL ALLOWED EVERYWHERE AND WE ARE GAINING UNITS. 
          THE QUESTION IS HOW MANY UNITS AND WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO TRADE FOR THAT? YOU KNOW, SOME, SO GETTING INTO SOME OF THE SPECIFIC ISSUES, WHICH IS WITH HEIGHT, I THINK IT'S CONTEXT BASED. 
          THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE, UH, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU PUT A BUILDING THAT WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE A LOT OF HEIGHT IS APPROPRIATE. 
          WE HAVE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE IT'S MORE CHALLENGING. 
          UM, AND SO I DON'T THINK THAT NINE STORY BUILDINGS IN THE RESIDENTS SEE ONE DISTRICT ARE REALLY APPROPRIATE AT ALL. 
          AND SO FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU'RE DECIDING TO BUILD THEM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY THAT COMMON ANYWAY. 
          NINE STORIES IS SORT OF A FUNNY HEIGHT BECAUSE OF THE COSTS OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, BUT, UM, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK NINE STORIES MAKE SENSE IN MOST OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          UM, I ALSO DON'T KNOW IN MANY CASES WHETHER SIX STORIES MAKE SENSE IF YOU'RE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH MUCH SMALLER HOMES AROUND IT. 
          AND SO THE WAY I SORT OF MADE IT CONTEXT BASED, AND I'VE HEARD OTHER WAYS OF DOING IT, WAS TO SAY, IF YOUR ABUTTERS ARE FOUR MORE STORIES, YOU CAN BE SIX STORIES. 
          IF THEY'RE NOT, YOU'RE LIMITED TO FOUR. 
          AND THE IDEA IS THAT OVER TIME, ONCE EVERYTHING CAME UP TO FOUR, THEN EVERYTHING WOULD BE UNLOCKED AND YOU COULD GO UP TO SIX. 
          SO IT'S A, IT'S A ITERATIVE SORT OF INCREMENTAL PROCESS RATHER THAN IMMEDIATELY ALLOWING SIX OR NINE STORY BUILDINGS. 
          UM, WITH, WITH SETBACKS, I THINK, AND WE SAW THIS CDD PROPOSED THIS ACTUALLY, AND, AND IT WAS INTERESTING TO SEE THAT WE BOTH HIT ON THE SAME SOLUTION, THAT AT LEAST ONE SIDE OUGHT 
          [00:20:01]
TO HAVE MORE SPACE FOR A DRIVEWAY OR FOR ADDITIONAL TREES OR FOR OPEN SPACE THAT HAVING FIVE FEET ON BOTH SIDES OF A HOUSE IS, UM, PROBABLY TOO AGGRESSIVE. 
          UM, I'M ALSO PROPOSING HERE THAT AS THE BUILDING GETS TALLER, THAT STEPS BACK, UM, THAT SOME OF THE UPPER STORIES ARE PULLED BACK A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          SO IT DOESN'T HAVE QUITE AS A OPPRESSIVE SENSE AGAINST THE NEIGHBORS. 
          AND I'M ALSO PROPOSING THAT LIKE THE, THE OVERALL LENGTH OF A BUILDING, THE DEPTH OF IT ON A LOT IS LIMITED TO A PERCENTAGE OF THE LOT. 
          THIS, THIS IDEA THAT CAME FROM TIM LOVE, UM, WHO PROPOSED THE SAME THING. 
          YOU DON'T WANT TO TOTALLY WALL OFF YOUR NEIGHBOR. 
          THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT YOU CAN'T BREAK A BUILDING UP INTO, INTO MORE THAN ONE STRUCTURE AND, UM, AND HAVE A LONGER, DEEPER BUILDING. 
          YOU KNOW, HERE'S SOME CLASSIC EXAMPLES FROM FROM HISTORY. 
          THE ONE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE IS ACTUALLY IN OREGON. 
          AND, UM, THAT'S THE INSPIRATION FOR THE MOVIE UP. 
          NOW, THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS A TRIPLE DECKER IN ATLANTIC CITY THAT IS DONALD TRUMP'S TRUMP PLAZA THAT, UM, WAS UNABLE TO BUY THE LOT AND BASICALLY WALLED IT OFF. 
          AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WOULD LOOK AT ANY OF THESE PHOTOS AND SAY, OH, THIS IS A DESIRABLE OUTCOME. 
          HERE'S, HERE'S A MORE SIMPLE VERSION OF IT THAT WE'RE SEEING IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          SO ON THE LEFT IS AN EXISTING HOUSE. 
          ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSAL FOR A REPLACEMENT. 
          AND SO YOU'LL SEE ON THE LEFT, IT'S A TWO STORY HOUSE WITH SOME WINDOWS FITS CLOSE TO THE LINE ON THE RIGHT, THE, THE BUILDING HAS GOTTEN TALLER, IT'S GOTTEN DEEPER, AND IT'S LOST ALL ITS WINDOWS. 
          AND SO EVEN THOUGH THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING MIGHT ONLY HAVE INCREASED ABOUT 17%, THE OVERALL SIZE OF THAT WALL HAS INCREASED BY 78%. 
          IT'S A MUCH BIGGER WALL, AND THAT WALL IS ONLY SEVEN INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          THERE'S A HOUSE SEVEN INCHES AWAY AND NO WINDOWS AT ALL. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I TALK ABOUT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR, I THINK SOMEONE WOULD LOOK AT IT AND SAY, THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT IS A GOOD NEIGHBOR. 
          THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT, NOT SO MUCH. 
           REGARDING STEP BACKS, WE'RE ALREADY SEEING THAT DEVELOPERS LIKE THE IDEA OF STEP BACKS, SO I'M NOT REALLY PROPOSING SOMETHING THAT THEY DON'T WANT. 
          ON THE LEFT IS CUSHING STREET, ON THE RIGHT IS BIRCH STREET. 
          BIRCH STREET IS A TALLER BUILDING. 
          SIX STORIES YOU CAN SEE ABOVE THE FOURTH FLOOR. 
          IT STARTS TO STEP BACK. 
          AND THAT'S SO IT DOESN'T SORT OF IMPOSE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE SAME WAY BUILDING ON THE LEFT STEPS BACK AFTER TWO STORIES AND THEN AGAIN AT THREE. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, UH, AGAIN, I'M, UH, YOU MIGHT HEAR FROM HRI THAT I'M, I'M GIVING UP A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL UNITS THAT I DON'T AGREE THAT I'M GIVING UP THAT, THAT IT, THIS ELIMINATES A LOT OF UNITS, BUT I DO AGREE THAT THIS IS MORE NEIGHBORLY. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN WITH OPEN SPACE, I THINK MY FUNDAMENTAL DISAGREEMENT WITH WHAT, WHAT CURRENTLY IS ON THE BOOKS IS THAT OPEN SPACE SHOULD BE ON THE GROUND. 
          IT SHOULDN'T BE ON A BALCONY OR ON A ROOF. 
          IT SHOULD BE ON THE GROUND, AND THAT IT SHOULD BE LARGE ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE RECREATIONAL USE. 
          YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T THROW A BALL AROUND IN A SPACE THAT'S FIVE FEET BY FIVE FEET. 
          UM, I WOULD ALSO ARGUE THAT IT SHOULD BE AS GREEN AS POSSIBLE. 
          I DIDN'T REALLY PROPOSE ANY CHANGES TO GREEN OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, THOUGH COUNCILOR SUZI AND FLAHERTY HAVE PROPOSED SOME CHANGES TO THAT. 
          AND THEN LAST IS PROBABLY THE, ONE OF THE, NOT LAST, BUT ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES THAT WE SEE WITH NEIGHBORS IS AROUND PARKING. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, NINE WYMAN ROAD IS SORT OF THE POSTER CHILD HERE, AND, AND IT REALLY CAN OVERWHELM US A NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE, ONE UNIT BEING REPLACED WITH 56 AND NOT PROVIDING ANY PARKING AT ALL. 
          SO I, I DIDN'T GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO ONE UNIT, ONE PARKING SPACE PER UNIT, BUT I SAID, YOU KNOW, BEYOND ONE, TWO, AND THREE FAMILIES, WHICH OFTEN DON'T HAVE THE SPACE TO ADD PARKING, UM, IF YOU'RE BUILDING MORE THAN THAT, THEN YOU HAVE TO ADD SOME PARKING. 
          SO I, I SETTLED ON 0.5, UH, BASICALLY ONE SPACE FOR EVERY TWO UNITS. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S A DISCUSSION AND IF YOU GUYS WANNA HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT A BETTER NUMBER IS, BUT I THINK YOU, THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING YOU GOTTA PROVIDE SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN'T JUST DROP ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD AND THINK IT, IT'S NOT GONNA JUST BLOW THINGS UP. 
          UM, BY HAVING A SET A SETBACK OF 10 FEET ON ONE SIDE, THOUGH, YOU DO PROVIDE SOME SPACE FOR THAT, YOU, YOU'RE CREATING A DRIVEWAY WITH EITHER CAN BE PARKED IN OR IT CAN ALLOW ACCESS TO PARKING IN THE RE WITH A 
          [00:25:01]
FIVE FOOT SETBACK, THERE'S REALLY NO WAY TO ACCESS ANY ONSITE PARKING LIKE THAT. 
          I WOULD, AND CDD DIDN'T MENTION THIS, BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT I THINK FRONT YARD PARKING REALLY SHOULD HAVE VARIANCE. 
          I DON'T, I'M NOT A FAN OF FRONT YARD PARKING. 
          UM, I THINK IT IS NOT REALLY THE, THE FEEL THAT WE WANT ON A STREET TO HAVE PARKED, PARKED CARS RIGHT UP AGAINST THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. 
          AND THEN LAST LASTLY AROUND DESIGN REVIEW. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT THAT LARGE BUILDINGS REQUIRE DESIGN REVIEW. 
          ALLS I'M PROPOSING IS THAT THE THRESHOLD IS SET LOWER. 
          SO BY PUTTING, WE ALLOWED THE THRESHOLD TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO, I THINK 75,000 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS A REALLY, REALLY BIG BUILDING. 
          PREVIOUSLY WE HAD A THRESHOLD OF 20,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO I'M PROPOSING THAT WE BRING THAT THRESHOLD BACK DOWN TO WHAT IT WAS. 
          UM, I THINK A 20,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING IS A, IS A BIG ENOUGH BUILDING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, THE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          HERE'S, HERE'S THE SCENARIOS AGAIN, OF, OF SORT OF WHAT USED TO BE ALLOWED, WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED AND WHAT I'M PROPOSING. 
          AND SO ON THE LEFT, YOU SEE IN WHAT WAS THE FORMER RESIDENTIAL B ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS WHERE I LIVE, UM, NOT MUCH WAS PERMITTED. 
          YOU WERE ALLOWED 2,500 SQUARE FEET ON A STANDARD 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, AND THE SETBACKS WERE PRETTY BIG. 
          YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU NEVER REALLY, UM, CAN HAD A MUCH OF A CONCERN ABOUT THE SETBACKS BECAUSE THE LIMITATION WAS ON HOW MANY SQUARE FEET YOU COULD BUILD AND YOU JUST COULDN'T BUILD SOMETHING BIG ENOUGH TO EVEN APPROACH THE SETBACKS. 
          UM, THE NEXT 3, 2, 3, AND FOUR IN THIS EXAMPLE ARE THE FOUR STORY, SIX STORY, AND NINE STORY BUILDINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE BIGGER, THEY MAKE A BETTER USE OF THE LOT, BUT I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE FIVE FEET AWAY. 
          UM, THEY'RE UP TO NINE STORIES HIGH, AND THE MULTIPLE IS REALLY BIG. 
          IF YOU LOOK DOWN THE BOTTOM, THE MULTIPLE OVER THE ORIGINAL ZONING IS AS HIGH AS 12 OR MORE. 
          AND THAT'S JUST A MASSIVE INCREASE, UH, IN THAT NUMBER. 
          AND SO IF YOU LOOK TO THE PROPOSAL ON THE RIGHT, WHAT I'M PROPOSING FOR IN SIX STORY BUILDINGS WITH SLIGHTLY BIGGER SETBACKS AND SLIGHTLY MORE OPEN SPACE, YOU CAN SEE THE MULTIPLES ARE STILL VERY BIG. 
          I MEAN, WE'RE STILL TALKING FLOOR AREA RATIOS ABOVE TWO OR TWO AND A HALF, UM, YOU KNOW, FIVE TIMES WHAT WAS CURRENTLY ALLOWED WAS PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED. 
          UM, AND THOSE BUILDINGS LOOK A LOT MORE LIKE THE CURRENT BUILDINGS THAN THEY DO THE OLD BUILDING. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT, I'M NOT PROPOSING WE GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO WHAT WE HAD. 
          I'M JUST INTRODUCING SOME SENSIBLE ADJUSTMENTS SO THAT THESE BUILDINGS ARE A LITTLE MORE NEIGHBORLY. 
          NOW, A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THE EFFECT ON AFFORDABLE PROJECTS. 
          FIRST OFF, I'LL NOTE THAT MY CHANGES ARE PROPOSED IN THE RESIDENTIAL C ONE DISTRICT. 
          SO NEW STREET  NOT IN A RE C ONE DISTRICT. 
          AND SO REALLY THESE ISSUES AROUND HEIGHT REDUCTIONS OR REQUIRING PARKING OR DESIGN REVIEW DON'T APPLY TO THAT BUILDING. 
          THEY'RE NOT IN, IN THE DISTRICT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. 
          UM, THE SETBACKS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE MINIMAL. 
          UH, INTRODUCING WE'RE GOING FROM FIVE FEET AND FIVE FEET TO FIVE FEET AND 10 FEET. 
          IT'S REALLY NOT A BIG CHANGE. 
          UM, AS FAR AS BALCONIES AND ROOF TESTS, I'M NOT PROHIBITING THEM. 
          I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD COUNT AS OPEN SPACE. 
          I THINK YOU NEED ACTUAL OPEN SPACE AND THAT BENEFITS THE RESIDENTS OF THOSE PROJECTS. 
          YOU KNOW, THE A HO PROJECTS, THOSE RESIDENTS DESERVE OPEN SPACE. 
          THEY DESERVE PARKING. 
          UM, THEY DESERVE SUNLIGHT AND, AND, UH, JUST AS MUCH AS ANYBODY ELSE. 
          AND SO, UM, I THINK THE, THE WORD ON THE STREET IS, OH, THIS IS DAMAGING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          I'M LOOKING AT THIS LIKE, THESE ARE THINGS THAT EVEN PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHOULD HAVE RIGHTS TO. 
          THEY SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO THOSE THINGS. 
          AND SO WE NEED TO DESIGN BUILDINGS THAT ARE, THAT ARE NEIGHBORLY TO BOTH, TO THE ABUTTERS, BUT ALSO TO THE RESIDENTS THEMSELVES. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT, UM, SIDEWALL LENGTH AND STEP BACKS, STUFF LIKE THAT, THAT ARE A LITTLE MORE ESOTERIC, THOSE REALLY ARE GOOD NEIGHBOR EFFORTS WITH THE IDEA OF BEING THAT, UM, YOU, YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO RESPECT WHAT'S ALREADY THERE IN SOME WAYS. 
          UM, I THINK IT, IT IS IMPORTANT ALSO TO, YOU KNOW, UH, DESPITE THE DOOM AND GLOOM OF, OH, WELL, BASED ON THESE CHANGES, WE'LL NEVER BUILD ANY MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS BUILT BEFORE WE CHANGED ANY OF THESE THINGS. 
          IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE BUILT. 
          IT JUST MEANS THAT THEIR ADJUSTMENTS ARE NEEDED IN THE DESIGN. 
          AND IF NOT AS MUCH CAN BE BUILT OR PACKED INTO A SINGLE SITE, THEN I 
          [00:30:01]
WOULD EXPECT THE LAND VALUES WOULD GO DOWN AND THAT WILL BE REFLECTED IN THE OVERALL COST OF THOSE PROJECTS. 
          YOU KNOW, THERE'S THIS FALLACY THAT, OH, WELL, ISN'T BIG OR BETTER. 
          WELL, NOT, NOT ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE BIGGEST APARTMENT BUILDING IN THE WORLD. 
          IT'S IN HANG XO CHINA. 
          IT'S 675 FEET TALL, AND IT HOLDS 11,000 APARTMENTS AND 30,000 RESIDENTS. 
          OKAY? AND YOU CAN GET AN APARTMENT IN THERE, WHICH HAS NO WINDOWS, UH, FOR $209 A MONTH, BUT IT'S ALSO DESCRIBED AS DYSTOPIAN CLAUSTROPHOBIC, MANY OTHER THINGS THAT PEOPLE DON'T PARTICULARLY CARE FOR. 
          AND SO, SURE, WE COULD FIND A SITE, WE, THIS BUILDING WOULD TAKE UP NINE ACRES AND DROP ONE OF THESE THINGS IN AND SOLVE OUR ENTIRE HOUSING PRO PROBLEM IN ONE GO. 
          I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S PROPOSING TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE IDEA IS SILLY. 
          AND SO YOU CAN'T JUST SAY, WELL, MORE IS ALWAYS BETTER. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK BOTH QUANTITY AND QUALITY ARE IMPORTANT HERE. 
          I MEAN, THIS IS TAKEN TO ITS EXTREME BUCKMINSTER FILLER THOUGHT THAT WE SHOULD FIT AN ENTIRE CITY OF 105,000 PEOPLE INSIDE A ONE MILE GLASS BUBBLE. 
          AGAIN, RIDICULOUS. 
          THE, THE REALITY IS, THIS IS A GREAT BOOK ON THE, ON THE SUBJECT, WHICH IS HOUSING AS IF PEOPLE MATTERED BY MARCUS AND IAN. 
          AND THEY BASICALLY GO THROUGH AND LOOK AT HOW DO YOU DESIGN MEDIUM DENSITY FAMILY HOUSING? AND THE TRUTH IS THAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN LOW INCOME HOUSING WANT THEIR HOUSING TO NOT STAND OUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          THEY WANT IT TO FIT IN WITH EVERYBODY ELSE. 
          THEY, THEY REALLY DON'T WANT TO STAND OUT BECAUSE THERE, THEN THERE'S SORT OF A STIGMA ASSOCIATED WITH IT. 
          AND SO THERE'S SORT OF BASIC ISSUES AROUND THE SCALE, UM, THAT ARE, UM, IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK BIGGER IS ALWAYS BETTER. 
          NOW THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES BEYOND, UM, 10,000 BALLOONS AND FLYING AWAY, UM, UP STYLE. 
          THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU GUYS CAN DO BEYOND WHAT I'M PROPOSING. 
          YOU CERTAINLY CAN CONVENE A WORKING GROUP AND GO OUT AND FIND CHANGES THAT WE WANNA MAKE ON A, ON A ONGOING BASIS. 
          THIS IS THE SAME PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH WITH CLIMATE CHANGE, UH, RESILIENT PLANNING. 
          THIS IS THE SAME PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH MOST RECENTLY AT ALEWIFE. 
          UM, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROCESS, BUT IT WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN. 
          UM, I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO COME UP WITH SOME MECHANISMS TO PROTECT THOSE NATURALLY AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT ARE BEING TARGETED. 
          HONESTLY. 
          UM, THE PLANNING BOARD WAS SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA THAT MAYBE WE NEED A MORE, UH, DETAILED DEMOLITION ORDINANCE. 
          NOT JUST A DELAY, BUT SORT OF A, UM, A MANUAL FOR HOW YOU DO DEMOLITIONS BECAUSE THE DEMOLITIONS DO HAVE AN IMPACT ON NEIGHBORS AND NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY DAMAGE TREES, THEY DAMAGE FOUNDATIONS, THEY CREATE A LOT OF CHAOS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UM, I THINK YOU ALSO AT SOME POINT NEED TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, TARGETED INTERVENTIONS ADDRESSED TO MIDDLE INCOME. 
          SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE SAW DURING COVID WAS ESSENTIAL WORKERS, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE LIVING IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, IF THEY'RE LIVING IN WESTERN MASS AND COMMUTING TO THEIR JOB AS A TEACHER OR FIREMAN, UM, THAT'S NOT IDEAL. 
          AND WE REALLY SHOULD LOOK AT THAT. 
          I'M GONNA ALWAYS POINT THE FINGER AT MIT AND HARVARD. 
          THEY HAVE 6,000 STUDENTS THAT COMPETE IN THE OPEN MARKET IN CAMBRIDGE FOR HOUSING. 
          AND THEY HAVE THE LAND, THE MONEY, THE RESOURCES, AND UNFORTUNATELY NOT THE DESIRE TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. 
          SO I THINK YOU SHOULD LOOK AT THE INSTITUTIONAL USE DISTRICTS AND SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE THERE. 
          UM, THERE IS NOW AN EFFORT TO DENY PARKING PERMITS FOR NEW BUILDINGS, UM, WHICH PROBABLY IS GONNA BE NECESSARY, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY GONNA SOLVE THE PROBLEM. 
          UM, IT'S JUST GONNA PUT THE BURDEN ON, UM, UH, THE NEW PEOPLE WHO HAVE LESS PARKING THAN THE PEOPLE THAT WERE ALREADY THERE. 
          THE ISSUE'S STILL GONNA BE THERE. 
          NOT ENOUGH PARKING. 
          UM, YOU COULD INTRODUCE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. 
          YOU COULD BRING BACK FARI THINK NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, IT'S GONNA TAKE TIME. 
          AND SO YOU MAY HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THE IDEA OF A MORATORIUM UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CHANGES GET MADE. 
          UM, WE'VE DONE THAT MANY OTHER TIMES AND IT'S A SUCCESSFUL WAY, AND IT'S NOT, IT DOESN'T GO ON FOREVER, BUT IT, IT ADDRESSES THE ISSUES THAT ARE IN FRONT OF YOU AND GIVES PEOPLE TIME TO ACTUALLY SOLVE 'EM. 
          UM, THAT'S EVERYTHING I'VE GOT. 
          UM, I'M CERTAINLY WOULD LOVE TO HEAR THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, WHATEVER YOU MAY HAVE. 
          UM, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM CDD. 
          I'D ALSO LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          UM, AND I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO, 
          [00:35:01]
UH, TO THE CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE WILL GO NOW 
          [COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER CITY OFFICERS]
TO, UH, COMMENTS FROM CITY STAFF AND THEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          UH, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CITY STAFF. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, CHAIR SABRINA WHEELER. 
          MELISSA PETERS, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. 
          I'M JOINED BY STAFF JEN KYRA, DEPUTY CHIEF OF PLANNING. 
          EVANS PETRINI, SENIOR ZONING MANAGER, AND BECCA PURE. 
          UM, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO EVAN, WHO, UM, CAN, UM, SUMMARIZE THE CDD MEMO THAT WENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD DESCRIBING, UM, OUR COMMENTS ON THE PETITION AND HOW IT RELATES TO OUR PLANNING, UH, STUDIES AND GOALS, AS WELL AS, UH, THE MEMO THAT WE GOT BACK FROM THE PLANNING BOARD HEARING ON THAT WAS HELD ON THE 14TH. 
          THAT SUMMARIZES THEIR COMMENTS. 
          THANKS, MELISSA. 
          UM, EVANS PETRIN AND THE ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER. 
          UM, I'M, I'M JOINED AS, AS MELISSA SAID. 
          UH, BECCA PUI ON, ON THE ZONING TEAM IS, IS WITH US TODAY. 
          SHE DID A LOT OF THE, THE WORK ON THE, THE ZONING MEMO, SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING I GET UH, WRONG, SHE CAN JUMP IN AND, AND CORRECT ME. 
          UM, SO THE, WE WE, AS WE DO WITH EVERY ZONING PETITION, WE PROVIDED A MEMO TO, UH, THE PLANNING BOARD AHEAD OF THE PLANNING BOARD'S. 
          UM, HEARING, UM, THE, UH, UH, MR. BROWN LAID OUT, I THINK THE, UH, THE, THE DETAILS OF THE PETITION, UM, VERY WELL. 
          AND THE, UM, THE SECTIONS OF, OF THE PETITION THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED, UM, OR THE, THE RATHER, THE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THE PETITION. 
          OUR COMMENTS, UM, AHEAD OF THE, THE PLANNING BOARD HEARING. 
          UM, I THINK WE CAN, WE CAN DRILL DOWN INTO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE SORT OF DESCRIBED, UH, WHAT THOSE, THOSE IMPACTS, UH, WOULD BE, IT'S UNCLEAR, UM, HOW MANY SORT OF ONGOING PROJECTS WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THESE CHANGES. 
          THAT'S, UM, WE, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO, TO DO THAT IN DEPTH OF, OF A STUDY. 
          UH, SOME OF THE MECHANIC CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUESTION? UH, IT'S ABOUT THIS PRESENTATION. 
          JUST DO WE HAVE YOUR MEMO? 'CAUSE I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE PACKET. 
          I JUST SEE THE PLANNING BOARD REPORT. 
          I I GUESS NOT. 
          I I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 
          I THOUGHT THAT, UM, I THOUGHT THAT WAS, UNLESS OTHERS HAVE IT. 
          IS IT A SEPARATE DOCUMENT? I SEE THE PLANNING BOARD. 
          THERE'S A SEPARATE CDD MEMO. 
          THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR THROUGH YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, THERE'S THE PRESENT, UM, MR. BROWN'S PRESENTATION, THEN THERE'S THE PLANNING BOARD, AND THEN IT GOES BACK TO, UM, 'CAUSE I MISSED IT TOO ORIGINALLY, AND THEN IT GOES BACK TO VOTE CERTIFICATION FROM REFERENCING MR. BROWN'S PETITION. 
          SO IT'S EASY TO MISS. 
          IT'S KIND OF SANDWICHED BETWEEN TWO THINGS, BUT IT'S THERE. 
          IT'S NOT IN THIS PACKET. 
          IT'S IN THE ONE, IT'S IN ONE WEEK. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, CHAIR THIS, WE MIGHT BE MISSING IT. 
          NEED TO USE YOUR MIC. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE NOT IN ALL THE PACKETS. 
          UH, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. , YES, THANK YOU. 
          UM, THROUGH YOU. 
          I, I APOLOGIZE THAT THE, THE MEMO WAS NOT, NOT INCLUDED. 
          UM, I, I WILL SAY THERE WASN'T A TON OF, OF COMMENTARY ON THE PROPOSAL. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE TRY TO DESCRIBE WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS AND WHAT THE PROPOSAL WOULD DO. 
          IT'S NOT THE C DD, UM, FOR THE PLANNING BOARD. 
          NO, IT'S THE C DD SO, SO I CAN, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT COMMENTARY THERE WAS, I CAN SORT OF SPEAK TO, UH, QUICKLY, UH, BUT IT DOES SORT OF BOIL DOWN TO THESE ARE, ARE, UM, WHAT THE PETITION PROPOSES ARE, UM, PRETTY DRASTIC CHANGES TO, UH, THE, THE MULTIFAMILY 
          [00:40:01]
ZONING THAT WAS PASSED, UM, A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO. 
          REINTRODUCING PARKING MINIMUMS IS, IS SOMETHING THAT, UM, PARKING MINIMUMS WERE, WERE ELIMINATED, UH, EVEN BEFORE THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING. 
          THAT WAS BACK IN 2022. 
          UM, SO THAT WOULD, UH, HAVE A, A PRETTY BIG IMPACT ON A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE WORKS, UM, ESPECIALLY A HO PROJECTS, UM, AND, AND, UH, PROJECTS MOVING FORWARD. 
          UM, AGAIN, YOU, THERE WASN'T TIME FOR US TO DO A, A FULL ANALYSIS OF, OF WHAT THIS WOULD DO FOR, UH, ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE, UM, AND, AND MOVING FORWARD, BUT, UM, THERE IS OF COURSE A, A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, UM, WITH PARKING MINIMUMS. UM, REDUCING THE SPECIAL PERMIT THRESHOLD FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE RESIDENT C ONE DISTRICT, UM, WILL, UH, DISCOURAGE INCLUSIONARY PROJECTS, UM, MAKING PROJECTS WITH AFFORDABLE UNITS MORE, UH, MORE DIFFICULT. 
          UM, I THINK THOSE WERE SORT OF THE, THE MAJOR POINTS IN, IN OUR MEMO. 
          I CAN SPEAK TO THE PLANNING BOARD REPORT, UH, A LITTLE BIT. 
          SO THE, THE PLANNING BOARD HELD THEIR PUBLIC HEARING LAST TUESDAY. 
          UM, OVERALL, UH, SO THE, THE PLANNING BOARD PASSED A, A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION ON THE PETITION. 
          UM, THEIR FEELINGS WERE, UH, THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING IS, IS JUST NOW STARTING TO, TO SHOW RESULTS. 
          UM, AND, AND IS IS IN LINE WITH WHAT THE INTENTION OF, OF THAT ZONING, UH, CHANGE WAS. 
          UH, THE PLANNING BOARD FELT IT, IT'S STILL TOO EARLY TO MAKE DRASTIC CHANGES. 
          UM, AND THESE CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED, UH, APPEAR VERY, UH, RESTRICTIVE. 
          THE PLANNING BOARD'S NOT OPPOSED TO, UH, CONSIDERING CHANGES TO, UH, THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING. 
          UM, BUT IT SHOULD BE THE RESULT OF, OF CAREFUL, UH, MONITORING OF WHAT'S GOING ON BY CDD AND FURTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL. 
          UH, THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, STRONGLY CAUTIONED AGAINST, UM, MORE REACTIVE CHANGES, UH, TO THE ZONING WHILE IT'S STILL, UM, ONLY ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF IN. 
          IS THAT IT FOR THEIR PRESENTATION OR COMMENTS FROM CITY STAFF? GREAT. 
          UM, WE'LL GO NOW TO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          UM, ACCORDING TO, UH, WE HAVE 22 FOLKS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ACCORDING TO CITY COUNCIL RULE 31 B. 
          EACH SPEAKER SHALL HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS YOUNG KIM, FOLLOWED BY CAROLYN FULLER. 
          THEN BILL VINNEY YOUNG, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          YOUNG KIM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YOUNG KIM 17 NOR STREET. 
          THANK YOU MR. BROWN, FOR YOUR EFFORTS AND THE EXCELLENT PRESENTATION. 
          I CAN AGREE MORE WITH THE PRINCIPLES YOU OUTLINED, HOWEVER, I RESPECTIVELY RECOMMEND THAT THE COMMITTEE DIFFER FURTHER MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ZONING AMENDMENT, INCLUDING THE BROWN PETITION, WHILE IMMEDIATELY IMPROVING IMPLEMENTATION OVERSIGHT. 
          HOW CAN THIS COMMITTEE EVALUATE ONE SET OF CHANGES THAT MR. BROWN PROPOSED WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT CDD IS GOING TO PRESENT, HOW WILL YOU COMPARE THE TWO? I AGREE WITH THE PLANNING BOARD THAT NOW IS NOT THE TIME FOR ADDITIONAL PIECEMEAL ZONING OR AMENDMENT, BUT DELAYING LEGISLATIVE CHANGES SHOULD NOT DELAY CORRECTION, CORRECTING IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS THAT ARE ALREADY AFFECTING NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          CAMBRIDGE IS ENACTING MULTIPLE MAJOR ZONING INITIATIVES IN A PEACEFUL MANNER. 
          THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY, MASS AVENUE CORRIDOR, CAMBRIDGE STREET CORRIDOR, AND OTHER ZONING INITIATIVE SHOULD BE PLANNED, IMPLEMENTED, MONITORED, AND EVALUATED AS ONE COHESIVE SYSTEM, NOT AS A SEPARATE ORGANIZ. 
          PARKING AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ARE JUST TWO EXAMPLES OF ISSUES. 
          THERE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED HOLISTICALLY ACROSS ALL ZONING PATHWAYS, NOT RE UH, RATHER THAN SEPARATELY FOR EACH ORDINANCE. 
          AT THE SAME TIME, CITIES SHOULD IMMEDIATELY STRENGTHEN ARTICLE 
          [00:45:01]
19 STAFF ADVISORY REVIEW. 
          FOOTNOTE TO 37 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING PROCEDURES, DEMOLITION OVERSIGHT, HAZARDOUS MATERIAL PROTECTION, PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, INTER DEVELOPMENTAL COORDINATION, AND ESTABLISH ONE AUTHORITATIVE DEVELOPMENT. 
          THANK YOU YOUNG. 
          YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. 
          PLEASE EMAIL THE REMAINDER OF YOUR COMMENT. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CAROLYN FULLER, FOLLOWED BY BILL MCNY. 
          THEN CARL NAJI LIN. 
          CAROLYN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          HI. 
          UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          CAN I ASSUME YOU CAN HEAR ME? WE CAN. 
          YEP, WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, UH, I'M PLEASE REJECT THE, UH, DOUG BROWN PETITION THAT SEEKS TO OVERRIDE THE VOTERS OF CAMBRIDGE WHO HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED FOR MAJORITIES OF COUNSELORS WHO SUPPORT POLICIES THAT PROMOTE MORE HOUSING AND FEWER CARS IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          THE PETITION IS NOTHING MORE THAN A CAREFULLY CRAFTED IN RUN AROUND THE ELECTION RESULTS FROM FOUR ELECTION CYCLES. 
          DOUG BROWN AND HIS HANDFUL OF PETITION SIGNERS HAVE SUCCESSFULLY STOPPED NEW AFFORDABLE HOMES FROM BEING BUILT AND PAUSED THE CON CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. 
          IT IS AN OUTRAGE THAT THIS LOOPHOLE IN OUR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IS ALLOWED FOR THE SAKE OF DEMOCRACY. 
          THIS PETITION SHOULD BE RESOUNDLY REJECTED. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS BILL NEY. 
          BILL, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          BILL MCNY 12 DOUGLAS STREET. 
          UM, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS PETITION. 
          I URGE YOU ALL TO THINK ABOUT WHAT IS THE FABRIC OF OUR COMMUNITY? WHAT IS THE FABRIC OF CAMBRIDGE? IS IT OUR BUILDINGS OR IS IT OUR PEOPLE? TO ME IT IS OUR PEOPLE, MY NEIGHBORS, OUR CHILDREN. 
          WHAT HAVE WE SEEN IN THE PAST TWO AND THREE, TWO TO THREE DECADES WITH OUR FORMER EXCLUSIONARY ZONING? WE HAVE SEEN THE DISPLACEMENT OF A VAST NUMBER OF THOSE PEOPLE BECAUSE NOT ENOUGH NEW HOUSING HAS BEEN BUILT. 
          UM, SORRY, YOU ALL JUST, JUST DISAPPEARED. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO THIS HAS INCLUDED MY SON ALAN, BUT NOT LIMITED TO HIM. 
          THE ONLY ONE OF HIS CLASSMATES THAT I KNOW OF WHO IS STILL ABLE TO LIVE IN CAMBRIDGE IS A WOMAN IN HER EARLY FORTIES WHO STILL LIVES WITH HER PARENTS. 
          IS THAT THE CONTINUATION OF THE FABRIC OF OUR COMMUNITY? NO. 
          WE HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS. 
          WE NEED MORE HOUSING. 
          THIS PETITION WOULD REDUCE THAT AMOUNT OF HOUSING. 
          SECOND, I WANT TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO HOMEOWNERS REHAB AND JUSTICE STARTS STATEMENTS ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD AFFECT THEIR ABILITY TO CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHICH IS, WOULD BE DRASTICALLY REDUCED UNDER THIS PETITION. 
          SO THAT IS MY COMMENT. 
          I HOPE THAT YOU VOTE THIS PETITION DOWN AND DON'T LET IT JUST CONTINUE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CARL NAJI KLIN, FOLLOWED BY MARGARET DONNELLY MORAN, THEN SUZANNE BLEA. 
          CARL, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          HI, UH, EVERYBODY. 
          CARL NAY KERCH, AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT JUSTICE ART AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY, AND I DON'T PICK UP ON BILL AND CAROLYN'S POINTS, BUT WITH A PARTICULAR PERSPECTIVE FROM, UH, THE POINT OF VIEW OF A LONGSTANDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          AND I'LL JUST REITERATE BILL'S POINT THAT, UH, WE, WE HAVE DONE ANALYSIS ON A PREVIOUS PROJECT AND ON A CURRENT, UH, PROJECT THAT'S IN THE PRE-DEVELOPMENT STAGE TO SEE REALLY ON THE NUTS AND BOLTS, YOU KNOW, THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS, UH, WHAT KIND OF IMPACT THIS WOULD HAVE ON, ON THOSE PROJECTS. 
          UH, I'VE INCLUDED THOSE ANALYSES IN WRITTEN TESTIMONIES, SO I WON'T GO THROUGH THEM VERBATIM, BUT I'LL SAY THAT THE, THE PARKING, THE HEIGHT, THE SETBACKS, UM, THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, WHILE I'M SURE WELL INTENTIONED, WOULD NOT ONLY UNDERMINE THE ADVANTAGES OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY, THEY WOULD REALLY IN EFFECT GUT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY AND THE OVERLAY HAS BEEN, UH, UNQUALIFIED, UH, SUCCESS IN MY MIND. 
          AND WHILE WE HAVE ALWAYS DEVELOPED AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AS IS HOMEOWNERS REHAB AND THE CAMBRIDGE, UH, HOUSING AUTHORITY, WE HAVE NEVER DONE IT AT THE SCALE. 
          WE'VE WE'RE DOING IT NOW. 
          WE'VE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO COMPETE ON THE MARKET THE WAY WE WE ARE NOW. 
          AND WE'VE NEVER 
          [00:50:01]
HAD SORT OF A CLEAR PATH TOWARD DEVELOPMENT, CLEAR PATH WITH COMMUNITY PROCESS, WITH PLANNING, BOARD OVERSIGHT, ALL THAT COME TOGETHER TO ASSURE THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE NOT ONLY CREATING A, A, A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF UNITS, BUT THEY'RE PROJECTS THAT WE CAN BE PROUD OF. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT THE DYSTOPIAN PROJECTS THAT, UH, THE PETITIONER, UH, THE PROPONENT, UH, PROPOSED. 
          THESE ARE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE PROUD TO BUILD AND PEOPLE ARE PROUD, UH, VERY PROUD TO LIVE IN. 
          YOU KNOW, IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT. 
          AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY, UH, IS DEFINITELY NOT BROKEN. 
          AND SO I HOPE WE CAN, UH, PUT, PUT THIS PETITION, UH, YOU KNOW, OPPOSE THIS POSITION, UH, PETITION, UH, AND MOVE FORWARD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARGARET DONNELLY MORRAN, FOLLOWED BY SUZANNE BLEIER, THEN JOE ALTA. 
          MARGARET, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          MARGARET DOLLY MORAN, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THE CAMBRIDGE HOUSING AUTHORITY. 
          UH, CAMBRIDGE HOUSING AUTHORITY IS A PRO OPPOSED TO THE ZONING PETITION BEING CONSIDERED AT THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE TODAY. 
          AS OUTLINED IN THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING BOARD, IF PASSED, THESE AMENDMENTS WOULD SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPEDE AS, AS CALLS SAID, GUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY. 
          TO DATE, THE CHA HAS COMPLETED THE OVERLAY PROCESS ON THREE PROJECTS. 
          ONE 16 NORFOLK STREET, JEFFERSON PARK, AND CORCORAN PARK. 
          ONE'S BEEN COMPLETED, ONE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND ONE WILL BE APPLYING FOR ITS BUILDING PERMIT LEADER THIS YEAR. 
          NONE OF THOSE THREE PROJECTS WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD IN THEIR APPROVED FORMS IF THE APPROVED, IF THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE OVERLAY BEING CONSIDERED WERE ADOPTED. 
          GIVEN THE DRAMATIC CHANGES PROPOSED TO THE HEIGHT, TO THE SETBACKS, PARKING OPEN SPACE AND DESIGN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS, IN ADDITION TO IMPACTING THOSE THREE PROJECTS, CHA HAS SEVEN OTHER REDEVELOPMENT AND NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, INCLUDING SOME FOR POSSIBLE CHA HAS PURCHASED OVER THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS THAT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED BY THE CHANGES. 
          AS ONE EXAMPLE OF THE IMPACT, THE SUCCESSFUL REDEVELOPMENT OF ONE 16 NORFOLK STREET, WHICH WAS COMPLETED IN EARLY 2025, WOULD EITHER NOT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE OR WOULD'VE SEEN THE UNITS REDUCED BY 58% FROM 62 UNITS TO 26 UNITS, AND REALLY JEOPARDIZE THE OVERALL EFFECT EFFECTIVENESS OR, UH, VIABILITY OF THAT SITE. 
          AND SOME OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY IMPAIR AND NEGATE CH A'S ABILITY TO INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON UNITS, ON EXISTING SITES. 
          AND TO CREATE MEANINGFUL NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON NEWLY ACQUIRED SITES, IT WOULD WEAKEN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY, WHICH HAS PROVEN TO BE ONE OF CH A'S MOST IMP UH, CAMBRIDGE'S MOST IMPORTANT TOOLS CREATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          IT WOULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF HOMES CHA CAN BUILD, JEOPARDIZE THOUGHTFUL PROJECT SHAPES THROUGH YEARS OF RESIDENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT, AND MAKE IT HARDER TO CREATE THE KIND OF DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING THAT CHANGES PEOPLE'S LIVES. 
          CHA STRONGLY URGES THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE TO VOTE AGAINST THE ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SUZANNE, BB FOLLOWED BY JOE ALETTA. 
          SUZANNE, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SUZANNE B FIVE FULLER PLACE AND I'M THE PROUD PRESIDENT OF THE CAMBRIDGE CITIZENS COALITION AND WE, UM, INTRODUCED THE FIRST CITIZEN WIDE, UM, ZONING PETITION TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY HOUSING CITYWIDE. 
          UM, I ALSO PARTICIPATED IN THE HARVARD SQUARE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION IN HARVARD SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PETITION ON HARVARD SQUARE WITH PATRICK BARRETT. 
          I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THIS CITY AND I HAVE PUT ASIDE KEY ASPECTS OF MY OWN CAREER BECAUSE I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT I FEEL AT THIS JUNCTURE. 
          A LITTLE BIT LIKE MADAM LAFARGE AT THE REVOLUTION KNITTING. 
          AS I'M READING AND WRITING WHAT IS HAPPENING ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I CARE STRONGLY ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT I THINK THAT DESIGN REALLY MATTERS IN IT. 
          AND THANK GOODNESS DENNIS CARONE WAS ABLE TO GET THAT RIGHT. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING IS BY DOING AWAY WITH PARKING MINIMUMS, WE MADE IT MUCH HARDER FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS. 
          WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE PRICES THAT THESE NEW UNITS ARE GONNA COST AND OUR COSTING, I CAN'T IMAGINE ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING GROUP BEING ABLE TO ACQUIRE ANY OF THESE. 
          PARTICULARLY NOW THAT FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING IS GONE. 
          I SUPPORT ASPECTS OF THE BROWN PETITION ON GREEN SPACE. 
          CHILDREN NEED PROXIMITY TO GREEN SPACES. 
          BUSH'S FOR INTELLECTUAL GROWTH. 
          THERE'S A COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY STUDY ON TREES LOST. 
          WE'VE GOT FLOODING. 
          HEAT ISLAND IMPACTS BOTH ON PRIVATE PROPERTIES AND ON STREET TREES. 
          AND THAT'S GONNA IMPACT MANY OF OUR HOMES BECAUSE WE ARE ALSO DENSELY POPULATED. 
          WE'VE SEEN THESE STUDIES HOUSES LOST THROUGH DEMOLITION. 
          YOU ARE LOSING YOUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOUR NATURALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, A TERM WHICH WAS CREATED BY THE HARVARD UNIVERSITY, UM, URBAN PLANNING CENTER. 
          THESE ARE FAR LESS EXPENSIVE THAN WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW. 
          LOOK AT THE WENDELL STREET PROJECT. 
          NINE APARTMENTS TAKEN DOWN FOR WAS GOING TO BE, WAS IT 54 UNITS? AND THEY'RE ADVERTISING ON FACEBOOK FOR, UM, PEOPLE 
          [00:55:01]
WHO WANT TO PROFIT FROM IT. 
          WE CAN SEE THIS ALL OVER. 
          THANK YOU, SUSAN. 
          YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. 
          PLEASE EMAIL US THE REMAINDER. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JOE ALTA, FOLLOWED BY SARAH BARKIN, THEN CAROLYN ALPERT. 
          JOE, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          HI, JOE LETTA, 68 WALKER STREET. 
          UM, JUST OUT FOR A WALK AROUND OUR BEAUTIFUL, UH, CITY I I FULLY SUPPORT, UH, MR. BROWN'S EFFORT AND ATTEMPT TO, UH, AUGMENT THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY ZONING. 
          UM, I THINK IT WILL ONLY BE A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THE COUNCIL REALIZES THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND AFFORDABILITY AND THAT THERE'S A VAST SEA OF US, IN FACT, UH,  PROBABLY, UH, YOU KNOW, 90 PLUS PERCENT THAT AFFORD THAT, UH, SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          BUT YOU'LL COME TO REALIZE THAT AFFORDABILITY PER SE, UH, IS JUST A MYTH. 
          YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD ENOUGH HOUSING TO MAKE ANY MATERIAL DIFFERENCE IN AFFORDABILITY AROUND CAMBRIDGE. 
          ALL THE WHILE YOU'RE GOING TO BE DESTROYING MANY OF THE OLD, UH, LOWER TO MIDDLE INCOME HOUSING UNITS. 
          UH, AS, AS MR. BROWN, UH, HAD HAD POINTED OUT. 
          UH, I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT THE COUNCIL LOOKS AT ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS IN PARTICULAR THINGS LIKE NINE WYMAN AND IT LOOKS AT THEM AND SAYS, THIS IS ACTUALLY WHAT WE INTENDED. 
          IF IT IS, WE HAVE A VASTLY DIFFERENT VIEW OF WHAT CAMBRIDGE COULD AND SHOULD LOOK LIKE OVER THE LONG TERM. 
          MAYBE THERE ARE AREAS OF THE CITY THAT DESERVE THAT SORT OF 54 UNIT STUDIO HOUSING, UH, DENSELY PACKED WITH NO REAL ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANSIT. 
          MAYBE YOU MIGHT BE RIGHT, BUT I DO THINK OVER TIME YOU WILL COME TO REALIZE THAT, AND MAYBE IT'S NOT MR. BROWN'S AMENDMENTS, BUT STRONG AMENDMENTS ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO KEEP THE CITY LIVABLE FOR EXISTING RESIDENTS AND AND BEAUTIFUL OVER AND HISTORIC OVER THE LONG RUN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SARAH BARKIN. 
          SARAH, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          PLEASE. 
          GO AHEAD SARAH, IF YOU CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF. 
          YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK THIS AFTERNOON. 
          UM, I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          UM, WE'RE DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY AND, AND ALSO WANNA CALL OUT BOTH THE CDD STAFF AND THE PLANNING BOARD FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS THOUGHTFUL AND PROGRESSIVE APPROACH TO PERMITTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          IT ALLOWS MISSION DEVELOPERS LIKE HRI TO PURCHASE AND PLAN SITES THAT MAXIMIZE AFFORDABLE HOMES, ESPECIALLY FOR FAMILIES, INCORPORATE DESIGN FEEDBACK FROM NEIGHBORS CITY AGENCIES AND THE PLANNING BOARD AND REFLECT THE CITY'S PRIORITIES TO ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND KEEP FAMILIES IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          I WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT THE BROWN PETITION WOULD MAKE MOST A HO PROJECTS INFEASIBLE. 
          UM, I'LL JUST GIVE YOU A QUICK ANALYSIS OF ONE PROJECT UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND ONE IN PRE-DEVELOPMENT. 
          MANY OF YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH FOUR MELLON, OUR FIRST A HO PERMITTED PROJECT, WHICH WILL PRODUCE 29 NEW FAMILY SIZED AFFORDABLE, UH, UNITS IN THE BALDWIN NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AT THIS WRITING, WE HAVE MORE THAN 1100 RENTAL APPLICATIONS FROM HOUSEHOLDS WHO WANNA MAKE IT THEIR HOME WHEN IT OPENS IN JANUARY. 
          UM, IT'S A SMALL PROJECT, JUST 29 UNITS. 
          UM, THE STEP BACKS THAT ARE INCORPORATED IN THIS ORDINANCE, UM, WOULD FORCE THE REDUCTION OF THE PROJECT BY FOUR UNITS. 
          MAYBE THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE VERY MUCH, BUT WE'RE STARTING WITH A FAIRLY SMALL PROJECT. 
          AND I WANNA NOTE THAT OF THE REMAINING UNITS, WE WOULD LOSE TWO, THREE BEDROOMS, SO MUCH LESS SPACE FOR FAMILIES. 
          WE'D ALSO REDUCE SOME OF OUR COMMUNITY SPACE. 
          28 30 WENDELL. 
          WE HAVE 95 HOMES PLANNED FOR FAMILIES AND SENIORS, AND THAT IS DESIGNED IN A BARBELL SHAPE THAT ALREADY TAKES THE BUILDING DOWN FROM EIGHT STORIES TO SIX ON EITHER END. 
          SO WE'RE, WE'RE BALANCING THE TRANSITION TO OTHER BUILDINGS WHILE MAINTAINING DENSITY. 
          THE SIDE YARDS, SETBACKS, AND PARTICULARLY THE STEP BACKS ON THIS BUILDING WOULD LOSE TWO THIRDS OF THE ORIGINAL AFFORDABLE HOMES, PRIMARILY LOSING FAMILY UNITS. 
          AND THE PROJECT WOULD BE COMPLETELY INFEASIBLE. 
          UM, I URGE THE COUNSEL TO REJECT THIS PETITION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CAROLYN ALPERT. 
          CAROLYN, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          99 CUSHING STREET. 
          WE DO NEED GREATER SETBACKS, REASONABLE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, OPEN SPACE, MINIMAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND SENSIBLE DESIGN REVIEW. 
          IT IS MY HOPE THAT DOUG'S RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE USED TO AUGMENT THE MODEST AMENDMENTS THAT CDD PUT FORWARD IN JUNE 20 ON JUNE 25TH. 
          I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH EXPORT, WITH EXPANDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN CAMBRIDGE AND I'M IN FAVOR OF ALL THE A OS. 
          BUT I DO TAKE ISSUE WITH SOME OF WHAT'S BEEN SET IN MOTION NOW IN THE NAME OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, 
          [01:00:01]
WHICH I CONSIDER A SORT OF RAPE AND PILLAGING OF OUR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS FOR THE PROFIT OF OUT-OF-TOWN INVESTORS AND DEVELOPERS WHO ARE BUILDING LUXURY UNITS AT THE EXPENSE OF LONGTIME RESIDENTS AND RENTERS. 
          AND AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR SHARED FUTURE. 
          AT THE JUNE 25TH MEETING, SEVERAL OF YOU PUSHED BACK ON ANY AMENDMENT THAT COULD POSSIBLY LOWER EVEN BY ONE UNIT, THE NUMBER OF NOT JUST AFFORDABLE UNITS, BUT ALSO OF ALL THESE MARKET RATE CONDOS. 
          THAT IS REALLY EXTREME. 
          I CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW REACHING SOME COMPLETELY ARBITRARY GOAL OF NEW MARKET RATE UNITS CAN STILL BE YOUR HIGHEST PRIORITY GIVEN THE HARM THAT IS ALREADY BEING DONE TO CURRENT RESIDENTS. 
          AND GIVEN WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN SHOWN ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF THESE DRASTICALLY REDUCED PLANNING STANDARDS ON OUR CITY'S FUTURE RESILIENCY, THOSE OF US WHO ARE LOSING OUR HOMES, RENTALS, SUNLIGHT, TREES, PARKING, AND PEACE OF MIND DURING YEARS OF DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION, MOSTLY FOR THE SAKE OF PROFITEERING, MARKET RATE, CONDO DEVELOPMENTS, DEVELOPERS WHO ARE POURING FUNDS INTO THE A BC PACK, WE LONG-TERM RESIDENTS AND RENTERS. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE JUST EXPENDABLE GUINEA PIGS TO YOU IN A GAME. 
          TO TOP ANY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN THE COUNTRY IN THIS RACE TO BUILD THE MOST WE CAN IN OUR FINITE SIX MILES, THERE NEEDS TO BE A BETTER BALANCE BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, CAROL. 
          YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. 
          YOU CAN EMAIL THE REMAINDER OF YOUR COMMENTS. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARYLEE MEYER. 
          MARY LEE, YOU'RE UNMUTED. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY, THERE IT IS. 
          UM, THE, UM, MARY MEYER 10, DANA STREET. 
          THE BROWN PETITION IS NOT BEING OBSTRUCTIONIST. 
          IT IS A VERY THOUGHTFUL AND PRACTICAL, UM, EFFORT, TRYING TO ANTICIPATE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES, NEEDING ATTENTION. 
          I KEEP HOPING THE COUNCIL WILL FIND A COMPROMISE IN MAKING THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING MORE RESPONSIBLE. 
          THE NEW ZONING WAS BILLED AS CONTRIBUTING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO FAR, NATURALLY OCCURRING. 
          AFFORDABLE HOMES ARE BEING TORN DOWN ON MASS BEING REPLACED BY MULTI, UM, MULTI, UH, MILLION DOLLAR UNITS. 
          IN WORKING CLASS NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          THE VINTAGE UNITS COULD BE USED FOR THE FIRST TIME HOME OWNERS. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, UH, THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE IS USUALLY MYOPICALLY PREDETERMINED ON THIS SUBJECT. 
          AND, UM, NEED FOR MITIGATION WHERE THE CDD ANALYSIS AND PLANNING BOARD LETTERS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE BEFORE THIS MEETING, I NOTICED, UM, INFORMATION IS INCOMPLETE. 
          THE ZONING IS BASED ON, UM, MAXING OUT NUMBERS OF UNITS AND NUMBER CRUNCHING DIMENSIONS. 
          OTHER ISSUES IGNORED. 
          THERE ARE TRANSFORMER UH, PLACEMENT. 
          THE TREE ORDINANCE, STORM DRAINS, FIVE FOOT SETBACK, THE GREEN FACTOR, MINIMAL PARKING AND PUBLIC HEALTH DEMOLITION IS NOW BECOMING A, UM, A HEALTH ISSUE. 
          CARBON FOOT, UM, FOOTPRINTS, ASBESTOS, DUST LANDFILL, PROTRUDING BALCONIES ARE NOT BENEFICIAL. 
          PUBLIC. 
          UM, SPACING, UH, PROJECT REVIEWS, UM, SMALLER THAN 75, UM, FEET, SQUARE FEET SE 75,000 SQUARE FEET ARE NEEDED. 
          THE IDEA OF LETTING THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING PLAY OUT, QUOTE UNQUOTE, IS TO ALLOW THE FORESEEABLE MISTAKES BECOME EMBEDDED. 
          UM, UM, PLEASE LOOK FOR COMPROMISE THAT, UM, THAT CAN BE REALIZED OTHERWISE. 
          THE COUNCIL, UM, CONTINUING TO MOW DOWN, UM, THE CONCERNS OF LONG-TERM TERM TIME RESIDENTS IN FAVOR OF PRE, UM, TRANSIENT YOUTH AND, UH, THE WEALTHY. 
          AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT INDICATION OF HARM, NOT PROOF OF HARM AS THE GOAL BY THE TIME IT'S PROVED IT'S TOO LATE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SUSAN KALE. 
          HI, MY NAME IS SUSAN KALE. 
          I LIVE AT FIVE FAVE STREET, LONGTIME CAMBRIDGE RESIDENT. 
          UH, AND I'VE ALREADY DISMAYED THAT THE COUNCIL HAS ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 
          I DO AGREE WITH DOUG BROWN'S, UM, PROPOSAL THAT THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WITHIN CAMBRIDGE IS REALLY BEING VERY GIVEN A BAD, UH, DISPOSITION. 
          I LIVE ON FO STREET, I'M SURE MANY OF YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE FOE STREET IS WITHIN THE PASTS MONTH. 
          HUDSON SANTANA, A DEVELOPER FROM MIAMI, JUST BOUGHT THREE HOUSES ON THE STREET, THREE FAUX STREET, $1.6 MILLION AS A 5,000 SQUARE LOT. 
          [01:05:01]
SO HE INTENDS TO PUT MINIMUM TWO FOUR STORY TOWNHOUSES, WHICH WILL IMPEDE MY SUNLIGHT. 
          ALL THE TREES ARE GONNA BE DEMOLISHED. 
          13 FO STREET WILL BE KNOCKED DOWN. 
          THREE TOWNHOUSES SOLD FOR 1.57. 
          GLADS SOLD ON THE CORNER OF FOES, SOLD FOR 1.3. 
          NOW WHY DOES THIS MATTER? BECAUSE REGULAR FAMILIES WERE ACTUALLY COMING TO LOOK AT THESE PROPERTIES AND BID FOR IT. 
          SO BY THIS DEVELOPER COMING IN AND BIDDING 200,000 OVER ASKING PRICE, HE NEVER GAVE FAMILIES AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 
          AND TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY, HE JUST PUT UP A SIGN ON THE HOUSE. 
          HE BOUGHT BUY ANY HOUSE THAT I CAN. 
          SO THE RESIDENTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND I'M GONNA BE SENDING YOU A LETTER, VERY ANGRY. 
          UH, FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS, WE ARE GONNA BE THE ONES THAT HAVE TO SUFFER. 
          WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES OBSTRUCTING OUR STREETS. 
          THE WORKERS ARE GONNA WORK SIX DAYS A WEEK. 
          UM, THE HOUSES ALREADY HAVE SEWER FLOWING INTO THEM. 
          WHAT'S ADDITIONAL GONNA BE PROBLEMS WITH ADDITIONAL HOUSING? UM, THEN WE HAVE A RAT INFESTATION PROBLEM ALREADY AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY IN CLOSING, THE REALTOR JUST CALLED ME AND SAID, ZEIN. 
          AND MELISSA PETERS TOLD HIM THAT HE HAS TO TELL ALL THE RESIDENTS HE WANTS TO BUY HOUSES FROM, THAT THEY HAVE TO CLOSE VERY SOON OR PUT AN OFFER EXCEPT AN OFFER, BECAUSE BY DECEMBER THE ZONING IS GONNA BE CHANGED. 
          SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, DID THE CITY COUNCIL MEET WITH THESE DEVELOPERS TO GIVE 'EM AN INSIDE, UM, OPPORTUNITY TO, TO FLEECE PEOPLE THEIR PROPERTY? SO I HOPE NOT. 
          I HOPE THE PEOPLE VOTE FOR THIS GET VOTED OUT IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS. 
          THANK YOU, SUSAN. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS DAVID HEDIS. 
          YOU'RE UNMUTED. 
          GO AHEAD, DAVID ADDIS 3 93 BROADWAY. 
          I WANT TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PETITION. 
          IT WOULD HAVE A REALLY NEGATIVE IMPACT ON HOUSING PRODUCTION AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION IN PARTICULAR. 
          UM, I WAS FORWARDED SARAH BARKIN EMAIL ABOUT, UM, FOR MELLON STREET, AND SHE MENTIONED THAT, UH, THERE'S, UH, OVER 1100 APPLICATIONS FOR ONLY, UH, 29 AFFORDABLE HOMES AT THAT LOCATION. 
          AND SO I THINK IT'S GOOD TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE IS A LOT OF, UH, NEED STILL IN CAMBRIDGE, EVEN IF THEY DON'T, PEOPLE ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAIT LIST DON'T SHOW UP TO MEETINGS LIKE THIS. 
          UM, REGARDING THE CONCERN ABOUT DEMOLITIONS, UM, FIRST I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW, UH, THAT ANALYSIS WAS DONE, COMPARING THE HOMES DEMOLISHED TO THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE HOMES, UM, PROPOSED. 
          UM, BUT I SUSPECT THAT THEY'RE, UM, COUNTING ALL DEMOLITIONS, INCLUDING PARTIAL DEMOLITIONS. 
          AND IN A LOT OF CASES, HOMES THAT ARE PARTIALLY DEMOLISHED. 
          THEY'RE ONLY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A THREE UNIT BUILDING AND THEN YOU'RE EXPANDING THE FOOTPRINT TO ADD A NEW UNIT, I DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO SAY THAT, UH, THREE HOMES ARE BEING DEMOLISHED. 
          I WOULD, I THINK THAT IT'S JUST ONE HOME IS BEING ADDED AND I THINK, UH, JUST BECAUSE, UH, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, UH, DOWN CONVERSIONS OVER TIME ANYWAY. 
          SO I THINK A LOT OF THIS CONCERN ABOUT DEMOLITION, LIKE NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS BEEN BEING TURNED INTO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, OR IT'S BEEN RENOVATED ALL THIS TIME. 
          SO IT'S NOT LIKE THESE HOMES HAVE EVER BEEN PROTECTED. 
          UM, IN GENERAL, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO INVEST IN THE HOUSING STOCK IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          THIS IS A PLACE OF FLAWED JOBS, AND I WOULD, I THINK THAT INVESTMENT SHOULD RESULT IN NEW HOMES RATHER THAN MAKING THE EXISTING HOMES, UH, FANCIER OR BUILDING MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SUSAN SCHLESINGER. 
          HELLO. 
          WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          UH, MY NAME IS SUSAN SCHLESINGER. 
          I LIVE AT 34 GLENWOOD AVENUE, CAMBRIDGE, AND I AM, UM, WANTED TO TALK TO YOU TODAY TO URGE YOU TO DEFEAT THE BROWN PETITION, UM, IN THE MOST EXPEDITIOUS WAY THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO DO SO. 
          UM, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY WAS, UM, TASK TO DO ONE SPECIFIC THING, WHICH WAS TO CREATE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, FOR PEOPLE FOR LOW AND MODERATE PEOPLE IN THE CITY. 
          AND IT CHANGED ZONING IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          UM, IT'S BEEN SPECTACULARLY SUCCESSFUL. 
          ONE OF THE BEST POLICY, UM, MOVES I THINK THE CITY HAS MADE TO HELP, UM, LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PEOPLE STAY IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          UM, WE'VE HEARD EXAMPLES TODAY FROM THE PEOPLE WHO CREATE 
          [01:10:01]
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE DEVELOPMENT NONPROFIT DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT OF THIS PETITION WOULD DO. 
          UM, WE HAVE A ROBUST PIPELINE OF A THOUSAND UNITS OR MORE THAT COULD BE CREATED WITH THE HELP OF THIS PETITION. 
          I MEAN, WITH THE HELP OF THE A HO, UM, IF THIS PETITION WERE PASSED, IT WOULD CAUSE MANY, UM, IF NOT MOST OF THOSE PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE TO BECOME INFEASIBLE AS THE DENSITY WOULD GO DOWN, NUMBER OF UNITS WOULD DROP, THE PRICE PER UNIT WOULD GO UP SPECTACULARLY. 
          SO PLEASE CONTINUE. 
          THE TREMENDOUS SUPPORT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THOUSAND UNITS IS AT LEAST IT'S SOMEPLACE BETWEEN THREE AND 4,000 CAMBRIDGE RESIDENTS THAT ARE ABLE TO ENJOY OUR PARKS, OUR SCHOOLS, AND ARE ABLE TO BE NEIGHBORLY TO US ALL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS HELEN WALKER, FOLLOWED BY DAVID HALPERIN, THEN LEE FERRIS. 
          HELEN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN. 
          HELEN WALKER, 43 LINEAN STREET. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE CHANCE TO SPEAK. 
          THE PLANNING BOARD HEARING DID NOT ADEQUATELY RECOGNIZE THAT DOUG BROWN'S PETITION, PROPOSALS, ADDRESS CONFLICTS WE'RE SEEING NOW BETWEEN MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ZONING AND OTHER CITY GOALS. 
          THEY FORM A BASIS FOR ONGOING DISCUSSION. 
          THERE ARE OPTIONS, MEANING THAT COUNCIL CAN CHOOSE TO ADVANCE THOSE THAT YOUR CONSTITUENTS TELL YOU ARE URGENT. 
          NOW, PLEASE GIVE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION TODAY TO PROVISIONS LIKE SETBACKS, OPEN SPACE PARKING AND REVIEW, WHICH AFFECT GREEN FACTOR CLIMATE, RESILIENCY, FIRE SAFETY, TRAFFIC SAFETY, AND THE CHANGES WHICH REDUCE DEVELOPER CONFUSION OVER ZONING, APPEARING TO BE MORE LENIENT THAN ALLOWED WHEN OTHER CITY REQUIREMENTS ARE ALSO MET. 
          PLEASE AVOID FALSE STEREOTYPES ABOUT WHO SUPPORTS AND SHOULD SUPPORT THESE PROPOSALS. 
          IN JUNE, I WORKED WITH OUR REVOLUTION MASSACHUSETTS ON STATE LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION. 
          HERE IS WHAT I LEARNED FROM ONE, OUR REVOLUTION, MASSACHUSETTS LEADER. 
          WE DON'T JUST NEED MORE HOUSING, WE NEED MORE HEALTHY HOUSING AND HEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS WITH TREES THAT IMPROVE AIR QUALITY, PROVIDE COOLING STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, BETTER MENTAL HEALTH AS NEIGHBORHOODS WITHOUT TREES HAVE MORE DOCTOR VISITS AND DEATHS. 
          WE DON'T NEED MORE, MORE, MORE JUST TO POISON OURSELVES AND DESTROY NATURE. 
          I URGE YOU TO TAKE A NUANCED VIEW OF THE PETITION AND ADVANCE THOSE PROVISIONS, WHICH CAN'T WAIT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS DAVID HALPERN. 
          DAVID, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          DAVID HALPERIN 14 VALENTINE STREET AT UNIT THREE. 
          UM, I AM SPEAKING TO STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS PETITION AND HOPE THE COUNCIL CAN VOTE IT DOWN. 
          UM, HOUSING IS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FOR CAMBRIDGE RESIDENTS OVER AND OVER. 
          UM, WE CONTINUE TO, YOU KNOW, VOTE IN A PRO HOUSING MAJORITY EVERY ELECTION. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN NO, THERE'S BEEN NO EFFORT TO BUILD A CONS, UH, POLITICAL CONSENSUS AROUND ANY OF THIS. 
          YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST, UM, TRYING, TRYING TO PAIR BACK. 
          UM, AND, YOU KNOW, AND LIKE DELAY BY, YOU KNOW, CREATING UNCERTAINTY PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE. 
          UM, THE, THE HARMS THAT ARE BEING DONE ARE TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAIT LIST AND THE PEOPLE BEING PRICE OUT OF CAMBRIDGE, UM, THE, THE SUPPOSED HARMS THAT ARE BEING TALKED ABOUT. 
          THEY'RE MOSTLY A AESTHETIC DIFFERENCES THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE ABOUT WHAT KIND OF CITY WE WANNA LIVE IN. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE DIFFERENT PEOPLE CAN HAVE REASONABLE PREFERENCES, BUT THAT IS NOT A CRISIS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE PART OF THE CITY THAT I LIVE IN, WE HAVE DIFFERENT KINDS OF BUILDINGS NEXT TO EACH OTHER. 
          A LOT OF THEM ARE VERY CLOSE TOGETHER. 
          UM, I REALLY LIKE MY NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          YOU KNOW, LIKE, UM, I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED BIG LAWNS AND SETBACKS NECESSARILY. 
          UM, UM, THIS WILL, ONE OF THE REASONS FOR SIX STORIES IN THE ORIGINAL MULTIFAMILY WAS TO ALLOW INCLUSIONARY IN NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          AND LIKE, AS THE AFFORDABLE DEVELOPERS HAVE SAID, THIS WILL, UH, MAKE A HO PROJECTS INFEASIBLE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, THIS WILL END BOTH INCLUSIONARY AND A HO PROJECTS, MEANING WE WON'T HAVE ANY AFFORDABLE UNITS AT ALL IN NEIGHBORHOODS THEMSELVES, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE A BIG LOSS. 
          UM, PLEASE REJECT THIS PETITION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE HAVE ABOUT EIGHT MORE SPEAKERS. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS LEE FERRIS, 
          [01:15:01]
FOLLOWED BY NHE VEDI. 
          THEN JAMES SAUL LEE, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, LEE FARRIS. 
          I LIVE IN THE PORT. 
          UM, TODAY I'M GOING TO BE READING COMMENTS NOT FROM THE CAMBRIDGE RESIDENTS ALLIANCE BROOK, BUT FROM, UH, CAMBRIDGE HOUSING JUSTICE COALITION. 
          UH, CHJC FOCUSES PARTICULARLY ON THE ISSUES OF DISPLACEMENT, GENTRIFICATION, AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR CAMBRIDGE. 
          WE ALSO ADVOCATE FOR AND ARE FINDING WAYS TO CREATE EQUITABLE NON-MARKET BASED SOLUTIONS FOR LIVABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY FOR LOWER INCOME RESIDENTS, MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS OUR TOP PRIORITY. 
          CHJC DOES NOT WANNA SEE A PAUSE IN A HO BUILDINGS, WHICH WOULD RESULT FROM THE BROWN PETITION. 
          OUR COMMENTS ARE ON THE ASPECTS ASPECT OF ASPECTS OF THE PETITION, WHICH WOULD HARM THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS. 
          WE OPPOSE THE PROPOSED REDUCTION OF MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR A HO BUILDINGS IN C ONE DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS OTHER PROPOSED CHANGES THAT WOULD REDUCE BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          WE DO NOT AGREE THAT ALL BUILDINGS ABUTTING A DEVELOPMENT MUST EXCEED THREE STORIES IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE MULTIFAMILY HEIGHT TO BE SIX FLOORS. 
          WITH INCLUSIONARY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO ENCOURAGE INCLUSIONARY UNITS. 
          HOWEVER, CHJC DOES PREFER THE THREE FLOOR PLUS THREE FOUR FLOOR APPROACH ON MULTIFAMILY. 
          THAT WAS DISCUSSED BEFORE, PASSAGE OF THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING IN 2025. 
          CDD SAID, THIS APPROACH WOULD PRODUCE MORE INCLUSIONARY UNITS AS WELL AS MORE MARKET UNITS COMPARED WITH THE APPROACH THAT WAS APPROVED. 
          WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE PARKING MINIMUMS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          REINTRODUCED PARKING SPOTS ARE TOO COSTLY FOR THESE REASONS. 
          CHJC ASKS THAT YOU VOTE AGAINST ADOPTION OF THE BROWN PETITION. 
          HOWEVER, BASED ON WHAT I HEARD TODAY, I DO WANT TO FLAG THE PROBLEM OF THE LONG TIME BETWEEN DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION. 
          THAT MEANS WE HAVE LESS UNITS IN THAT TIME PERIOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK, THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS NHI TI NHI. 
          YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          UH, THANK YOU. 
          UM, I LIVE ON MAGOON STREET IN NORTH CAMBRIDGE, 16 YEAR CAMBRIDGE RESIDENT. 
          AND I JUST WOULD URGE THE, THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMITTEE TO, UH, REJECT THESE ZONING AMENDMENTS. 
          I DO THINK THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO, UM, UH, CERTAINLY TO, UH, IMPROVE OUR ZONING AND THE, AND THE MFH OVERLAY AND, UH, ALL OUR ZONING FOR HOUSING OVER TIME AS WE LEARN. 
          BUT THIS IS, UM, I THINK THIS THE, THE ZONING PETITION AS IT STANDS, UM, WOULD DO, UH, FAR MORE HARM THAN GOOD. 
          I THINK THAT, UM, DOUG BRINGS UP, UH, ONCE AGAIN A RANGE OF, OF IMPORTANT COMMENTS, BUT THE ONE THAT, UH, I DID NOT HEAR IS AROUND THE ECONOMICS. 
          THE REASON WE HAVE HEIGHT AND DENSITY IS BECAUSE IT'S EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO BUILD. 
          UM, ON TOP OF THAT, WITH TARIFFS, WITH CRACKDOWNS AND IMMIGRATION AND LABOR, IT'S MAKING THE COST TO BUILD, UM, HIGHER. 
          AND SO, UH, OBVIOUSLY THE DENSITY IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO GET THE TYPE OF HOUSING THAT WE NEED. 
          IN CAMBRIDGE, WE ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT, OR I CERTAINLY ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT PEOPLE LEAVING CAMBRIDGE BECAUSE IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE TO LIVE HERE. 
          UM, YOU ALSO HEAR STORIES ABOUT CITIES THAT HAVE BUILT EXTENSIVELY AND THAT IT ENABLES THE COST OF HOUSING AND THE COST OF RENTS TO COME DOWN, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED. 
          SO, UH, AS MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, ALWAYS OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE, UM, UM, OUR ZONING AND, AND LEARN AS WE GO. 
          BUT, UH, I THINK THESE ZONING AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED, UM, BY MR. BROWN, SHOULD BE REJECTED. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THE NEXT SPEAKER, JAMES ZALL HAS NOT JOINED. 
          WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO KAREN ETTE, FOLLOWED BY JESSICA SHEEN, THEN JUSTIN SAFE. 
          KAREN, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          HI EVERYONE. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON COUNSELORS. 
          I'M KAREN BRUSH AT 51 CUSHING STREET. 
          WE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND WE CREATED A STRONG ECONOMIC INCENTIVE TO REDEVELOP PROPERTIES ACROSS CAMBRIDGE. 
          BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE FAILING ON IMMEDIATE SAFETY OVERSIGHT. 
          WE'RE FAILING ON LONG-TERM PLANNING PRINCIPLES, AND WE'RE FAILING TO DELIVER TRUE MIXED INCOME, AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THE GROUND. 
          OUR OVERSIGHT SYSTEM IS BROKEN. 
          WE'RE SEEING PERMITTED ACTIVE DEMOLITIONS, INCLUDING A RECENT INCIDENT WHERE 
          [01:20:01]
A WORKER WAS INSIDE A PARTIALLY DEMOLISHED STRUCTURE THAT WAS UNSAFE TO BE INHABITED. 
          ANOTHER DEMOLITION INCIDENT IS INADEQUATE ASBESTOS AND LEAD TESTING WHERE PROJECTS HAD TO BE STOPPED MID DEMOLITION TO PREVENT EXPOSING NEIGHBORS TO AIRBORNE HAZARDS. 
          A THIRD INCIDENT IS A COMPLETE STRUCTURAL COLLAPSE THAT WAS UNCONTROLLED OF A WALL, HAVING DOWN POWER LINES AND SENDING A MASSIVE DUST STORM THROUGH OUR STREETS. 
          IT SHOULDN'T REQUIRE RESIDENTS POLICING THIS AND CONTACTING THE EPA AND THE CITY FOR THE CITY TO ENFORCE BASIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PROTOCOLS. 
          BEYOND THE IMMEDIATE SAFETY. 
          OUR CURRENT APPROACH CONTRADICTS LEADING RESEARCH IN URBAN DESIGN AND OUR OWN ENVISION CAMBRIDGE PLAN. 
          RECENT MIT RESEARCH PUBLISHED THIS MONTH IDENTIFIES FOUR INTERCONNECTED PILLARS FOR RESIDENT HEALTH. 
          DENSITY IS CRITICAL, BUT SO IS TREE CANOPY ACCESS TO AMENITIES AND AN UNFRAGMENTED URBAN MOTIF. 
          THE SCIENCE IS CLEAR, HARMONIOUS BUILDING HEIGHTS DESIGN CONGRUENCY AND PROPORTIONAL SETBACKS ARE ACTUALLY EMPIRICALLY PROVEN TO SUPPORT BETTER HEALTH OUTCOMES FOR OUR RESIDENTS. 
          UM, AND THIS SUPPORTS SOME OF THE INTENT BEHIND DOUG BROWN'S PROPOSALS BECAUSE UNCOORDINATED FRAGMENTED INFILL THAT DISRUPTS STREET SCAPES, SQUEEZES OUT TREE CANOPY NEGATIVELY IMPACTS OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          PLEASE ADDRESS THE VALID INTENT BEHIND HIS PROPOSALS, AND IN THE MEANTIME, URGENTLY FIX THE UNSAFE DEMOLITION PRACTICES ONGOING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JESSICA SHEEN. 
          JESSICA, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          HI, I'M JESSICA SHEEN, 86 PLYMOUTH STREET, AND I OPPOSE THE PETITION. 
          IT WOULD HURT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION AT A TIME WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE IT AND ALREADY FACING ECONOMIC HEADWINDS. 
          HRA AND CHA HAVE BOTH SAID AS MUCH THE A HO HAS BEEN SUCCESS. 
          AND THIS PETITION WOULDN'T JUST ROLL IT BACK TO ITS STATE BEFORE THE MULTIFAMILY ORDINANCE. 
          IT GOES FURTHER THAN THAT AND WOULD ALSO INTRODUCE BRAND NEW PARKING MINIMUMS THAT THE A HO HAS NEVER BEEN SUBJECT TO. 
          PARKING IS ENORMOUSLY EXPENSIVE REQUIREMENT THAT RESULTS IN FEWER AFFORDABLE UNITS AND IN SOME CASES MAKES ENTIRE PROJECTS INFEASIBLE. 
          AND DEVELOPMENTS THAT PROVIDE MORE PARKING, PRODUCE MORE CAR TRAFFIC, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE WANT. 
          THE PROBLEM WITH HAVING DIFFERENT ZONING FOR DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS, THE THING WE JUST DID AWAY WITH IS THAT THE WAY OUR NEIGHBORHOODS LOOK TODAY IS NOT ACCIDENTAL AND IS NOT THE RESULT OF BENIGN POLICY CHOICES. 
          THE DENSER AREAS OF THE CITY TEND TO HAVE GREATER ECONOMIC AND RACIAL DIVERSITY. 
          SO IF WE SAY NEW HOUSING NEEDS TO REFLECT THE CONTEXT OF ITS NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT'S GOING TO CONCENTRATE NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY DENSER AND LESS WEALTHY. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WANT REGARDING THE PACE OF CHANGE. 
          THE HOUSING CRISIS IS LIKE THE CLIMATE CRISIS IN THAT THE SOONER ACTION IS TAKEN TO FIX IT, THE EASIER IT IS. 
          I WISH WE HAD BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS 20 YEARS AGO BECAUSE WHEN REFORM IS DELAYED, THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM GROWS, AND THAT ALSO GROWS THE SCALE OF THE SOLUTION NEEDED. 
          I COMMEND THE CASTLE FOR COUNSEL FOR PASSING SOMETHING EIGHT, ONE THAT IS RESPONSIVE TO THE SIZE OF THE PROBLEM. 
          FINALLY, I DO THINK WE NEED TO REFORM THE PETITION PROCESS. 
          I'M NOT SPECULATING AS TO THESE PETITIONER'S MOTIVES, BUT THE PROCESS IS VULNERABLE TO ABUSE. 
          AS MR. BROWN HIMSELF SAID. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT THAT ZONING BE PREDICTABLE. 
          A DOWN ZONING PETITION INTRODUCES UNCERTAINTY INTO THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WHICH EFFECTIVELY PAUSES PROGRESS ON PROJECTS AND INCREASES THEIR COST, ESPECIALLY AFFORDABLE PROJECTS. 
          AND ALL YOU NEED TO DO THAT IS GET NINE OTHER PEOPLE TO SIGN A PIECE OF PAPER. 
          WHETHER THAT'S THE INTENT IS IRRELEVANT, IT'S THE EFFECT THAT MATTERS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKERS ARE JUSTIN SAFE, FOLLOWED BY PATRICK BARRETT, AND OUR FINAL SPEAKER WILL BE HEATHER HOFFMAN. 
          JUSTIN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          TWO MINUTES. 
          HI, JUSTIN SAFE, 72 THORN DECK. 
          THIS REVIST PETITION IS A COMPLETE BETRAYAL OF CAMBRIDGE'S PROGRESSIVE VALUES OF INCLUSIVITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND DIVERSITY. 
          AND THE PETITIONERS HERE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE DOING DESPITE TODAY'S SILLY LITTLE ACT. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, TODAY'S PRESENTATION WAS AN EXERCISE IN GASLIGHTING FROM START TO FINISH. 
          PETITIONER TAKING CREDIT FOR ANY PART OF THE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE IS LAUGHABLE. 
          WE ALL KNOW THE PROPONENTS OF THIS PETITION FOUGHT THE A HO AND MHO TOOTH AND NAIL. 
          THEY DON'T WANT TO IMPROVE CAMBRIDGE HOUSING. 
          THEY WANNA BLOCK IT. 
          THEY APPARENTLY THINK THEY'RE SO MUCH SMARTER THAN ANYONE ELSE IN CAMBRIDGE THAT THEY CAN PRESENT THIS BLATANT DISINFORMATION. 
          BUT EVERYONE WHO'S EVER BUILT ANYTHING IN CAMBRIDGE SAID THE PETITION WILL EFFECTIVELY END INCLUSIONARY AND 100% AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          IN FACT, WE ALL KNOW WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING HERE. 
          NM B WEST CAMBRIDGE RESIDENTS ARE TRYING TO REINSTATE EXCLUSIONARY ZONING TO BLOCK THE FIRST INCLUSIONARY MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING PROPOSED FOR WEST CAMBRIDGE. 
          WE KNOW THE SUPPORTERS OF THIS PETITION AREN'T CONCERNED ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECAUSE THEY'RE KILLING THE A HO WITH THEIR AMENDMENTS. 
          THEY CAN ADD 1000 A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE HOMES TO THEIR LIST, UH, SINCE THEY WOULD COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN THE A HO PIPELINE. 
          ACCORDING TO CHA AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NON-PROFITS, THE PROPONENTS WANT TO BUILD A WALL AROUND CAMBRIDGE AND STATE OF CAMBRIDGE FAMILIES IN DESPERATE NEED OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT CAMBRIDGE IS FULL. 
          [01:25:01]
THE COUNCIL MUST FORWARD THIS PETITION WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION AND MUST VOTE IT DOWN, OR ELSE THE PETITIONERS AND THEIR SUPPORTERS WILL CONTINUALLY BRING SIMILAR DOWN ZONING PETITIONS TO TRY TO BLOCK AFFORDABLE AND INCLUSIONARY MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PATRICK BARRETT, FOLLOWED BY HEATHER HOFFMAN. 
          UH, HELLO. 
          MY NAME IS PATRICK BARRETT. 
          UM, I WAS A RESIDENT OF CAMBRIDGE FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS, BUT NOW I LIVE IN MAINE. 
          UM, I'M HERE. 
          UH, AS I KNOW IN DOUG'S OWN PRESENTATION, I'VE WORKED WITH DOUG, I'VE WORKED WITH OTHER PEOPLE IN THE CITY. 
          I'VE PASSED A LOT OF ZONING IN THIS CITY. 
          THIS PARTICULAR PETITION HAS A LOT OF INACCURACIES IN ITS PRESENTATION, WHICH I THINK DOUG KNOWS. 
          I MEAN, THE PREEXISTING THRESHOLD FOR SPECIAL PERMIT, IT WASN'T 20,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          IT WASN'T A COUPLE AREAS, BUT NOT IN MANY. 
          AND WHAT I'M REALLY HEARING ABOUT FORM AND CONTEXT IS PEOPLE IN WEST CAMBRIDGE AND PLACES WHERE THEY HAD RES B AND RESA ZONING ARE EXPERIENCING A CONDITION ALMOST VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT IT PREEXIST IN THE C ONE ZONE, WHICH IS IN THE OLDER EAST CAMBRIDGE, CAMBRIDGE PORT AREAS THAT HAD TIGHTER BUILDS. 
          AND THEY'RE HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THAT. 
          WHAT THEY'RE REALLY HAVING IS A PROBLEM WITH CONTROL. 
          WHAT I'M REALLY SAYING IS A PROBLEM WITH MISINFORMATION, AND I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE. 
          AND I DID SEND AN EMAIL OUT TO THE COUNCIL A FEW DAYS AGO ASKING, UH, COUNCILORS ZUI TO APOLOGIZE TO THE PLANNING BOARD WHO SHE ADMONISHED FOR NOT SUPPORTING THIS BLINDLY. 
          I THINK THAT'S IRRESPONSIBLE. 
          YOU HAVE NINE PROFESSIONAL VOLUNTEER OR NOT A GROUP OF PROFESSIONAL VOLUNTEERS, UM, WHO SPEND A LOT OF THEIR TIME AND ARE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE, MUCH MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN THIS COUNCIL ON ZONING DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT IT ACTUALLY TAKES TO BUILD SOMETHING. 
          UM, I ALSO HAVE FIELDED MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MISINFORMATION, WHAT LISTS, UH, DOXING PEOPLE'S HOMES. 
          IT'S, IT'S BECOME A LITTLE BIT RIDICULOUS. 
          UM, BUT IF I LOOK AT THE SUBSTANCE OF OF MR. BROWN'S PETITION, I CAN ONLY COME TO THE CONCLUSION BECAUSE DOUG'S SMART THAT HE KNOWS WHAT THIS WILL DO. 
          I ALSO HAVE EVERY, I'M ALSO EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL THE COUNCIL SENDS A MESSAGE. 
          AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO SEND A MESSAGE WHETHER YOU WANNA GO BACK TO EXCLUSIONARY ZONING OR WHETHER YOU WANNA GO BACK TO THE PREEXISTING CONDITION AND MAKING EVERYTHING NON-CONFORMING. 
          OR IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, I COULD EXPLAIN IT ALL TO YOU, BUT NOT IN TWO, NOT IN TWO MINUTES. 
          UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OUR FINAL SPEAKER IS HEATHER HOFFMAN. 
          HEATHER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. 
          PLEASE GO AHEAD. 
          HELLO, HEATHER HOFFMAN, TWO 13 HURLEY STREET. 
          FIRST OF ALL, I I AM STRUCK THAT NO ONE SEEMS TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF THIS, INCLUDING THE PLANNING BOARD, WHICH WAS WHAT I READ THAT KATHY ZUI COMPLAINED ABOUT. 
          UM, BECAUSE THE PLANNING BOARD DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IT. 
          AND I AM CERTAIN THAT IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOKED AT SOME OF THE ACTUAL PROVISIONS, YOU MIGHT FIND THINGS TO LIKE, AND PEOPLE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE A HO. 
          WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT MOST PEOPLE WHO READ THIS SEE THIS AS, SEE AS THE, UM, PRIME INTEREST OF, OF BRINGING THIS PETITION BECAUSE ALL OF THE DEMOLITIONS THAT PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT ARE NOT HAPPENING BECAUSE OF THE A HO THEY'RE HAPPENING BECAUSE OF THE MASSIVE UPZONING LAST YEAR THAT HAS INCENTIVIZED, TEARING DOWN EVERYTHING IN SIGHT THAT IS ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO SAY, I JUST CAN'T LIVE WITH THIS ANYMORE AND SELL THEIR HOMES FOR TOP DOLLAR, SO THAT NOTHING THAT'S BUILT WILL EVER BE AFFORDABLE BY A NORMAL PERSON. 
          AGAIN, I THINK THAT WE CAN DO A TON BETTER. 
          AND I THINK THAT SINCE THE PLANNING BOARD SPENT MORE TIME TALKING ABOUT WHAT A GREAT CITIZEN DOUG BROWN IS THAN TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF ANYTHING IN HIS PETITION, YOU MIGHT THINK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THE PLANNING BOARD THINKS HE'S A GOOD, A GOOD CITIZEN. 
          AND SO DO I. 
          NOW YOU CAN LOOK AT, LOOK AROUND YOU AND SEE HOW MUCH AFFORDABLE STUFF ISN'T BEING BUILT UNDER THE MASSIVE UPSO AND THINK MAYBE THAT'S A PROBLEM. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THAT WAS OUR FINAL SPEAKER. 
          GREAT. 
          THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, ON A MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          COUNCILOR ZUBE? YES. 
          YES. 
          VICE MAYOR. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR FLAHERTY. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR MCGOVERN. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR NOLAN. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SIMMONS. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILLOR EY. 
          YES. 
          [01:30:01]
YES. 
          MAYOR SIDIKI. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          AND YOU HAVE NINE MEMBERS RECORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          IT IS 4:32 PM AND WE'RE GONNA OPEN IT UP FOR, UH, DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS BY THE CITY COUNCIL, THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, I SHOULD SAY QUESTION. 
          UH, CITY COUNCILLOR . 
          I'LL, I'LL START OUT BY TALKING ABOUT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING, WHICH WAS A WEEK AGO. 
          I, I ATTEND A LOT OF MEETINGS. 
          WHAT I FOUND, UM, CONCERNING ABOUT THAT MEETING IS THAT THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION OF DOUG BROWN'S AMENDMENTS ARE HIS PROPOSAL. 
          I MEAN, HE, HE PUT WEEKS INTO DEVELOPING AMENDMENTS TO THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE. 
          AND NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM WAS DISCUSSED AT THAT MEETING. 
          AND, UH, JEFF, ROBERT SAID AT THE MEETING, UH, SOMEONE ASKED, IS MUCH HAPPENING? AND HE SAID, NOTHING MUCH. 
          UH, AND THEY HADN'T SEEN THE TRACKER. 
          THEY DIDN'T KNOW 128 PROJECTS ARE IN PROCESS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE 102 OF THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIATED ON CITY WEBSITES. 
          I FEEL AS THOUGH, YOU KNOW, I WALK AROUND IN CAMBRIDGEPORT IN RIVERSIDE AND EVERY WEEK THERE'S ANOTHER DEMOLITION. 
          THERE HAVE BEEN TWO ON MY STREET. 
          THERE'S ONE ON A STREET BEHIND ME. 
          THERE WAS ANOTHER I RECENTLY SAW IN RIVERSIDE. 
          THEY'RE HAPPENING EVERYWHERE. 
          NEIGHBORS ARE REALLY UPSET ABOUT THE LEAD AND THE ASBESTOS AND THE MANAGEMENT OF THE DEMOLITIONS. 
          SO FOR JEFF ROBERTS TO SAY, NOTHING MUCH IS HAPPENING, WE'VE GOTTA LIKE LEAVE IT. 
          UH, WE REALLY WON'T KNOW WHAT THE EFFECT OF THIS POLICY IS FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS IS JUST, UM, UH, SO, SO WRONG TO ME. 
          SO I, I THINK, UH, SO I, I FEEL AS THOUGH THE CITY SHOULD HAVE BETTER INFORMED THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS AS TO WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE CITY, CITY BY SHARING THE TRACKER. 
          AND AGAIN, I, I JUST WAS, UM, IMPRESSED WITH HOW UNAWARE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD WERE OF THE IMPACTS. 
          I MEAN, I'M HEARING EVERY DAY ABOUT TREES COMING DOWN AGAIN ON MY BLOCK. 
          THERE'LL BE, THERE'S ONE HOUSE THAT'S COMING DOWN THAT I THINK WILL TAKE DOWN THREE STREET TREES AND TWO OTHER TREES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          SO AN AWFUL LOT IS HAPPENING, AND IT'S HAPPENING VERY, VERY QUICKLY. 
          UM, WHILE I THINK DOUG BROWN'S PETITION, UH, WOULD REQUIRE SOME MODIFICATIONS RELATING TO A-A-A-H-O PROJECTS OVERALL, MY TAKEAWAY IS THAT BROWN IS INTRODUCING MORE HUMANE URBAN PLANNING OVERALL IN BETTER DESIGN WITH HIS AMENDMENTS. 
          HE HAS, HE MAKES GOOD POINT ABOUT HEIGHT, SETBACKS, STEP BACKS, UH, SIDEWALL LENGTH. 
          HE DOESN'T WANNA CREATE CANYONS. 
          HE'S TRYING TO CREATE MORE OPEN SPACE. 
          UH, THE REALITY WHEN I ATTEND, YOU KNOW, I, I, AGAIN, I ATTEND MEETINGS ALL THE TIME. 
          I ATTEND THE JUSTICE START MEETINGS. 
          UM, GENERALLY THEY SAY HALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF THEIR HOUSING WILL HAVE CARS. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S JUST LIKE A REALITY. 
          SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE ISSUES WITH BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IF YOU BUILD PARKING. 
          BUT I, YOU KNOW, I, AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED TO THINK MORE ABOUT HOW TO ACCOMMODATE AND INCENTIVIZE THE PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          BUT THERE IS A REAL ISSUE RELATING TO PARKING WITH, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE BUILDING A HUNDRED UNITS ON MASS AVE, UH, WHICH WILL SOON HAPPEN ON THE LESLIE, ON THE LESLIE PARKING LOTS, AND IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE AT LEAST 50 MORE CARS IN AN ALREADY UM, PLACE WITH SCARCE PARKING, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE IMPACT. 
          SO WE NEED TO PLAN FOR THE PARKING. 
          I THINK DOUG MAKES A GREAT POINT ABOUT DESIGN REVIEW FOR LARGER PROJECTS, WHETHER IT'S AT 20,000 SQUARE FEET OR, OR 50,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO I, I'M HOPING TODAY DURING THE SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE HAVE, MAYBE THIS WILL BE A MEETING THAT'S CONTINUED THAT WILL TALK MORE ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF INTRODUCING DESIGN REVIEW. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, I JUST, I JUST DON'T THINK WHAT'S HAPPENING IS PERFECT. 
          IF IT WAS THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE WOULD BE PRODUCING MORE INCLUSIONARY UNITS, UH, WHAT I'M SEEING AND WHAT YOU SEE ON THE TRACKER IS MOSTLY IT'S PRODUCING, UM, LUXURY UNITS. 
          A A AGAIN, WE'RE SEEING A DISPLACEMENT OF MIDDLE INCOME RESIDENTS. 
          WE'RE SEEING THAT WE'RE INCENTIVIZING DEMOLITIONS. 
          I, I WILL TELL YOU, AS I, AGAIN, I'VE, I'VE WITNESSED THREE DEMOLITIONS AND THEN I OBSERVED ONE AFTER THE EFFECT, AFTER THE EFFECT. 
          IT JUST SEEMS SO CRAZY TO ME. 
          WE ARE A CITY THAT TAKES SUCH PRIDE IN OUR 
          [01:35:01]
URBAN FOREST. 
          WE TAKE SUCH PRIDE IN BEING CLIMATE CHAMPIONS, AND YET WE'RE INCENTIVIZING AND SANCTION SANCTIONING THE DESTRUCTION OF HOUSES. 
          OFTEN WELL BUILT HOUSES THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR A HUNDRED, 150 OR MORE YEARS. 
          SO WE, WE'VE GOTTA THINK ABOUT AMENDMENTS, WE'VE GOTTA THINK ABOUT IMPROVING THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE. 
          UM, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ENGAGING WITH ALL OF YOU IN THAT DISCUSSION. 
          AND I REALLY, UH, LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING YOUR COMMENTS NOW ABOUT THE IDEAS THAT DOUG BROWN HAS PROPOSED THAT JUST ADD MORE, WILL ADD MORE HUMANITY TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I YIELD VICE MAYOR AZEEM WITH HIS HAND UP, AND THEN COUNSELOR AL ZUBE, UH, VICE MAYOR ZE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, I WANTED TO SAY, I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH MUCH OF WHAT COUNCILORS EY HAS SAID. 
          I THINK THAT THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE WAS A BIG CHANGE. 
          I THINK THAT THERE IS LOTS OF ROOM FOR A HEALTHY DISCUSSION AROUND IT. 
          AND I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE SPENT MORE TIME ON THIS COUNCIL FIRM ON THAN ANY OTHER TOPIC. 
          WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS ON AMENDMENTS, AND I'M SURE THAT THEY WILL COME BACK AND WE'LL HAVE EVEN MORE AMEN, UH, MEETINGS ON IT. 
          WE'VE HAD A LOT OF OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT PARKING, ABOUT LIMITING PARKING PERMITS AND OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN DO. 
          AND I'M SURE THAT WE WON'T MAKE AMENDMENTS ON THAT. 
          WE'VE HAD A LOT OF TOPICS ABOUT PERMITTING AND OTHER SORTS OF ISSUES. 
          I THINK THAT THAT IS ALL VERY FAIR. 
          AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A LARGE AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE IN THE COMMUNITY AND THAT THAT IS HEALTHY AND RIGHTEOUS, AND WE SHOULD ENGAGE IN THAT AND TRY TO LAND IN A PLACE WHERE WE CAN GROW IN A WAY THAT, UM, RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH AND RESULT IN GOOD OUTCOMES. 
          I THINK THAT THIS SPECIFIC PETITION BY TOUCHING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY, IS CROSSING THAT LINE IN THAT IT WILL HAVE A VERY NEGATIVE EFFECT ON ALL OF THE A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY. 
          IT RISKS OUR STATE FUNDING. 
          AND BY LEAVING THIS IN COMMITTEE TODAY, WE WILL RISK A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE AND WILL PROVIDE A LOT OF HOMES TO LOW INCOME RESIDENTS IN OUR CITY AND THOUSANDS OF FAMILIES. 
          I THINK THAT I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON THE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE, BUT TO KEEP IT SHORT, I WOULD JUST MAKE A MOTION TO FORWARD THIS TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION. 
          I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THIS PROMPTLY RISK LET WE RISK OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE ALREADY. 
          THANKS, VICE MAYOR ZE WILL NOTE, WE NOW HAVE A MOTION BEFORE US. 
          UM, COUNCILOR ZUBE, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP. 
          HE TOOK THE WORDS OUT OF MY MOUTH, SO I'LL DIFFER. 
          UH, COUNCILOR FLAHERTY THE BEFORE. 
          WELL, I THINK, UM, FIRST OF ALL, WE'VE GOTTA STOP KIDDING OURSELVES IN THIS CHAMBER. 
          UM, WE TALK ABOUT A HOUSING CRISIS AND THERE'S NO DISPUTE ABOUT THAT, THAT, BUT IT'S NOT SPECIFIC TO CAMBRIDGE. 
          WE ALL KNOW THAT. 
          SO LET'S STOP KIDDING OURSELVES THAT THE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ZONING ORDINANCE IS GOING TO MAKE A CHANGE. 
          IT'S NOT, WE NEED A REGIONAL SOLUTION, IF NOT A NATIONAL SOLUTION FOR A REAL PROBLEM, WHICH IN MANY WAYS IS CONNECTED TO TRANSPORTATION. 
          AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          AND I THINK WE'VE GOTTA FRAME THIS THE RIGHT WAY. 
          UM, IN MY MIND, I SEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING O OVERLAY AS SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          AND, UM, I'LL DIRECT MY COMMENTS TO THE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE IS CAUSING, UM, AWFUL LOT OF DISRUPTION IN OUR CITY. 
          I MEAN, RIGHT NOW THAT ZONING ORDINANCE INCENTIVIZES THE DEMOLITION OF ONE, TWO, AND THREE FAMILY HOMES ALL ACROSS THE CITY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF, AT A MINIMUM FOUR STORY, IF NOT SIX STORY BUILDINGS, NOT, UH, TO IMPROVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR AFFORDABILITY. 
          AND I THINK ONE OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS, JOE ALETTA MENTIONED IT IN IN HIS REMARKS, AFFORDABILITY IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          SO THE MULTI, WE HAVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY, WE'VE GOT THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ZONING, AND WE'VE GOT AFFORDABILITY, THREE DIFFERENT COLUMNS IN MY MIND. 
          AND WHAT'S IMPORTANT, I THINK THE DIAGRAM IN DOUG BROWN'S PETITION, WHICH IN HIS PRESENTATION, WHICH SHOWS THE CASE STUDY OF 85 CURRENT PROJECTS, WE SEE A NET LOSS OF UNITS, THE LOSS OF NATURALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS. 
          THAT'S THE DISPLACEMENT OF THE MIDDLE CLASS IN CAMBRIDGE THAT'S ELIMINATING FAMILIES FROM LIVING IN CAMBRIDGE THAT'S DISRUPTING AND ERADICATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS AS WE SEE IT. 
          AND IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED RIGHT NOW, WE'LL CONTINUE TO SEE PROJECTS LIKE WE SEE AT NINE WYMAN STREET. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SEEING THEM ON, ON FOLK STREET, ON CLAY STREET ON 
          [01:40:01]
SERGEANT, ALL ACROSS THE CITY. 
          LIKE CONS, ZUZI. 
          I WALK AROUND WEST AND NORTH CAMBRIDGE AND I SEE THESE DEMOLITIONS AND I SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING. 
          BUT EXHIBIT A IS NINE WYMAN 56 UNITS WHERE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WAS. 
          THERE'S NO AFFORDABILITY THERE. 
          THOSE UNITS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE TO LIVE IN. 
          THERE'S NO TRANSPORTATION AVAILABLE, THERE'S NO PARKING. 
          THAT'S NOT HOUSING FOR FAMILIES. 
          I DON'T SEE A NET BENE A NET BENEFIT FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S COUNTERINTUITIVE TO THE LABEL OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ZONING. 
          IT JUST IS. 
          BUT HAVING SAID ALL OF THAT, UM, MY, I I LIKED CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MR. BROWN'S PETITION, UH, THE OPEN SPACE, THE DESIGN REVIEW, THE SETBACKS. 
          UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AND WE SHOULD DISCUSS IT. 
          MY FEAR, UH, ABOUT THIS CITIZEN PETITION AND ANY CITIZEN'S PETITION IS IF WE FORWARD THIS TO THE COUNCIL AND THEN THE COUNCIL, UM, RETURNS A NEGATIVE VOTE ON THIS PETITION, DOES IT THEN OPERATE AS A BAR TO OTHER ACTION THAT WE CAN TAKE IN CONGE IN CONNECTION WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FROM CDD THAT WILL ALLOW US TO MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES TO THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ZONING ORDINANCE THAT ARE REQUIRED. 
          SO HONESTLY, I THINK WE'RE ALL GONNA STOP KIDDING OURSELVES. 
          THE CITY HAS SPOKEN AND, AND IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD IT, WELL CHECK YOUR EMAIL BECAUSE PEOPLE ALL ACROSS THE CITY ARE UPSET ABOUT THIS. 
          ALL ACROSS THE CITY ARE FEELING THIS. 
          I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO, UH, CREATING MORE HOUSING. 
          BUT THE IDEA I THINK WE'VE GOT TO GRAPPLE WITH IS WHAT TYPE OF HOUSING ARE WE CREATING AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE AND FOR WHOM, IF WE'RE GOING TO, IF OUR GOAL IS TO IS TO MEET THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS BY CREATING MORE HOUSING IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          IT'S NOT SIMPLY TO INCREASE OUR DENSITY SO THAT, UM, LUXURY APARTMENTS ARE BUILT NOT FOR FAMILIES. 
          I MEAN, I, I THINK OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE A SUSTAINABLE CITY LIKE THE ONE WE ALL ENJOY RIGHT NOW. 
          I'VE HEARD IT SAID MANY TIMES BY OTHER PEOPLE, CAMBRIDGE IS A UNICORN. 
          IT'S A REMBRANDT, IT'S A SPECIAL PLACE. 
          WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO BUILD OURSELF OUT OF AN AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IN CAMBRIDGE. 
          IT'S, IT'S AN EXCEPTIONAL PLACE TO LIVE. 
          WE'VE GOT ARTIFICIAL STRESSES FROM THE UNIVERSITIES, HOSPITALS, OUR PROXIMITY TO BOSTON AND KENDALL SQUARE. 
          IT'S ALWAYS GONNA BE EXPENSIVE TO LIVE IN. 
          AND WHAT WE DID DO OVER THE LAST DECADE IS WE'VE, WE'VE DEDICATED, YOU KNOW, SOME SOMETHING LIKE $40 MILLION A YEAR TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          WE'VE BUILT MORE HOUSING THAN ANY OTHER ONE. 
          ONE OF THE 350 CI 51 CITIES AND TOWNS IN MASSACHUSETTS. 
          AND WE INVESTED $2.2 BILLION WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT TO MAKE MEDFORD AND SOMERVILLE MORE ACCESSIBLE TO KENDALL SQUARE IN BOSTON WITH THE GREEN LINE EXTENSION. 
          AND IN THE WAKE OF THAT, THIS CITY COUNCIL PASSED A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ZONING ORDINANCE WITH GOOD INTENTIONS. 
          BUT THE IMPACT OF THAT WITH OUR ECONOMIC REALITIES OF CAMBRIDGE IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. 
          SO BEFORE WE, UM, PUSH OUT THE LAST OF THE MIDDLE CLASS IN CAMBRIDGE, LET'S THINK VERY CAREFULLY ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH THIS BROWN PETITION AND HOW IT IMPACTS OUR OVERALL GOAL OF DEALING WITH AMENDMENTS TO THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          UH, BECAUSE I THINK, AND I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT WE'VE GOT THE WILL ON THIS COUNCIL. 
          WE'VE CERTAINLY GOT THE WILL ACROSS THE CITY WITH VOTERS, BUT THE WILL ON THIS COUNCIL IS TO MAKE THOUGHTFUL, DELIBERATE, PURPOSEFUL AMENDMENTS AND PROTECT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHICH ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS. 
          SO I YIELD OKAY. 
          COUNCILLOR NOLAN. 
          AND THEN WE NEED TO DISPOSE OF THE MOTION BEFORE US. 
          OH, UH, COUNCILLOR SADIKI AFTER COUNCILLOR NOLAN. 
          THANKS. 
          UM, IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. 
          FIRST, THANKS TO SOLICITOR BAYER FOR FORWARDING US THE CDD MEMO, WHICH WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PACKET AS AN OVERSIGHT. 
          I RECOGNIZE 'CAUSE IT WASN'T EVEN ON THE, ON THE LIST. 
          IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT BACKGROUND. 
          I DID QUICKLY REVIEW IT. 
          SO THANKS AND THANKS TO, UM, MR. BROWN FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. 
          'CAUSE I, I AGREE THAT WITH FOLKS HERE, THAT IT, IT HAS ROILED THE CITY IN A WAY THAT I, I THINK WE UNDERESTIMATED THE, THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT WILL COME FORWARD QUITE THIS QUICKLY TO CHANGE. 
          UM, AND, UH, AS, UH, COUNCILOR FLAHERTY AND OTHERS HAVE SAID, AND I THINK THIS COUNCIL AS A WHOLE SAID, WE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, IT'S REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT TO SAY AFFORDABILITY FOR WHOM THERE'S DEEPLY AFFORDABLE. 
          AND THEN THERE'S THE MIDDLE INCOME, WHICH WE KNOW ALL OF OUR DATA SHOWS. 
          THAT'S WHO WE'RE LOSING IN THE CITY. 
          STATISTICALLY, WE HAVE LOST 5% OF OUR POPULATION. 
          IT IS DIMINISHED. 
          [01:45:01]
AND I THINK WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING. 
          THAT'S PART OF WHY THE SOCIAL HOUSING, UH, MIXED INCOME IS, IS PART OF THAT, THAT, UM, DIALOGUE. 
          SO I THINK THOSE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS. 
          UM, I THINK THAT THE, THERE WERE SOME VERY GOOD INFORMATION AND QUESTIONS RAISED IN THIS PETITION. 
          I THINK THE DEMOLITION NUMBERS ARE QUITE STRIKING, JUST WALKING AROUND THE CITY. 
          I THINK THERE IS A QUESTION OF NOAH, THE NATURAL OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE OPEN SPACE CONCERN IN, IN GREEN SPACE IS SOMETHING I SHARE. 
          I PARKING AS AN, IT'S, IT'S AN ISSUE. 
          IT'S THE P WORD. 
          IT IS TOTALLY SOMETHING PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. 
          BUT AS THE PERSON WHO, WITH COUNSELOR SABRINA RULERS STARTED GETTING RID OF PARKING MINIMUMS, WHICH I CERTAINLY SUPPORTED AND, AND WE, WE LED ON THAT, I'M NOT BACKING OFF ON THAT. 
          I THINK IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO DO. 
          I HAVE NO INTEREST IN REINSERTING PARKING MINIMUMS. HOWEVER, I ALSO WANNA NOTE ONE OF THE, UM, SOLUTIONS HERE WE'RE ALREADY LOOKING AT, WHICH IS NOT ALLOWING, UH, RESIDENT PARKING FOR SOME OF THE SIZE OF THE NEW. 
          AND I KNOW THE, THE CITY COUNCIL IS SET TO LOOK AT THAT. 
          THAT'S THE KIND OF CREATIVE WAY THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN ADDRESS THAT. 
          BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, I HAVE NO INTEREST IN, IN CHANGING THAT. 
          'CAUSE I STILL STAND BY THE, UM, UH, TAKING THAT ON AS A COUNCIL. 
          AND I ALSO THINK THERE'S A REAL ISSUE HERE, WHICH IS PERSONALLY, I DO BELIEVE HAVING INCLUDED THE A HO CHANGES IN HERE WAS NOT HELPFUL TO THE DISCUSSION. 
          SO MANY OF THE PEOPLE IN THE CITY WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ARE WAY MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE MULTI-FAMILY ELEMENT OF IT, NOT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ELEMENT. 
          AND I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          UM, WE HEARD FROM HRI, FROM JUSTICE START AND THE CAMBRIDGE HOUSING AUTHORITY ABOUT VERY SPECIFIC CLEAR IMPACT THIS WOULD HAVE ON THOSE PROJECTS, WHICH IS NOT, NOT SOMETHING WE SHOULD WANT TO, UH, TO JEOPARDIZE. 
          SO I, I THINK THAT'S A, A BIG ISSUE WITH THIS, UM, PETITION, WHICH IS WHY I COULDN'T SUPPORT IT AS IS. 
          UM, I DO, I DO HAVE A QUESTION TO BUILD ON, WHICH I WOULD LIKE ANSWERED THAT COUNCILLOR FLAHERTY RAISED, WHICH IS, IF WE VOTE THIS DOWN OR FORWARD IT WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION AND THEN IT'S VOTED DOWN, WHAT ABOUT POSSIBLE FUTURE AMENDMENTS IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE? BECAUSE I AM STILL INTERESTED IN US REVIEWING AND HOPEFULLY PASSING SOME OF THE CDD RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH ARE IN LINE, I THINK WITH WHAT WE WOULD SEE ANYWAY. 
          AND ALSO WE HAVE THIS QUESTION ABOUT SOLAR ACCESS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO, TO FIND A BALANCE FOR. 
          SO WILL, WILL WE BE ABLE TO STILL CONSIDER THOSE DEPENDING ON HOW WE DISPOSE OF THIS PETITION? I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION. 
          MS. BAYER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THROUGH YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, SO AS YOU KNOW IN CHAPTER 48, SECTION FIVE, UM, THE STATE LAW SAYS THAT WHEN THERE'S A ZONING PETITION, IF THERE'S NEGATIVE ACTION, THEN IT CAN'T COME BACK FOR TWO YEARS. 
          AND THE PURPOSE BEHIND THAT IS, SO YOU HAVE SOME FINALITY, YOU'RE NOT WITH A CITIZEN'S PETITION. 
          HAVING A NEW PETITION REFILED EVERY COUNCIL MEETING AND HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE FULL PROCESS, UM, EVERY TIME. 
          THERE ARE NOT MANY CASES THAT HAVE INTERPRETED WHAT THAT MEANS, UM, WHETHER A PETITION IS THE SAME, UH, FOR PURPOSES OF THAT BAR ON REPETITIVE PETITIONS. 
          SO THE LEADING CASE ON THAT IS A CASE OUT OF THE TOWN OF BARNSTABLE. 
          AND IN THAT CASE, UM, THE TOWN WANTED TO ESTABLISH A PARKING OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT WOULD LEGALIZE SOME NON-CONFORMING PARKING LOTS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA IN BARNSTABLE. 
          AND IT, THAT PETITION WAS VOTED DOWN. 
          AND THEN ANOTHER PETITION CAME FORWARD THAT, UM, THE COURT CLASS, UH, DESCRIBED AS JUST OFFERING CLARIFYING CHANGES, UH, WHERE IT SAID LIKE, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT OPEN AIR PARKING, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT COVERED PARKING AND, UM, SETTING SOME LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 
          AND THE COURT SAID THAT THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME PETITION BECAUSE IT JUST CLARIFIED ELEMENTS OF THE EXISTING PETITION. 
          AND IT, THE COURT FOUND THAT THE TWO PETITIONS SHARED THE SAME FUNDAMENTAL OR ESSENTIAL CHARACTER WITH LITTLE SUBSTANTIVE DIFFERENCE. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S AN EASIER CALL TO MAKE BECAUSE THOSE WERE PRETTY SIMPLE PETITIONS LIKE PUT A PARKING OVERLAY DISTRICT IN VERSUS CHANGING ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT PARTS OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, UM, TO EFFECTUATE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. 
          HOWEVER, EVEN WITH THAT BEING THE CASE, I THINK IF THERE'S A SUBSEQUENT PETITION BROUGHT BY CDD OR ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL OR A ANOTHER 
          [01:50:01]
CITIZEN PETITION, UM, IT COULD BE DIFFERENT ENOUGH TO NOT BE BARRED BY THIS PART OF THE STATE LAW. 
          UM, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT SETBACKS, UM, NO PARKING REQUIREMENT VERSUS PUTTING IN A PARKING REQUIREMENT, ET CETERA, I THINK THOSE ARE, UM, CHANGES THAT ARE FUNDAMENTAL AND THEY GO TO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE PETITION AND ARE SUBSTANTIVE DIFFERENCES SO THAT IT WOULD NOT BE A REPETITIVE PETITION. 
          UH, AND, UM, UM, SO THAT THE, THE REPETITIVE PETITIONS KICKS IN IF THERE IS NEGATIVE ACTION. 
          SO THAT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHAT HAPPENS HERE FOR THE VOTE TODAY IN ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, BUT IT MEANS WHEN IS, THIS IS BACK BEFORE THE COUNCIL, IF THERE WAS A VOTE TO PASS THIS PETITION AND IT FAILED, THAT WOULD BE THE WHAT THE NEGATIVE ACTION IS. 
          COUNCILOR NOMAN, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I, YES. 
          WHAT I'M HEARING, JUST TO CLARIFY 'CAUSE THIS WOULD BE IMPORTANT 'CAUSE I, THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS THAT CDD WE'RE STILL HOLDING IN COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER FOR THE FUTURE. 
          THAT THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, WHICH MEANS WE CAN CONTINUE ON THAT PATH, EVEN IF THIS IS ULTIMATELY IN COUNCIL HAS A NEGATIVE ACTION ON, ON IT. 
          AND THIS CLEARLY CERTAINLY LIKE THE A HO IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS AT ALL, UH, IMPACTED. 
          THE, THE PARKING REQUIREMENT IS NOT THERE. 
          SO I, AND THOSE ARE THE ONES I AM MOST CONCERNED ABOUT US AND WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF ANY WAY. 
          BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN THE CDD PETITION AND THE SOLAR ACCESS THAT I THINK IS, I'M HOPING THAT WE COME TO SOME KIND OF AGREEMENT, UM, TO CONSIDER. 
          AND SO, SO I'M, I'M SEEING A, A A, A NOD SO THAT THAT DOES ANSWER MY QUESTION. 
          AND I THINK THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS I, WHETHER CDD HAS A RESPONSE TO THE, THE SCALE OF THE DEMOLITIONS AND SOME OF THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHICH WE HAVE SEEN OF SOME OF THE, YOU KNOW, TWO FAMILIES WITH THE PROVERBIAL NOAH, THAT LIKELY SUB PRIMO LUXURY PRICING OF THE MARKET, THAT THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WILL BE REPLACED WITH OFTEN, UH, UNITS THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO INCLUSIONARY. 
          AND THEREFORE WILL WILL BE SAYING THAT THERE ARE SOME UNITS THAT ARE NATURALLY CURRENT AND AFFORDABLE, WHICH WILL BE REPLACED BY LUXURY AND IT WOULD BE A NET NEGATIVE ON THE, SO I JUST WANNA CONFIRM IF WE, I KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE'VE ANY DONE ANY ANALYSIS OF IT, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING I, I I THINK WE HAVE EXAMPLES. 
          I CERTAINLY HAVE EXAMPLES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THAT IS THE CASE. 
          CD DO YOU WANNA SPEAK ON THAT? THANK YOU, UH, THROUGH YOU THE CHAIR. 
          SO, TO, TO CLARIFY COUNSELOR? NO, YOUR QUESTION IS JUST THE, UM, THE SCALE OF THE CHANGE THAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          UM, YEAH, THANK YOU. 
          I, I THINK, UM, WE'VE CERTAINLY HAVE SEEN A LOT OF ACTIVITY, UM, IN DEMOLITIONS AND IN, UM, PRE-APPLICATION SUBMITTALS. 
          UM, I THINK TO WHAT JEFF ROBERTS POINT WAS AT PLANNING BOARD IS THAT WE STILL HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT OF, UH, BUILDING PERMITS. 
          UM, SO THAT DOES TAKE TIME. 
          IT CAN TAKE A OVER A YEAR TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT AND TO GO AND EVEN PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A BUILDING PERMIT, UM, DOING DESIGN. 
          AND SO THE POINT THAT WE'RE STILL VERY EARLY IN THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE AND THINGS HAVEN'T COME ONLINE YET, IS STILL TRUE, BUT WE CERTAINLY HAVE SEEN, AND WHICH WAS THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE, WAS TO SEE AN UPTAKE IN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU ALSO COUNCILMAN? YEP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S SO GIVEN THAT ON THIS MOTION, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF SENDING IT WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND I ALSO AM ON RECORD TO SAY, I, I WANT US TO CON TO ALSO MAKE IT MUCH EASIER TO GET THOSE BUILDING PERMITS AND DO IT MUCH FASTER AND REALLY SPUR THAT UP. 
          'CAUSE IT SHOULD NOT BE TAKING THIS LONG FOR US TO HAVE THIS INFORMATION. 
          WE HAVE TO, WE, WE, WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO BEFORE WE HAVE A SEAMLESS REALLY QUICK PROCESS FOR THIS. 
          WE SHOULD, UM, WE'VE GOT MAYOR SIDIKI AND THEN COUNCILLOR GOVERN. 
          I THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED TO EXTEND, UH, TO, SO LET'S DO THAT MOTION NOW ON A MOTION FROM, UH, MAYOR SIDIKI TO EXTEND BY 15 MINUTES. 
          COUNCILOR ZUZI? YES. 
          VICE MAYOR ZI? YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR FLAHERTY. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR MCGOVERN. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR NOLAN. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SIMMONS. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR ZUI. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          MAYOR SIDIKI. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          AND YOU HAVE NINE MEMBERS RECORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'VE GOT MAYOR SIDIKI AND THEN COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN. 
          MAYOR SIDIKI. 
          UM, I'LL JUST THROUGH YOU, I'LL JUST SAY THAT, UH, I AGREE WITH, UH, A LOT OF WHAT COUNCILOR NOLAN HAS SAID, SO I WON'T BE REPETITIVE. 
          I AM CURIOUS, UM, AROUND SOME OF WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, UH, PARTICULARLY THE, YOU KNOW, THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE NATURALLY, YOU KNOW, OCCURRING HOUSING AND THAT PIECE OF IT. 
          [01:55:01]
UM, AND I THINK, BUT, BUT ULTIMATELY, GIVEN SOME OF THE CONCERNS FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT WHAT'S PRESENTED. 
          I WILL SAY ON THE MULTIFAMILY PIECE, WE DO HAVE AMENDMENTS BEFORE US. 
          I ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO, YOU KNOW, LAND THAT PLANE WHEN AND GET TOGETHER ON THAT. 
          UM, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S SOME OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS THERE, BUT I THINK, UM, WE NEED TO DISPOSE OF THAT, UM, FIRST, UH, BEFORE WE, UH, KIND OF ENTERTAIN, UM, THIS ANY MORE CHANGES. 
          UM, BUT I DO THINK SOME OF THE, UH, INFORMATION, UH, I I, I THINK WE, THERE ARE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS TO, TO ASK AND THINK ABOUT. 
          UH, BUT AT THIS MOMENT, UM, I'M WHERE COUNCILOR NOLAN IS. 
          SO FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, I'LL, I'LL YIELD TO COUNCILOR MCGOVERN. 
          COUNCILOR MCGOVERN. 
          UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR THROUGH YOU. 
          CAN I, UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, BUT CAN I ASK MR. BROWN A QUESTION? UH, YOU CAN ASK A QUESTION. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, MR. BROWN, UM, PAGES AREN'T NUMBERED, BUT ON THE, THE SLIDE THAT'S THE 85 UNITS THAT, OR THE 80, THE DEMOLITIONS THAT WERE LOOKED AT, HOLD ON, HANG ON A SECOND. 
          I'LL 85 CURRENT PROJECTS. 
          YEAH, LET ME SHARE IT FOR YOU. 
          SO THE, THE SECOND ONE, THE ONE WITH THE BAR GRAPH, LIKE THE, UH, YEP. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, I'M JUST, I MEAN, I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO HOW, I MEAN, HOW DO WE KNOW, AND I KNOW THIS WASN'T YOUR ANALYSIS, BUT, SO MAYBE YOU, YOU CAN'T ANSWER IT, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THESE, THAT 78% OF THE UNITS ARE NATURALLY AFFORDABLE RENTALS? BUT I MEAN, I, I, THE YEAH, SURE. 
          IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 
          THE, THE ANALYSIS THAT SHANNON DID IS, UM, SHE, IT'S, IT'S RIGHT HERE. 
          SHE CROSS-REFERENCED THE ASSESSOR PROPERTY DATA, UM, AGAINST DEMOLITION PERMITS THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, ISSUED BY ISD. 
          AND SHE WAS MAINLY LOOKING TO SEE, ARE THERE HOME, DO THEY GET THE HOMEOWNER EXEMPTION? SO IF THEY GET THE HOMEOWNER EXEMPTION, THEN YOU TAKE ONE UNIT OUT OF THE COUNT, BASICALLY ASSUME THAT THE PERSON THAT LIVED THERE IS SELLING IT, YOU KNOW, AND THEY'RE NOT REALLY A LOST UNIT. 
          THEY MADE A DECISION TO LEAVE. 
          UM, BUT THAT THE, ANY REMAINING RENTALS, IT'S ASSUMED THEY'RE NOT THE HOMEOWNER. 
          UM, I THINK IN GENERAL, THESE ALL TEND TO BE OLDER PROPERTIES. 
          UM, I'M, THAT'S AN ASSUMPTION BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE, THE NEW OWNER SEES FIT TO TEAR IT DOWN. 
          MM-HMM . 
          UM, AND SO WHEN YOU COMBINE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE DECIDING TO TEAR IT DOWN, UM, IT, IT REALLY LENDS ITSELF TO THE, TO A SCENARIO WHERE YOU SAY IT, IT PROBABLY WASN'T, UM, A PRISTINE BRAND NEW PROPERTY. 
          UM, AND THEREFORE YOU WOULD EXPECT THAT THE RENTS WERE MORE REASONABLE. 
          AS AN EXAMPLE, I CAN GIVE YOU THE, THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME, WHICH WAS, UM, TWO, TWO FAMILY HOMES. 
          THEY WERE, UM, BO THEY WERE ALL TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS. 
          UH, THE RENT WAS $2,400 A MONTH PER APARTMENT. 
          UM, THOSE, UH, WERE SOLD IN APRIL. 
          UH, ALL OF THE TENANTS, INCLUDING, UH, RESIDENTS OF THE CITY FOR MORE THAN 65 YEARS WERE, UM, VACATED, UM, WITH A MONTH NOTICE. 
          UM, THE PROJECT, THE, THE, THE TWO HOUSES WERE SOLD FOR $3.4 MILLION, UM, AND THEN FLIPPED TWO WEEKS LATER FOR $4.1 MILLION. 
          SO THAT'S A $700,000 PROFIT FOR TWO WEEKS HOLDING. 
          UM, I WOULD EXPECT, BASED ON WHAT WE SEE NOW, UM, SOIL EXCAVATIONS BEING DONE, UM, THE, THE PROJECT BEING, UM, YOU KNOW, LISTED AS A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, THAT WE'RE GONNA GET SOMETHING THAT'S LARGE, WHAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN, WILL IT BE ABOVE OR BELOW THE AFFORDABLE THRESHOLD. 
          AND WHAT WE'RE FINDING IS MOST DEVELOPERS ON SMALLER LOTS ARE CHOOSING TO REMAIN BELOW THE THRESHOLD. 
          SO WYMAN STREET IS A BIT OF AN EXCEPTION, 56 UNITS, UH, BECAUSE ONCE YOU GO ABOVE THE 10 UNIT EXCEPTION EXEMPTION, YOU'RE GONNA GO AS HIGH AS YOU CAN. 
          [02:00:01]
BUT WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE PROJECTS THAT ARE NINE UNITS. 
          RIGHT. 
          BECAUSE THAT KEEPS YOU BELOW THE THRESHOLD. 
          RIGHT. 
          WELL, I, I JUST WANTED TO FOCUS 'CAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, I JUST, A COUPLE THINGS. 
          UM, SO I, I GUESS THE ONLY REASON I ADDED THAT PART IS THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOU'RE NOT SEEING A BIG UPTICK IN NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS ON THE NEXT SLIDE, RIGHT. 
          BECAUSE, UM, MANY OF THEM ARE CHOOSING NOT TO BUILD AFFORDABLE UNITS. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I DO THINK IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE PUT OUT NUMBERS, IF PEOPLE THEN LOOK AT THAT AND THEY SAY THAT'S THE FACT, THAT'S WHAT IT IS. 
          AND I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT. 
          I MEAN, I THINK, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IS THAT THEY'RE TYPICALLY OLDER BUILDINGS. 
          THEY'RE TYPICALLY APARTMENTS THAT ARE NOT UP TO, YOU KNOW, CURRENT MARKET RATE STANDARDS. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, AND I MARK, I DON'T WANNA INTERRUPT YOU, BUT I WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME TELLING THAT TO THE FOUR FAMILIES THAT WERE EVICTED, I'M SORRY, YOUR HOME WASN'T UP TO STANDARDS, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING, MR. BROWN. 
          WHAT I'M, BUT THAT'S THE REALITY OF IT. 
          WHAT I'M ALL RIGHT. 
          I'M NOT GETTING INTO AN ARGUMENT WITH YOU. 
          UM, OKAY, THAT'S FINE. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT WHAT I, THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS SAYING. 
          BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE FACT IS THAT, THAT WHEN SOMEONE IN THOSE, WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS THAT THOSE UNITS ARE OFTEN LESS EXPENSIVE FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT REASONS, INCLUDING THE CONDITION OF THE UNITS. 
          AND INCLUDING THAT YOU HAVE FOLKS WHO HAVE OWNED THOSE PROPERTIES FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME AND DON'T HAVE A LARGE MORTGAGE ON THEM OR ANY MORTGAGE AT ALL. 
          AND THEN ONCE THOSE PRO, ONCE THEY SELL, WHETHER THEY SELL TO A, A DEVELOPER OR WHETHER THEY SELL TO AN INDIVIDUAL PERSON WHO WANTS TO LIVE IN A UNIT AND RENT THE OTHER TWO OUT, YOU LOSE THAT AFFORDABILITY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO RENOVATE. 
          'CAUSE NOW THAT PERSON HAD TO PAY $3 MILLION FOR THAT HOUSE. 
          'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE SELLING THEM FOR. 
          SO THIS IS NOT NEW TO THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE. 
          I THINK THE QUESTION IS WHAT DO THEY GET REPLACED WITH? AND YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WE NEED TO, TO DEAL WITH IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN, LET'S SAY SOMEONE KNOCKS DOWN A, A THREE UNIT BUILDING AND THEN REPLACES IT WITH JUST A LARGER THREE UNIT BUILDING SO THAT THEY'RE MORE EXPENSIVE AND YOU DON'T GAIN ANY UNITS THERE, THAT'S A PROBLEM. 
          AND WE NEED TO FIGURE, WE FIGURE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT. 
          AND SOME PEOPLE ARE CERTAINLY DOING THAT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO DEAL WITH, I AGREE WITH EVERYONE ELSE AROUND THE DEMOLITION AND, AND PERMITTING. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S NOT ZONING, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT, THAT'S A DIFFERENT, THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION. 
          UM, I WAS JUST AT A MEETING THIS MORNING ON CANARD STREET ABOUT, WITH A NEW DEVELOPER WHO, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW, HE READ IN THE PAPER THAT WAS NOT, UH, DIDN'T GET THE PERMITS THAT HE NEEDED TO GET. 
          HE SAYS HE DIDN'T KNOW HE NEEDED TO GET THEM. 
          WHO KNOWS. 
          UM, BUT CLEARLY THERE ARE TIMES WHEN THE DEMOLITIONS ARE HAPPENING WITHOUT PERMITS OR THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING WHAT IT IS THEY GOT THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO. 
          SO WE DO NEED TO DO THAT AND DEAL WITH THAT. 
          BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT A ZONING QUESTION. 
          UM, SO I THINK WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH UNIT SIZE. 
          I THINK WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH PARKING. 
          I THINK WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE DEMOLITIONS AND PERMITTING. 
          UM, ALL OF THOSE THINGS I AM OPEN TO, UH, LOOKING AT. 
          BUT WE ARE DOING THAT. 
          LIKE CDD IS COMING FORWARD WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT WE'RE, THAT, THAT WE ARE ALREADY IN, UH, TO DO THAT. 
          UM, AND I'M OPEN TO THOSE CONVERSATIONS. 
          UH, I AM NOT OPEN, I'LL SAY IT RIGHT NOW. 
          I AM NOT OPEN TO DOING ANYTHING THAT UNDERMINES THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE COUNSELOR FLAHERTY, 'CAUSE I'VE BEEN SAYING THE SAME THING FOR MONTHS, SAYING THAT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND THE A HO ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. 
          THEY HAVE TWO DIFFERENT INTENTIONS. 
          THEY MULTI A HO WAS PASSED FIVE AND A HALF YEARS AGO, TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS WITH TWO DIFFERENT PURPOSES. 
          AND SO, UM, ANYTHING THAT WEAKENS THAT A HO IS GONNA PROVE TO BE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT AFFORDABLE BY THAT AFFORDABLE, I MEAN LOW SUBSIDIZED INCOME UNITS, THE MOST IMPORTANT ORDINANCE OF THAT TYPE IN NOT JUST THE HISTORY OF THIS CITY, BUT CERTAINLY THE HISTORY OF THIS STATE. 
          UM, AND TO UNDERMINE THAT OR, OR TO MAKE THAT WEAKER BECAUSE WE SOMEHOW DON'T THINK THAT CERTAIN HEIGHTS DON'T FIT IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. 
          AND I WOULD, AND I WOULD ARGUE TOO, THIS WHOLE QUESTION ABOUT HEIGHTS AND NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE WE HEAR, WELL, IN SOME NEIGHBORHOODS YOU CAN BUILD A TALLER BUILDING IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          YOU CAN'T JUST WANNA REMIND FOLKS THAT THOSE TALLER BUILDINGS AND THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS DIDN'T ALWAYS EXIST. 
          RIGHT? I, I LIVE ON A STREET THAT WAS TWO AND THREE FAMILY HOMES THAT IN THE NINETIES GOT TWO SIX STORY BUILDINGS IN THE SEVEN STORY BUILDING. 
          RIGHT? THEY DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE. 
          AND SOMEONE DECIDED THAT IT'S 
          [02:05:01]
OKAY ON MY STREET TO DO THAT. 
          UM, BUT IT'S NOT OKAY IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY. 
          AND SO YEAH, THIS IS CREATING SOME CHANGE FOR FOLKS IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVEN'T SEEN THIS TYPE OF HEIGHT BEFORE. 
          WELL, SOME OF US HAVE SEEN THAT GOING BACK, GOING WAY BACK. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, PUT THE TALLER BUILDINGS SOMEWHERE ELSE BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY TALLER BUILDINGS THERE. 
          BUT WE, A DECISION WAS MADE TO PUT THOSE TALLER BUILDINGS THERE, AND NOW WE'RE MAKING A DECISION TO PUT THOSE TALLER BUILDINGS MORE SPREAD OUT. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN UNREASONABLE, UH, REQUEST. 
          AND I, AND I DON'T THINK FOUR OR SIX STORIES IS, IS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT TALKING THE 650 SOMETHING FOOT BUILDING THAT WAS ON THE SLIDE. 
          NO ONE IS PROPOSING ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          UM, YOU'RE TALKING FOUR TO SIX STORIES, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS UNREASONABLE. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, UM, GIVEN THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION, THE EFFECT ON THE A HO, THE FACT THAT WE'RE ALREADY IN A PROCESS TO DISCUSS AMENDMENTS TO MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, I WOULD SUPPORT THE, UH, THE MOTION TO SEND THIS FORWARD WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE NEED TO DISPOSE OF THE MOTION BEFORE US. 
          UM, IN TERMS OF EXPLANATION, THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE CAN SEND THE PETITION TO THE COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE, NEUTRAL, OR NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION. 
          THE CITY COUNCIL CAN THEN VOTE ON THE PETITION, UH, UP OR DOWN. 
          THE MOTION BEFORE US IS TO REFER THE PETITION TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION, IF YOU WOULD. 
          SO IF YOU, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VOTE, IF WE WITH A NE NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION, YOU WOULD VOTE YES. 
          IF YOU WOULD NOT LIKE TO VOTE, MOVE IT FORWARD WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION, YOU WOULD VOTE NO. 
          UM, CAN WE PLEASE CALL THE ROLE COUNCILOR ZUBIE? YES. 
          YES. 
          VICE MAYOR ZE. 
          THAT'S YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR FLAHERTY? NO. 
          NO. 
          COUNCILOR MCGOVERN? YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR NOLAN? YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SIMMONS. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNSELOR ZUI? NO. 
          NO. 
          MAYOR SIDIKI? YES. 
          YES. 
          AND YOU HAVE SEVEN MEMBERS RECORDING THE AFFIRMATIVE AND TWO RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE. 
          WITH THAT, OUR AGENDA FOR TODAY IS CONCLUDED, UM, THANKS TO THE PRESENTERS AND THE CITY STAFF FOR PRESENTING, UH, ON A MOVE AJOUR FROM COUNCILOR UH, SIMMONS TO ADJOURN. 
          YES. 
          UM, ONE QUICK, NO. 
          OH, SORRY. 
          WE GOTTA PROCEED WITH THIS. 
          MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          YEAH. 
          COUNCILOR ZUBIE IS A YES. 
          VICE MAYOR. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCIL FLAHERTY. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR MCGOVERN. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR NOLAN. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SIMMONS. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          COUNCILOR EY. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          MAYOR SIDIKI. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          AND YOU HAVE NINE MEMBERS RECORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. 
          WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.