Acceptance of EOHLC FY2026 Community Planning Grant in the amount of $100,250
Agenda original PDF
Minutes original PDF
C. (ID # 2026-3): Acceptance of EOHLC FY2026 Community Planning Grant in the amount of $100,250 Motion to Recommend to full council made by Councilor Williams Seconded by Councilor Karamcheti All were in favor and motion passed RESULTS: ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS] TO: City Council AYES: Jason Chen, Cal Finocchiaro, Bradley Freeman, Manjula Karamcheti, Elizabeth Kowal, John Obremski, Christopher Park, Devin Romanul, Kim Vandiver, Ryan Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: Maya Jamaleddine Comments on Discussion: -Councilor Williams thanked them for pursuing this grant, especially to review outdated subdivision regulations. Which consultant will be used? They used Community Scale from previous work to help with the grant application process. This will be put out to bid and they have until June 2027 to use the money and hope to complete it within a year. -Councilor Finocchiaro asked for clarification on enabling a more diverse mix of housing types. Are you looking to change the zoning laws within neighborhoods? More data is available now to compare to the regulations to determine future dimensions, especially for multi-unit housing. -Councilor Karamcheti asked what are potential outcomes that residents could expect. They will have public engagement with visualization and data, resulting in zoning amendments for council's approval. Will this allow future plans to require less planning board and zoning board of appeals? Yes, potentially things that need variances today could be allowed by right. -Councilor Vandiver commented that this will help address concern that our zoning regulations currently are not compliant to our existing structures. Will this help us move to a point where we can build houses faster and better regarding 40B's? The goal is to reach 10% threshold of subsidized housing in our stock so we no longer have to approve 40B projects. Developers would no longer have the option of a 40B project then. -Councilor Williams stated that in August 2025 Melrose was at 8-9% for subsidized housing 3 inventory. Is there a pipeline in place that will push us to a higher number for Safe Harbor Status of 10% and when will we achieve that. All of the projects must be built, not permitted, to get an accurate count. Regarding current projects that have been permitted, we deed about 50 units to reach the 10% but that number is fluid until completion. Once we hit the 10% we will continue to build the multi-use housing in the proper zoning areas. -Councilor Finocchiaro asked how we will get community input. We will do surveys to reach a wider audience, hold meetings in person with the consultant, use best practices to get stakeholder feedback. -Councilor Karamcheti stated that our goal is to get to Safe Harbor Status. We want to have affordable housing in Melrose, she is not necessarily opposed to 40B, we need to be planned and purposeful about where it is built and co-designed. Will this help us be planned and purposeful to have a diverse type of housing in the city. This will allow a more varied stock of housing and this grant will aid in reaching that goal. It will examine the zoning districts across the region and compare to the built environment, showing how they don't match. This is not a Melrose specific problem. Many communities in the area have the same issue. This could allow neighborhood specific focus, and one ADU was recently approved as an example of this. -Councilor Park asked if the February 2022 housing production plan has been helpful to the public, especially as a guide and not necessarily adhered to. It has been very helpful, a lot of those sites are in production or permitted, and it's great when discussion occurs at public meetings. There is great data in the plan about housing, affordability in Melrose, and our residents' incomes. It's helpful and necessary to have the plan in order to claim safe harbor status from the state. V. ADJOURNMENT Motion to Adjourn by unanimous consent made by Chair Romanul at 7:49 PM Meeting was adjourned 4 Docusign Envelope ID: E0517824-4EE6-43A8-83BF-DDBDA4E9C646 FY26-LC-LCC-2463_Melrose Cultural Council_Contract December 03, 2025 Dear Jennifer Grigoraitis, Thank you for your participation in the Mass Cultural Council’s Local Cultural Council Program. We are pleased to inform you that City of Melrose for Melrose Cultural Council has been approved for a Local Cultural Council Allocation grant of $16,800 (FY26-LC-LCC-2463) from the Mass Cultural Council. Thanks to vigorous advocacy from the cultural sector, both the Healey-Driscoll Administration and the State Legislature showed strong, bipartisan support for the Mass Cultural Council, and its programs and services in the FY26 state budget. This allows us to contin
Transcript
▶ 47:58 Devin Romanul: And last but not least, particularly for the housing enthusiast in the room ID number 20 26 3 acceptance of the, uh, E-O-H-L-C-F-Y 26 Community Planning grant in the amount of 100 and 200, $100,250. We're now joined by Ms. Masa. Thank you so much for coming in.
▶ 48:19 Speaker 9: Yes, thanks for having me. I'm Lori Masa. I'm the Director of the Office of Planning and Community Development. Uh, we applied for a grant from the Executive Office of Housing and Lable communities, uh, for this, um, grant to, um, implement some of our, uh, housing production plan goals around zoning. Um, so we reified our zoning ordinance in the fall of 20, um, 24, which was a huge effort. And at that point we discussed this kind of phase two, um, work. And so now we're got the grant, um, to hire a consultant to work with planning staff, planning board, zoning board, uh, the zoning subcommittee of the planning board. Um, and to kick off this, um, this effort. So we'll likely be looking at our neighborhoods and the dimensions that are, um, required within them to look at, you know, the built conditions and can we build housing, um, the, the way that we, our neighborhoods are built right now. And also look to, um, other kinds of housing types that, um, would fit within the, the context of, um, the neighborhoods. And then also look at our subdivision regulations, um, which are very outdated, um, and often require many waivers when we do get subdivisions. Um, so we wanna take a look at those as well.
▶ 49:38 Ryan Williams: Terrific. Thanks so much. Councillor Williams. Just wanted to say thank you for pursuing this, especially the subdivision regulations, which are something that I find particularly egregious given that they have enormous, massive parcel sizes compared to the standard parcel size in the city. Um, and I think they create really out of character housing as a result. So I really appreciate you guys looking into this. Um, I wanted to ask, is this consultant the one that was doing some of this work prior with you? Have you got a consultant in mind?
▶ 50:06 Speaker 9: So we did, um, in the application process, you often need to have a kind of an estimate from, um, a consultant. So we did reach out to the community scale who we had worked with, um, with the zoning reification. Um, we will be putting this up to bid. So, um, we'll see what we come back with.
▶ 50:24 Ryan Williams: Excellent. And what do you think about a timeline?
▶ 50:26 Speaker 9: So we, um, said in the grant we would, um, hope to have a year long process, um, for this work. Um, we do have until the end of, um, well June 20, um, 27 to use the money.
▶ 50:42 Speaker 1: Nice. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Councilor for no chiro.
▶ 50:45 Cal Finocchiaro: Thank you. Uh, chair model. So when you say enable a more diverse mix of housing types, um, and are you looking I I just, I I don't understand this as sure as much as I, um, probably should. I dunno. But, um, the zoning in the all, all of this sort of, I'm trying to understand a little bit better. Um, does that mean that you're looking to change the zoning laws within like the neighborhoods to,
▶ 51:08 Speaker 9: So within the neighborhoods there's, you know, many different zoning districts. So when we talk about this, it's um, like looking specifically at the district and the blocks and um, you know, we have the capability now of kind of having so much data around the existing conditions and, and what's there and then compare it to what the regulations are. Um, so it is kind of a, um, a, a, a close look. And so we're not talking about like neighborhoods in general, but, you know, looking at where two families are allowed or like looking at our townhouse, um, building type right now and, you know, what really do we want those dimensions to be for that kind of housing. So, you know, looking at that kind of, we call missing middle housing of like, you know, three to six or 10 units and, and where, um, we do allow for that kind of housing in Melrose, we're pretty progressive in that way, but then do the dimensions actually match what we wanna see, um, with, with some of those housing types.
▶ 52:11 Cal Finocchiaro: So, so potentially maybe adding more units to those lots or reducing or, well,
▶ 52:15 Speaker 9: It's, it's things like, you know, we have lot sizes that you never see in Melrose. So if, you know, we look at what the built condition is and make the regulations match that, then there could be a potential that you could, um, you know, have a single family house, you know, in a, in a very large side yard. Um, where now you'd have to get a variance in order to do that. Um, so those are the kinds of things, um, that we'd be looking at. I see.
▶ 52:42 Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Councilor Ki Treaty.
▶ 52:44 Manjula Karamcheti: Um, I think my line of questioning is sort of similar to Councilor Rios, but I was just hoping that you could give sort of a, through this grant and the implementation, like what could some potential outcomes be that residents could expect?
▶ 52:57 Speaker 9: So we will have a public engagement, you know, as part of this and try to do some great vis visualization. 'cause the dimensions can be well boring, but also can be, you know, depending on what it is. Um, hard to understand. So we're, you know, really wanna have some great visuals and data for the public. So, um, we'd go through that process and then have zoning amendments that would come back to you for approval. The, the subdivision regulations would go to, um, the planning board, but a lot of those, um, in terms of lot sizes and things would be zoning that, um, the city council would approve. It would just be more of like the road sizes and things that, um, would go to the planning board
▶ 53:42 Manjula Karamcheti: And just related to that with the planning board, the zoning board of appeals with the potential like recommendations and zoning changes, then not, we wouldn't need certain, um, proposals to go through the planning board and the zoning zoning board of appeals because like obviously the, the regulations would change. So those approvals and those discussions wouldn't be necessary
▶ 54:06 Speaker 9: Potentially, potentially, you know, things that right now need variances to be built could be by. Right.
▶ 54:17 Speaker 1: Oh, Councillor ver Thank you.
▶ 54:18 Kimberly Vandiver: Uh, thank you for bringing this to us. I have two questions. Um, the first is, uh, so if I'm understanding correctly, correct me if I'm wrong, th this would, uh, help address the concern that I hear people say frequently. I've heard it anyways frequently, um, that we have these, these zoning regulations, but a lot of existing neighborhoods that we love actually would not be compliant according to our zoning regulations. Right. So this would be matching up kind of when you say the built environment, kind of the reality that we have today with, with how we're describing ourselves, right? Yes, yes. Okay, great. And, um, I, I guess my other question, comment is, it's as, um, as you know, we have several 40 Bs active one, um, kind of pending in my ward, but we've had 40 Bs throughout the city. Um, and would you say that this would help us, um, move to a point where we can build houses the way that we have agreed upon according to our zoning code faster, better so that we don't, aren't potentially subject to as many 40 B situations?
▶ 55:26 Speaker 9: So the, um, 40 B is related to our subsidized housing inventory. This kind of housing, um, would have to have, um, eight or more units in order to have an affordable unit that would then go on the subsidized housing inventory. So, um, you know, once we hit the, the 10% threshold of having our number of, uh, housing units on the subsidized housing inventory, 10% of our total stock on that inventory, um, then we wouldn't be, um, subject to having to approve 40 B projects. So it's, um, you know, then developers wouldn't necessarily have the option of proposing a 40 B project. They have to stick with the, the zoning that's in place for that property. Um, so it's kind of, I would say indirectly related to, you know, getting, um, housing that, that we want to have here. Um, which we, we do have a lot of this kind of housing, so kind of a legal legalizing it and being able to, to build more of it. Um, but it would be kind of the, it's it's typically the, the larger projects that have more inclusionary housing that then goes on the subsidized housing inventory that affects the, that kind of, um, our threshold of where we are in terms of needing to accept 40 Bs.
▶ 56:50 Kimberly Vandiver: Okay. Great. Uh, well I look forward to seeing as this goes through what comes back as far as the zoning, potential zoning amendments and I, I really appreciate that we're looking at this and making sure that we're tuned up to the way we'd like it to be
▶ 57:02 Ryan Williams: Councillor Williams. Yeah, thank you. And I want to ask for the discretion of the chair because I have a question that's not directly related to the order, but it came up in the course of discussion with Councillor Vandiver in August, 2025. The state said our SHI, our subsidized housing inventory was at about 9%, 8.9%. And do you see, do you foresee a pipeline at this moment that would push us to a higher number? And if so, just ballpark or do you think we're headed because we're about 1% away from Safe Harbor status at this point?
▶ 57:32 Speaker 9: So where are we headed in terms of
▶ 57:34 Ryan Williams: Next year building housing next year or two, you know, what's coming down the line? What's been, um, floated that hasn't been, you know, uh, put before the board yet to
▶ 57:42 Speaker 9: Reach the 10%? Yeah, yeah, so it, um, it's, it's hard to give a number always because with the 40 B projects, they're put, we, we put them on the subsidized housing inventory, we can put them on right when they're permitted. If they're not constructed, they're taken off. Mm-hmm. And so, um, until, you know, all of the projects are actually built, the number is gonna fluctuate over time. But in terms of all of the ones that have been permitted, um, we need about 50 units, um, to hit the 10%. But again, it's, you know, that is always kind of a moving target. Um, so once we hit that number, then we'll be able to, um, continue to build housing in the dis zoning districts that we want multi-family housing and mixed use projects, so we're not stopping the housing, uh, you know, building housing at that point. It's just in, you know, what kind of permitting and where those projects are coming.
▶ 58:39 Devin Romanul: Appreciate it. Thank you. Next I have Councillor Occhio, followed by Councillor, Karen Shady.
▶ 58:43 Cal Finocchiaro: Sorry. Last question. You talked about, um, community input. What, how are you gonna go about that?
▶ 58:49 Speaker 9: So we'll do, um, you know, typically surveys to try to reach a wider audience, but then also, um, holds, you know, meetings, um, in person and, um, so with the consultant and then our staff, um, you know, do best, best practices for getting, uh, as much information as we can from, from the public. And then also, you know, stakeholders that are, um, you know, we work with on projects that have, um, kind of a different kind of feedback. So we'll try to get as much input, um, from the, the public and, um, and then that all comes back to you for mm-hmm. Um, before anything's approved.
▶ 59:35 Manjula Karamcheti: Um, probably my last question, but we'll see. Um, you know, I, in terms of like getting to Safe Harbor, I mean, that's really the goal. We want to have affordable housing in Melrose, and, you know, and thinking about 40 B, that's not necessarily something I'm opposed to because it is an avenue to have affordable housing. So I think it's more about being planned and purposeful about where affordable housing is and that it's like co-designed between the developer and the city. And so do you anticipate this grant being helpful as part of like, us being planned and purposeful regarding getting to Safe Harbor and making sure that we have a diverse array of housing for, for the city.
▶ 1:00:24 Speaker 9: So it will, um, be a way of building more housing at, you know, varying types. Like we, we want different, we want our housing stock to be varied. So that's what really the goal of this, um, grant will be, is, you know, so, um, the Metropolitan Area Planning Council is actually, um, doing a big project for, you know, kind of this exact, um, goal of looking at the, um, zoning districts across the region, um, and looking at, you know, with GIS data, um, what's the built environment is and, um, what the zoning districts are and looking, uh, showing kind of how, um, they don't match. And so we knew we were gonna be doing this project, but they're actually also doing this at the same time. So I think the timing will, will be helpful to use their work and then kind of go from there to, um, work with a consultant, um, and the staff and the boards to, um, continue that work. So it's not a Melrose specific problem. Most communities in this area have this, um, issue where, you know, in the seventies somebody created these zoning districts and dimensions, not necessarily districts, but dimensions of like, okay, this is what we think it should be, and then there's like a copy and paste and, you know, and so, um, now we can, you know, be more thoughtful and look, um, you know, at closely at each neighborhood, um, to see, you know, what's there, what do we want to allow for being built there, um, and have different kinds of housing. So one example that, um, was just approved recently was the accessory dwelling unit. That's another, you know, kind of housing that adds a small unit, um, in a neighborhood and generally, you know, minimal impact. And so those are the kinds of things that, um, we're looking for. Um, as opposed to specifying, you know, taking a look at some of the larger redevelopment, um, districts which, um, were more recently rewritten in the city. Um, and, you know, those can always kind of use fresh eyes and um, and attention. But, um, with this grant, we're hoping to do those, um, implementation steps in the zone in the housing production plan that is more of a focus on the neighborhoods, which really, um, you know, those, uh, dimensions haven't really changed much, um, you know, since the seventies.
▶ 1:02:55 Devin Romanul: Terrific. And I have one more person in line, but I just wanna note for our members, it is 7 46, so we should wrap up shortly. I believe I have, uh, Councillor Park.
▶ 1:03:03 Speaker 1: Thank you. Um, right. So, so, uh, thank you for, for applying for this grant. And I'm, I'm curious, having been in the process of, uh, being in, uh, some of the meetings throughout the course of the past few years with regards to some of the housing, uh, how, I know we had a housing production plan back in that was conducted February of 2022. How have you found that to be in terms of worthwhile and was it useful to, to the public? Because I, and I asked this because I know that the 1424 Tremont Street project was largely, uh, outside of the scope and recommendation of the pro the housing production plan in terms of the size. And, um, it seemed to be that a lot of people, uh, reference the housing production plan as a guide, but not to be followed or adhered to. So what are your thoughts on that and how valuable has the 2022 housing production plan been?
▶ 1:04:03 Speaker 9: It's been really valuable. We've gotten, um, a lot of, I think, development, when you put a document out that shows that Melrose wants housing and, um, we've, a lot of those development sites are, you know, under construction or permitted, and, um, those projects are moving along. Um, it's always great when a plan is, uh, discussed at public meetings and people know it's there and they look at it. And, you know, that particular site, it had three stories, the zoning dis the zoning allowed for more, um, stories, so people kind of latched onto that one particular, um, you know, thing and height in the, um, in the plan. Um, but generally it has great data about, um, housing and about affordability in Melrose, um, and our, uh, residents incomes. And, um, there's a lot of good data in the plan. So it's also really helpful to have a housing production plan because in order to, um, claim safe harbor, um, from the state, you have to produce a number of housing units and have your housing production plan certified. If you don't have the housing production plan, um, you can't, uh, have, uh, safe harbor for, you know, that specific kind of safe harbor. So it's been really, it's been really helpful to have the plan.
▶ 1:05:25 Speaker 1: Thank you Councilor Williams. I would like To make motion to approve to the full counsel Second. Second
▶ 1:05:30 Devin Romanul: Motion made by Councilor Williams, seconded by Councilor Karen Shady on discussion. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed the ayes have it. Thank you very much, director Maim. Thank you. Seeing as that is our last agenda item, how motion by unanimous consent to adjourn. Seeing no objection, we are now adjourned. Great work, everybody.