An Appropriation from Free Cash (account 01-324001) to the Planning Department (#175) in the amount of $75,000 to hire a consultant for technical assistance to update the City’s Housing Production Plan (HPP).

Transcript (~26 min @ 5:05:24)

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

▶ 5:04:52 Kimberly Vandiver: Councilor Jamaleddine. Yes. Councilor Karamcheti. Yes. Councilor Kohl. Yes. Councilor Abramsky. Yes. Councilor Park. Yes. Councilor Williams. Yes. President Freeman. Yes. Councilor Romanul. Yes. Chair Vandiver. Yes. All in favor, motion passes. Thank you. We are now onto a few more appropriations for fiscal year '26. Why not? We have two free cash orders here. We have ID number 2026-1164, an appropriation from free cash account 01-324001 to the planning department, number 175, in the amount of $75,000 to hire a consultant for technical assistance to update the city's housing production plan, HPP.

▶ 5:05:38 Speaker 14: Thank you. So we have a housing production plan that we've used to help shape where development happens in the city. It's also a plan that we're able to use to apply for temporary safe harbor when we have a 40B comprehensive permit project that's coming, and the zoning board has issued a certain number of units within a year. We use that plan to give to the state for certification to have safe harbor, which we're currently in until September. So the plan has housing needs and demand assessment goals for the next five years, an analysis of factors affecting development, a development framework, an identification of opportunity sites, numeric production targets, and recommendations for the city to achieve our housing goals, and actionable implementation plan. The current plan expires on April 2027, and so we're looking to hire a consultant to help us update this plan so that it can continue to be current in five-year increments.

▶ 5:07:01 Speaker 10: Thank you. Questions and discussion, Councilor Finocchiaro?

▶ 5:07:04 Speaker 12: Yeah. Just going to make a motion to recommend.

▶ 5:07:06 Kimberly Vandiver: Second. We have a motion to recommend, Councilor Finocchiaro, seconded by Councilor Romanul. Anyone on discussion? Councilor Chen.

▶ 5:07:17 Jason Chen: Ms. Massa and I have had numerous discussions on, is there a way that we can do this a little bit cheaper, even with less consultant fees, but more volunteers who are expert in the community on this issue and passionate about housing. And when I read the housing production plan, yes, I know we need it, and we need to be able to defend or have safe harbor, but it seems like the parts that need to be updated and really thought through are a fraction of this large plan, and a lot of it just seems like routine updates that generally smart people can do. So, I know that we're short on staff and that you'd prefer to have your staff working on other things, but any way... I feel like this is one where we might actually have a chance to save some money and do some of it ourselves if we come up with a creative way. So, I'm wondering, any thoughts on this?

▶ 5:08:08 Speaker 14: Yeah. As I mentioned, you can pull out public engagement. I think that is a critical piece of this plan. I think education is something that is really important and hard to do when you're doing all your other tasks every day to be able to prioritize that. And, so I think it's an important piece of this plan. And this is actually on the lower end of what communities are paying for these plans. So, I would request that we have a consultant that can put in the time to actually engage with us and get a meaningful plan out of this. So that's why we're continuing to request the 75. I have a lot of free cash requests, so yeah, remembering the amount for this exact one. Thank you.

▶ 5:09:16 Kimberly Vandiver: Okay, and next I have Councilor Park, followed by Councilor Karamcheti.

▶ 5:09:21 Speaker 11: So

▶ 5:09:25 Speaker 11: I struggle with this particular study or plan because I understand that we need to continue to have safe harbor status or temporary safe harbor status, but I struggle with the practical value of the plan itself. It makes recommendations, butDevelopers can still go before the zoning board of appeals and often get what they want regardless. I cross-referenced the housing plan that we have with the current developments that we have in Melrose, and there are five specifically in the plan that had made recommendations for a certain number of units that would be compliant with Chapter 40B housing. And of those five that are currently listed that we currently have developments going on, it came out to 128 units within that housing plan. Do you know how many that are actually going up now? There are 206. Okay? That's 80 units more than what the housing production plan has actually recommended or suggested. And this, again, I stress to you, is the very fact that it's supposed to be in compliant with Chapter 40B. So if the HPP can effectively be set aside whenever it is inconvenient for the developers, then it starts to feel more like a formality than a meaningful planning tool. Mm-hmm. And that's the part I feel where this is not necessarily the best way we should allocate funds. I've recognized the fact that we need this to play the game, to continue to achieve our safe harbor status. But I just don't like the fact that this is just merely... And I've heard this before from the planning board and the zoning board, that this plan is merely a guideline, not necessarily a blueprint. And that's just an open way of saying, "Okay, we just checked off the box that we did a housing production plan," but it doesn't really have any teeth or weight.

▶ 5:11:40 Speaker 11: Sorry, that wasn't really a question.

▶ 5:11:42 Speaker 14: Well, if I could respond, I'm not sure the number that you're referencing exactly with the number of units. We have zoning, so that sets the rules of what you can build where. And this housing production plan has pointed people in the direction of, these are the sites that we would prefer to be developed first. So I know developers look to that to give themselves guidance. They want to pick the sites that, obviously, they have to be for sale or develop themselves. But, it's easier to find a site that the community wants to have redeveloped as opposed to trying to pick another site that would cause a lot of issues. So with the housing production plan, the other aspects of the goals and the actions in that, we have a grant for $100,250. And we're hiring a consultant to implement a lot of the other recommendations in the plan for our neighborhood districts and our business district, the BD. So we're actively working on that. So it's not just about development sites and about the number of affordable units. It also has a whole host of other actions that we're currently implementing from our existing housing production plan.

▶ 5:13:14 Speaker 11: Thank you.

▶ 5:13:17 Kimberly Vandiver: Next, I have Councilor Carm Cheidy.

▶ 5:13:23 Manjula Karamcheti: So I have a question about the intersection between the housing production plan and what is in the housing production plan, and the decisions that are made at the planning board and the zoning board level. Because I've been to a lot of those meetings in the past five years, and what is in the housing production plan isn't... And maybe similar to your point, Councilor Chen. Oh, sorry. Oh. Councilor Park. I'm tired. And my Tylenol is kicking in perhaps. That they sometimes just seem in conflict with each other and, or I don't always understand the decisions that are being made. I think sort of the most recent one for me is Summit Avenue. It was approved with conditions, and it's further out from the zoning for being on the MBTA station. And so I support the housing production plan. I think it is an important tool in our toolbox. I think the Affordable Housing Trust is another important measure in our toolbox in terms of proactive development. But I continue to feel, and I will say feel, not fact. I continue to feel that we continue to be at the mercy of unfriendly development. And so I think I'm just trying to understand the intersection of how it all plays out. I absolutely want to support the housing production plan and improving it, but I don't always find that it helps on the ground.

▶ 5:15:17 Speaker 14: So, the Summit Ave project is a 40B comprehensive permit project. Yes. So, our response to MassHousing for that project was, we have a housing production plan. We are building housing. We're doing a bit of our part to create housing. And that was a consideration in their response with the whole list of things that the developer needed to really dig into with the zoning board of appeals. So that's-Not something that is going to be... Because we had the housing production plan, we're showing we're doing the work to build housing where we want it. But it's not going to stop a 40B project from being proposed on Summit Ave. And so we can talk more about the conditions of approval for that project, which they'd have to redesign the site plan and that project in order to build it with those conditions. So, the zoning sets the regulations for what can be built where, and then our current plan is recommending conditions that we're working on to then amend the zoning to comply with the plan. So that's how those pieces work. But it's not that every project that the planning board or the zoning board sees is going to be one that's identified in the housing production plan.

▶ 5:16:49 Speaker 10: Okay. Thank you. Next, I have Counselor Williams. Thank you.

▶ 5:16:56 Ryan Williams: I was just on the EOHLC, which is the Mass Gov

▶ 5:17:02 Speaker 14: group that- Office of- ... Office of- Yeah, Housing and Livable Communities.

▶ 5:17:05 Ryan Williams: Yes. That does the housing production plans. I was looking at communities with approved housing production plans, of which there are 113, so about a third of Massachusetts communities. Two-thirds have no approved or certified HPP. And how many communities have certified HPPs? 11. We're one of them. And there's some interesting bedfellows here. Stoneham actually is expired, but they were certified back when. Medford is certified. That's about it. And I want to recognize that the HPP by itself is a tool, and I want to give you a chance to talk about the specific way that it interacts with 40B developments, specifically because we have a certified HPP, and give an example of a 40B developer comes in and says they want to do something. What is the benefit that the HPP gives us? We say something to them because we have a certified HPP. You can't do this. You can do this. We're going to negotiate. You can't appeal. What's the functional interaction?

▶ 5:18:16 Speaker 14: So we've used our current housing production plan twice to get temporary safe harbor. So if the zoning board approves 63 units within a calendar year and you have a approved housing production plan when it's voted on, and then it's certified because you have permitted that number of units- Mm ... then you have a year from safe harbor, meaning the Zoning Board of Appeals doesn't have to grant approval for a 40B project. So right now, if somebody came in and proposed another 40B, the zoning board has more power to deny that application.

▶ 5:18:58 Ryan Williams: Yeah. In practice, have we denied any 40B applications since we've had the HPP approved and certified?

▶ 5:19:03 Speaker 14: So the Summit Ave project, they filed it the day after our certification ended, and then with very little information because they weren't sure if EOHLC would certify our plan. Mm. And they didn't end up including the units on Summit Greenwood because it was first approved in 2023, and then they appealed it. And so if the zoning board sorry again to- It's okay ... use the weird term but- It's okay. This is why I asked the question ... very technical, yes, reason they didn't accept those units, and so therefore, we only had 50 units permitted as opposed to 63. Yeah. And so Summit Ave was able to continue on with their application.

▶ 5:19:56 Ryan Williams: Yeah. So that's a case where the HPP sort of directly allows us to have more control over housing production- ... in the city. Yes. Right. And I do agree that it's sort of a cottage industry, right? There's a few things in Massachusetts, especially around housing. The HPP was sort of created in 2008. Since then we've had the MBTA Communities Act and all these other zoning reforms. And so I think it's a question for the state to figure out sort of like, is it meeting its goals, and is it working for the state? More people have the CPA than have an HPP. But I trust you, and I trust that it has a role in the community. But the conversation around the horseshoe has definitely got me thinking about whether it's a priority. But I think for now, I'd like to see it move forward because I'd like us to be able to control the conversation to the degree that we can.

▶ 5:21:03 Speaker 10: I have President Freeman next.

▶ 5:21:04 Bradley Freeman: Just a quick question. If this doesn't go through and when our temporary safe harbor status expires in September, I believe is- Mm ... if we don't have a certified plan, we cannot apply for safe harbor status? Correct. Okay. Thank you.

▶ 5:21:17 Speaker 14: So the current plan expires in April of 2027. Okay. So yes.

▶ 5:21:23 Speaker 11: But when that expires-

▶ 5:21:24 Speaker 14: The temporary safe harbor ends in September. Okay. And then you have to actually permit the number of units, though, the 63- Yes

▶ 5:21:33 Bradley Freeman: ... or 100. But next time we go to apply for safe harbor status, if we don't have the HPP certified- Right ... we won't be able to apply. Exactly.

▶ 5:21:39 Speaker 11: Thank you.

▶ 5:21:41 Kimberly Vandiver: Okay. I don't believe I have anyone in queue. I'd like to comment as well. Some of, I guess, this discussion tonight is a little bit confusing and concerning to me. The goal of this plan is not only to prevent 40B projects. This goal of this plan isto recognize the fact that we do have a very serious housing crisis, and we need to think constructively about where we would like housing to go. The goal is not to build only as many houses are defined in the plan. It's not a housing prevention plan. It's a housing production plan. So I find this discussion really concerning, especially in light of the fact that we just, earlier tonight, voted against funding the Affordable Housing Trust. So, more of a comment than a question.

▶ 5:22:29 Speaker 10: As always.

▶ 5:22:31 Kimberly Vandiver: I believe we do not yet have a motion on the floor.

▶ 5:22:37 Speaker 10: Can I ask one last- We do. Yes. Go ahead.

▶ 5:22:39 Manjula Karamcheti: I just have one more question. In terms of certifying the plan in April,

▶ 5:22:47 Speaker 14: could we certify the plan we have? I'm not saying we should, just to understand what is required versus the want to, need to. I'm just curious. So there's two parts to it. There's the approval of the plan when you create it. And so we do that once we have the plan and bring it to the planning board and your council. And then there's the certification, which is a second step, and you only do that if you have a 40B project that you're expecting that is an unwanted development, and the zoning board has had to permit. It's to try to prevent one community from having too many projects all at the same time. It's in order to space them out if it's too much. Oftentimes, 40B projects are hundreds of units, not these kind of smaller projects that we have in Melrose. So, it's for that, kind of a little bit of time relief for communities that have these larger 40B projects and they need more time. So it's not just having the plan, it's also having the zoning board permit for us at 63 units in a calendar year, and having the housing production plan that allows us to have that temporary safe harbor.

▶ 5:24:17 Speaker 14: So it's not just about having the plan. The zoning board has to actually be allowing for a project to happen and then giving the community some time. Yeah, I think I'm just trying to understand the depth of work in terms of updating the plan to be certified. I think I just don't understand what it

▶ 5:24:41 Manjula Karamcheti: requires in terms of every-- I heard that there's community engagement is an important part. So, I get that part. But what else does the process require? Yeah. It's not just resubmitting the plan that we have. Right. So it's like- Updated. What does updating mean? Updating all of the data that goes into the plan and having the community discussions and looking at, we're working on a lot of the recommendations now, so what else can we do to help to address housing of all different types, not just kind of the

▶ 5:25:22 Speaker 14: multifamily projects that you typically think of when you're increasing housing, but some of the smaller infill projects as well. I don't want to just kind of put

▶ 5:25:41 Speaker 14: something together No, I totally get it ... put together if we have to do it. I think I just like, can you just give an example of something that's not in there that we would hope would be added? I'm just trying to get concrete a little bit. Yeah. Something easy to think about is the development sites. So, a lot of those have been permitted or are under construction. So where else would we ideally like to see housing developed in Melrose? So, that's an easy one. But I can't think of another example of-- Because we have been doing a lot to implement the existing plan, so I'm not sure what's going to come through this process yet to have as a new recommendation in the- Yeah ... in the plan. I'm just really trying to understand what the $75,000 is for, in terms of updating the plan and certifying it. Yeah. We want to be using good data, and that takes time and somebody working through the different sources of data to make it specific for Melrose and to have a plan that we can implement to actually increase housing options and... So it's housing and affordable housing, it's not a super straightforward thing. It's very specific for your market. And so it's not something we want to be copying and pasting.

▶ 5:27:31 Manjula Karamcheti: No, I get that. But what

▶ 5:27:35 Speaker 14: happens? Who does what? Yeah. The last one we hired MAPC, the regional planning agency, to do the data and the analysis of our regulations and looking at market conditions to come up with the current plan that we

▶ 5:28:06 Speaker 14: have.So we would be hiring a consultant again. Things change. We have a lot of different housing prices, and so using census data, but then there's a lot of other sources of data and rental data and for sale that they have access to and we don't as staff. This

▶ 5:28:47 Speaker 14: is an important issue, and I think that we also want to make sure that we are communicating the benefits of housing and to those that might not realize all of the benefits of it too. So it's an important part of the plan.

▶ 5:29:12 Manjula Karamcheti: It still just feels very big picture to me. I'm like... But I'm done.

▶ 5:29:17 Kimberly Vandiver: Okay. If I can, maybe point of clarification. I've read the previous plan, and my understanding from having read it is that part of this data is not just data you can look up online, but it's hosting info sessions with residents and asking them questions about things like, "What do you feel about what types of housing we have enough of or not enough of? Do we have enough two-family housing? Do we have enough single-family housing? Are there certain locations or certain demographics that people feel are over or underrepresented?" Is that accurate?

▶ 5:29:48 Speaker 14: Yes. Yeah. So- Yeah. The community engagement piece is important. Yeah.

▶ 5:29:54 Kimberly Vandiver: I think that's an aspect of data collection as well as well as bringing the community into the decision-making process to some extent. Councilor Chen?

▶ 5:30:04 Jason Chen: I think where I'm at with this is I think we have a lot of the expertise to do it ourselves and be able to pay a consultant less. However, it doesn't seem like we can do it in the timeframe that we need given the resources and the other things that we have to do. I agree, it is a total cottage industry, and MAPC is raking in money. When I read the plan, there's a lot of front matter that does not seem to change between town to town, and we're getting demographic data that's probably very similar for communities like us in our income bracket and north of Boston. So that's, I feel like we're updating about 15, 20 pages of this. And I agree that we need to have this community conversation about housing, but I'm not sure we need to pay someone to do that. That said, necessary evil, so I recommend we approve this.

▶ 5:30:52 Speaker 10: Was there a motion?

▶ 5:30:53 Speaker 12: There was a motion on the floor already. Oh, I need a motion on the floor.

▶ 5:30:55 Speaker 10: Ah. It's okay. All right. Let's vote.

▶ 5:31:03 Speaker 10: Six.

▶ 5:31:06 Speaker 10: Councilor Chen. Yes. Councilor Finocchiaro.

▶ 5:31:10 Speaker 12: Yes.

▶ 5:31:12 Speaker 10: Councilor Jamaleddine. Yes. Councilor Karamcheti. Yes. Councilor Kowal. Yes. Councilor Abramski. Yes. Councilor Park. Yes. Councilor Williams. Yes. President Freeman. Chair- Councilor Romanul. Chair Vandiver. Yes. All in favor of motion passes.

▶ 5:31:33 Kimberly Vandiver: Good work. Thank you. That will be recommended back to the full council. Next up, we have ID number 2026-1165, an appropriation from free cash account 01-324001 to the planning department, number 175, in the amount of $70,000 to hire a consultant for technical assistance to update the downtown parking study.