Public Participation

Transcript (~10 min @ 0:45)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 0:54 Speaker 1: we do have a quorum could you please join me in saluting the flag

▶ 1:16 Speaker 1: chair would entertain a motion to commence public participation relative to this evening's meeting second alderman mortimer moves that we commence public participation the motion is seconded by alderman forbes on the motion all those in favor aye aye anyone opposed motion passes this is an opportunity for any member of the public who wishes to address the board relative to the order that is on the agenda for this evening to come forward to the center of the room identify yourself and speak your piece sir thank you mr president my name is bruce carmichael i'm

▶ 1:51 Speaker 2: I'm a resident of 121 Essex Street in Melrose, Massachusetts, and I appreciate the opportunity to make a few comments regarding this.

▶ 2:09 Speaker 2: I would have liked to be a little bit more detailed at the public hearing. Unfortunately, I learned of the public hearing the day after from Alderman Tramontozzi when he told me the public hearing was on the Monday evening before, which surprised me because I would have expected to have received a notice in the mail being a direct about it to the Deering Lumber site, which is certainly part of the process.

▶ 2:33 Speaker 1: This isn't a zoning ordinance site-specific matter, sir. I'm sorry? We're not considering the Deering Lumber site.

▶ 2:40 Speaker 2: No, I'm just saying I would have liked to make a little bit more of a statement, but I'm not going to belabor that. And what I would like to talk about is obviously what's coming before the board this evening, which is the RCOD and the eventual, I assume, voting on that issue. I attended several meetings, talked with some neighbors, been involved with the process for a while. and we've watched a lot of the discussion go on regarding this particular zoning and I don't see this as being a major problem I I think it's us the MCA P you know discussions have been fruitful and some of the aspects of this are very very beneficial to the corridor I do have one concern because I see and I'm maybe as you discuss this this evening it might be something that I understand a little better because I understand you know obviously during lumber is is a is in a situation where there is a purchase and sale agreement for lack of a better term by LCB senior center center living which is an assisted care facility which is something that I think would be a beneficial situation for everybody to look at providing that they stay within you know the confines of you know not not excessively developing the site and I know that the planning the planning board and the planning department of itself and advocated having something put into this overlay zoning ordinance uh to speak to that so there is a obviously a section that talks about assisted care facilities um i noticed there was another on one and hopefully as your discussion proceeds this evening i'll understand it a little better but it has to do with uh a substance abuse center addition to the uh to the ordinances now i don't know if that's in And it's going to be, from what I can see, a substance abuse treatment center is being treated as a definition within the overlay district as well as maybe a zoning, you know, in addition to the zoning ordinances. The only issue I have with that is I'm not entirely sure during the entire discussions that we've had during the MCAP and all of the discussions with the neighborhoods, that never really came up. so hopefully I'm I'm assuming that maybe you know this is being put into the board orders and put into the zoning ordinances because the city sees a treatment center as something valuable to the community my only concern is that I know why the assisted living facility is being brought up as far as an overlay situation because it's it's a pending situation for during lumber I'm just

▶ 5:57 Speaker 2: wondering if this subsequent substance abuse treatment center is something that has arisen the city is of an understanding that there is a center that is coming in or being proposed in some fashion and whether or not this addition to this overlay has something in particular to do with that within the confines of the corridor because my concern about the corridor of course would be the obvious reasons why we would have it is to promote economic development neighborhood revitalization housing options that are sufficient multiple differences of you know economic situations for promote a high quality of substance design reinforcing and enhancing the neighborhood these are particulars that are being stated you see it in your own package here pedestrian-friendly environment all of these aspects are things that are good that have the ICO D you know advocate would be neighborhoods would be advocating for it I don't see a substance abuse center treatment center as being something contiguous with that entire idea so I mean maybe this is something that the city and the planning department and you know the planning board and their own wisdom sees that they need to provide my only concern is that we're not opening the barn door and letting the letting the letting everything out because somebody is coming in on the Tremont Street Essex Street Tremont Street corridor with a substance abuse treatment center which is otherwise known as a methadone clinic or a detox center or anything like that so I don't see that as being contiguous to what you know some of the thought process here to this rezoning is so that's my only concern and you know hopefully some of the members of the board might question that or or define that a little bit more the only other issues I have with that I mean like I said I've been at all the meetings I think this is overall a beneficial idea I think there are some density discussions I mean some of the aldermen from the individual wards know this maybe a little bit more increasing on density maybe the height a little more height a little less you know frontage those are not major issues but you know we would like to be able to put a five

▶ 8:35 Speaker 2: pound bag of sugar together for the Tremont, Essex Street Tremont corridor as opposed to stuffing ten pounds of potatoes into it. So hopefully some of the some of the aspects of increased density and stuff doesn't doesn't warrant any any more concern. But I do know that you know throughout the process in most of the process we're going to have some there will be review and there will be site plan approval and there will be special permits under certain aspects or aspects so I'm not entirely concerned about about the situation because every advocate and every neighborhood person will have an opportunity to talk about certain things but that was my only concern so I happened to notice it and you know we did talk to a few I did talk to some people who were in the neighborhood who saw it and were interested in hearing a little bit more about the particular aspect other than that I appreciate your time and certainly appreciate your consideration on all of these items in

▶ 9:46 Speaker 1: front of you thank you very much sir thank you thank you

▶ 10:06 Speaker 1: thanks mr comical okay is there anybody else who wish wishes to speak during the public hearing portion of uh the meeting this evening motion to close public participation second president

▶ 10:14 Speaker 1: alderman mortimer moves to conclude public participation the motion is seconded by alderman forbes on the motion all those in favor anyone opposed motion passes public participation is concluded i will point out that our meeting is being broadcast on mmtv in compliance with