►
Description
Docket #0212 - Hearing regarding zoning relief for 100% affordable and deeply affordable housing projects.
A
In
lieu
of
a
gavel,
I
will
use
a
reusable
water
bottle
good
morning.
Ladies
and
gentlemen,
this
is
the
planning
development
and
transportation
committee.
My
name
is
matt
o'malley.
We
are
here
to
discuss
docket
zero,
two
one
two.
This
is
a
working
session
sponsored
by
the
district,
eight
counselor,
counselor,
kenzie,
bach
and
myself.
A
This
is
a
follow-up
working
session
to
a
hearing
that
councilor
bach
and
I
originally
introduced.
Last
year
we
had
a
hearing,
I
believe
in
november,
and
obviously
the
importance
of
the
work
has
only
intensified
since
then,
and
since
october
of
last
year,
we've
seen
10
nearly.
B
A
Thousand
I'm
sure
we've
passed
that
mark
of
evictions
across
the
commonwealth
and
and
fully
one
tenth
or
a
thousand
of
those
have
been
in
suffolk
county
alone,
so
the
work
has
never
been
more
important,
counselor
bach,
to
her
credit
and
to
our
great
fortune
as
members
of
this
committee
and
city
officials
has
put
forth
a
really
interesting,
and
I
completely
support
the
findings
in
a
memorandum
that
she
submitted
to
many
of
us.
That's
one
of
the
items
that
we're
going
to
be
discussing
as
well.
A
Forgive
me,
I
don't
quite
have
kind
of
doing
this
by
the
fly
of
our
pants
or
seat
in
my
pants,
flying
by
the
seat
of
my
pants
to
mix
metaphors
counselor
wu
is
the
chair
of
the
committee.
I
know
she
will
take
over
once.
She
joins
us,
and
I
know
we
have
a
number
of
panelists
here,
just
looking
around
mike
christopher,
of
course,
from
the
bpda
as
well
as
brian
glasscock.
A
Michelle
mccarthy,
I
believe,
lizzie
torres,
tim
davis,
jessica
boatwright,
are
all
directors
at
either
dnd
or
the
bpda
who
are
gonna,
be
joining
us
as
well.
I
see,
of
course,
counselor
bach
the
lead
sponsor
in
this
counselor
mejia
counselor
flynn,
counselor
brayden,
have
joined
us
and
his
future
counselors
join
us
we'll
be
sure
to
add
them
as
well.
Sorry,
I'm
just
trying
to
navigate
the
page.
A
As
well,
I
see
has
joined
us
so
we're
going
to
get
right
into
it.
I
want
you
to
turn
the
panel
over
to
counselor
bach
for
opening
remarks
and
then
maybe
we'll
get
right
into
the
administration
and
again
this
is
a
working
session,
which
is
a
little
bit
different
than
a
hearing.
It's
gonna
be
more
of
a
conversation,
less
of
a
formalized
setting,
but
really
looking
forward
to
discussing
issues
as
it
relates
to
making
it
easier
for
individuals
to
build
deeply
affordable
housing
in
the
city
of
boston.
A
B
Thank
you
so
much,
mr
president,
and
thank
you
to
all
my
colleagues
for
being
here
and
to
the
bpda
and
dnd
for
joining
us.
As
the
chair
said,
we
had
a
hearing
on
this
last
year
and
you
know
the
the
momentum,
for
this
was
really
occasioned
sort
of
on
two
fronts.
One
was
that
we
saw
an
unfortunate
lawsuit
sort
of
holding
up
this
major
signature
project
and
jp.
B
That
gives
us
the
opportunity
for
some
100
deeply,
affordable
housing,
supported
by
pine
street
inn
and
the
community
builders,
and
and
was
a
real
kind
of
frustration
to
see
that
setback
and
trying
to
think
about
ways
to
ways
to
reduce
the
levers
for
that
kind
of
block
against
the
units
that
we
so
desperately
need
across
the
city.
So
that
was
sort
of
the
local
context
and
then
the
slightly
wider
regional
context
is
that
both
of
our
neighbors
to
the
north,
cambridge
and
somerville
have
recently
adopted
affordable
housing
overlays.
B
So
you
know
we.
We
don't
like
to
be
shown
up
in
boston.
We're
very
pleased
to
have
recently
set
a
standard,
not
just
in
the
region
but
nationwide,
with
the
ephemerally
furthering
fair
housing.
Zoning
relief,
which
now
you
know
others
are
looking
to
copy
us
on,
but
on
the
on
the
idea
of
a
kind
of
zoning
overlay
for
deeply
affordable
units
and-
and
you
know,
100,
affordable
developments,
we
really
wanted
to
figure
out
how
boston
could
do
something
along
those
lines.
B
So,
at
our
last
hearing
we
had
folks
from
the
administration.
We
also
had
a
number
of
advocates
come
and
talk
about
the
need
for
this,
and
just
the
sort
of
scale
of
need
for
low-income
housing
in
boston
and-
and
I
think
it's
important
to
emphasize-
there's
been
a
lot
of
progress
in
boston
specifically
towards
building
units
over
the
last
decade,
and
that
is
important
to
meeting
our
overall
supply
needs.
But
we
just
know
when
you
run
out
the
models
that
you're.
Never
that's.
B
It's
not
going
to
be
enough
to
trickle
down
to
the
you
know,
half
of
boston
workers
who
make
less
than
30
000
a
year,
so
you've
got
to
also
be
building
up
at
the
same
time,
and
and
while
dnd
has
been
permitting
a
record
number
of
these
we're
still,
we
still
just
need
so
much
more
supply
so
anywhere
that
we
have
levers
in
our
control
as
a
city
to
kind
of
speed
the
process.
B
I
think
we've
got
to
be
looking
at
that,
so
the
the
memo
we
set
around
today
was
kind
of
in
the
context
of
having
looked
at
the
summerville
and
the
cambridge
examples.
What
we
found
is,
you
know
our
our
boston.
Zoning
code
is
a
very
particular
unique,
special
beast,
and
so
we
can't
really
just
copy
and
paste
something
that
another
municipality
has
done,
because
in
order
to
really
align
with
the
way
that
our
our
zoning
and
our
zoning
relief
processes
work,
we
kind
of
have
to
do
something
bespoke
for
boston.
B
So
the
our
idea
today
was
to
talk
about
some
of
the
strategies
that
have
been
taken
in
other
places
and
kind
of
categorically.
So,
for
instance,
there's
been
efforts
on
parking
relief
setback
and
open
space
relief,
height
and
scale
increases,
expedited
review
processes,
waving
fees.
B
So
like
a
lot
of
different
levers
and
also
within
that
different
ways
of
defining
those,
and
so
we
wanted
to
kind
of
collect
up
some
of
those
strategies
and
talk
through
with
our
experts
from
the
bpda
and
dnd
departments,
sort
of
what
seems
most
promising
and
doable
in
a
boston
context
and
and
what
seems
more
challenging
so
that
we
can
then
kind
of
make
the
next
iteration
actually
be
introducing
some
language
but
wanted
to
have
this
kind
of
conceptual
conversation.
First.
B
So
sorry,
mr
chair,
I
was
a
little
long,
but
I
just
wanted
to
provide
some
framing
of
where
we
are
and
again
grateful
grateful
to
everybody
for
being
here.
A
You're
here
no
need
to
apologize
appreciate
your
your
leadership
on
this
incredibly
important
topic.
Very
briefly
to
my
colleagues.
If
we
can
do
like
a
one
minute,
quick,
hello
and
introduction,
starting
with
counselor
in
order
of
appearance,
counselor
flynn,.
C
A
Thank
you,
councillor
flynn,
sending
a
good
bar
for
brevity
councillor
mejia.
D
Thank
you,
mr
president,
and
you
know
I'm
gonna
follow
that
suit,
I'm
very
competitive,
so
I'm
glad
to
be
here
looking
forward
to
the
conversation
and
thank
you,
counselor
bach,
for
your
steadfast
conviction
on
all
things
that
deal
with
housing,
justice.
E
Thank
you,
mr
president,
I'm
delighted
to
be
here
to
talk
about
this
very
important
issue
today.
I
want
to
thank
all
the
folks
from
the
administration
who
are
here
and
look
forward
to
diving
in
to
the
discussion
this
morning.
Thank
you.
F
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Counselor
sir
b
george
and
we're
joined
by
district
4,
counselor,
andrea
campbell,
counselor
campbell.
Do
you
have
any
opening
remarks
before
we
jump
into
the
panel.
G
Yes,
just
first
of
all
good
morning,
everyone
and
thank
you
for
this
hearing
for
bringing
this
to
the
floor.
Councilor
bach
and
councilor
o'malley
really
appreciate
it.
As
you
can
imagine,
affordable
housing
continues
to
be
a
major
topic
of
discussion
in
the
city,
not
only
with
advocates
but,
of
course,
those
in
the
development
world
and
how
we
streamline
processes
to
make
it
easier
to
build,
affordable
housing
to
save
costs
and,
of
course,
get
communities
and
residents
the
housing
they
desperately
need
is
really
important.
G
A
Thank
you
very
much
concert
campbell.
Thank
you
all
my
colleagues,
so
I
think
we'll
we'll
get
into
the
panelists
and
again,
forgive
me,
I'm
not
sure
if
there's
a
if
there's
an
administration
lead
on
this,
so
I
don't
know
if
this
tim,
maybe
perhaps
you
wanna,
introduce
your
colleagues
and
then,
if
there's
any
opening
statements
and
then
we'll
just
get
right
into
q,
a.
H
Thank
you
councillor,
o'malley,
for
having
us
here
today.
I
am
the
deputy
director
for
policy
development
research
at
the
department
of
neighborhood
development.
We
are,
of
course,
the
agency
that
likes
to
fund
all
these
affordable
housing
projects
that
we
would
love
to
see
them
go
smoother
and
faster.
H
However,
most
of
the
discussion
today
will
be
based
on
you
know,
zoning
principles
and
approval
principles
which
are
under
the
aegis
of
the
boston
planning
and
development
agency,
so
myself
and
jessica
boatwright,
who
is
our
deputy
director
for
neighborhood
housing
development
right
here
kind
of
in
support
and
and
for
this
discussion,
and
I
will
turn
it
over
to
brian
glascock,
from
the
boston
planning
and
development
agency
to
kind
of
discuss
the
bpda's
role
and
to
help
us
in
the
rest
of
this
conversation.
Thank
you.
I
Thanks
tim
thanks,
mr
president,
and
thanks
council
members
yeah,
you
know
you
know
me,
I'm
I'm
all
zoning
all
the
time
and
I
think
there's
definitely
a
zoning
component
of
this
larger
problem
that
that
we
need
to
look
at.
You
know
has
begun
to
think
about
it,
and
I
appreciate
counselor
box
scholarship
in
this
in
this
area,
because
this
is
this
is
deep
weeds.
But
I'd
sort
of
see
two
two
issues,
main
issues
that
were
that
we
need
to
grapple
with.
I
The
first
is:
how
do
we
make
it
easier
for
affordable
housing
projects
to
get
through
the
gauntlet
of
regulatory
reviews
and
the
and
the
zba
can
be
a
stumbling
block,
but
secondarily
and
and
to
the
point
of
the
you
know,
the
the
lawsuits
and
the
the
challenges
by
butters
that
one
may
be,
maybe
a
zoning
issue,
or
also
maybe
a
something
more
fundamental,
and
that
is
when
variances
are
granted
they're
granted
on
the
basis
of
hardship
and
I'm,
I
wonder
if,
if
being
able
to
to
expand
the
the
true
meaning
of
hardship
to
include
affordability,
essentially
taking
away
the
keys
to
the
courthouse
to
to
butter
challenges
on
something
like
this
might
be
something.
I
We
should
run
to
ground
that
by
giving
somebody,
you
know
any
a
butter,
the
ability
to
challenge
any
zoning
relief
granted.
We
will
continue
to
fight
this
fight
on
affordable
housing.
You
know
sooner
or
later,
there's
going
to
be
somebody
that
will
bring
another
suit.
So
I
I
put
that
out
there
and
there
may
be
greater
legal
minds
than
than
mine
in
the
room,
no
doubt,
but
that
might
be
something
worth
worth
tracking.
A
Great,
thank
you
brian.
I'm
going
to
return
the
the
water
bottle
gavel
to
counselor
at
large,
michelle
wu
who's
joined
us
who's.
Technically,
chair
of
the
committee,
madam
chair,
we've
just
done
brief
opening
statements
from
counselors
and
then
brian
sort
of
set
the
stage
on
sort
of
the
bpda
and
some
opening
thoughts
so
the
floor,
or
the
gavel
is
yours.
J
Thank
you
for
passing
the
water
bottle.
I
am
needing
to
get
caught
up
as
well,
so
was.
Is
there
any
other
comments
from
the
administration
panel?
I
don't
know
if
jessica
or
or
others
wanted
to
to
chime
in
as
well.
B
Great
okay
go
for
it
counselor
box
great,
so
I
wonder
and
brian
it's
an
interesting
point
about
the
lawsuits.
I
think
what
we
also
we
also
there's
a
couple
things
we
have
to
figure
out.
B
One
is
how
much
the
the
new
rule
that
passed
as
part
of
housing
choice
at
the
state
level,
which
actually
requires
people
to
post
bonds
in
their
affordable
housing
related
lawsuits
like
kind
of
how
much
that's
going
to
apply
to
our
cases,
how
helpful
that
is,
and
and
trying
to
think
that
through,
I
guess
I
guess
I
I'm
curious.
I
don't
really
know
how
we
would
how
we
would
redefine
hardship
to
include
affordability
unless
you're
saying
that
would
involve
a
state
law
change.
B
I
Sure,
and,
and
so
just
to
sort
of
recount
for
folks
that
maybe
don't
live
in
the
zoning
world
all
the
time.
There
are
a
couple
of
sort
of
a
hierarchy
of
types
of
zoning
relief,
essentially
that
are
granted
that
allow
us
to
create
these
projects
with
with
100,
affordable,
very
large
projects.
Projects
on
the
one
acre
site
or
larger
may
be
able
to
use
the
plant
development
area
process
and
in
that
process
it's
essentially
like
changing
the
zoning.
I
So
you
you
don't
give
to
the
butters
the
same
ability
to
to
challenge
it
as
as
in
a
butter
in
court
which
is
different
than
granite
covariance,
and
then
in
our
various
planning
processes.
We've
worked
with
the
community
to
sort
through
this
idea
of
density
bonus.
I
So
essentially
there's
two
levels
of
zoning
sort
of
base
your
base,
zoning
and
then,
if
you
agree
to
do
a
certain
contribution
of
affordable,
you'd
avail
yourself
of
higher
density
and
then
there's
the
just
the
straight-up
zoning
variance
process,
and
that's
the
one
that
you
know
really
makes
a
project
potentially
vulnerable
to
suits
by
by
butters.
B
Right,
yeah
and
so,
and
so
just
for
folks,
just
reference
you
are
watching-
and
I
want
to.
I
want
to
allow
my
council
colleagues
to
ask
some
questions
about
this
stuff,
but
the
memo
that
we
sent
around
looked
at
you
know
I
mentioned
this,
but
sort
of
certainly
the
density,
a
density
bonus
being
something
that
other
places
have
tried
and
that,
as
you
say,
we've
tried
in
a
sort
of
limited
way,
which
is
kind
of
you
know,
heightened
scale
increase
to
go
along
with
affordability.
B
Personally,
I
think
that
in
this
context
at
least,
we
would
be
talking
about
that
for
kind
of
like
kind
of
hundred
percent
like
affordable
developments,
as
opposed
to,
I
think,
we've
had
a
we've,
had
an
effort
in
a
few
parts
of
the
city
to
think
about.
Like
you
just
said,
driving
up
the
affordability
a
bit
in
a
market
rate
development
and
how
that
would
lead
to
a
density
bonus,
we
don't
we
haven't
done
any
any
density
bonuses
for
100
affordable.
B
Have
we
anywhere
in
the
city
on
the
pda
side?
No!
No!
So
I
guess
I'd
be
curious
to
know
what
you
think
about
that
and
then
the
question
the
one
question
all
I'll
lodge
additionally
to
the
dnd
folks
and
then
let
others
sort
of
follow
up
with
further
questions.
Is
you
know
when
we
were
thinking
about
different
places?
There
could
be
these
levers.
Looking
at
you
know,
do
we
do
parking
relief?
B
I
feel
like
often
we're
sitting
there
talking
about
affordable
projects
and
saying
this
project
does
not
need
half
a
parking
spot
like
you
know
a
unit
because
of
because
the
folks
are
going
to
be
in
these
departments.
Don't
own
cars
right.
B
We
have
those
conversations
but
we're
sort
of
having
them
one-off,
so
interested
about
that
about
setbacks,
and
then
about
kind
of
expedited
review
processes,
sort
of
coordinating
more
of
our
department
processes
together
and
then
I
know
that
we
have
occasionally
waived
fees
on
the
kind
of
bha
side,
but
I
don't
think
we
do
a
lot
of
that
on
the
private,
affordable
housing
development
side.
B
The
projects
that
are
getting
funded
through
the
affordable
housing
round
so
be
curious,
which,
if
any
of
those
levers,
seemed
kind
of
more
or
less
promising
to
you.
So
that's
two
questions,
sorry
that
that
one
for
the
dnd
team
and
then
yeah
back
to
brian
at
all,
it
sounds
like
we
haven't
done:
100,
affordable
density
bonuses.
What's
kind
of
your
thought
about
that,.
I
Yeah,
I
think
you
know
the
part
of
the
challenge
is
those
hundred
percent
projects.
Are
you
know
each
one's
a
unicorn
and
it's
really
hard
to
to
say
exactly
what
kind
of
zoning
relief
is
going
to
be
required?
I
think
that's,
probably
the
you,
you
sort
of
touched
upon
it
when
you
talked
about
parking
relief,
so
it's
city-wide
parking
relief,
you
know,
might
not
be
viable
because
some
neighborhoods,
you
know
people
are
gonna,
have
have
cars,
so
it's
gonna
be
really
hard
to.
I
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
piece
through
this
neighborhood
by
neighborhood
sub
district
by
sub
district,
because
I
don't
I
don't
know
that.
There's
too
many
opportunities
for
a
blanket
sort
of
overlay
that
will
work
everywhere.
There's
there's
always
going
to
be
that
situation
where
it
has.
It
has
the
opposite
effect
or
causes
some
other
unforeseen
problem,
not
that
we
can't
do
it.
I
K
I
I
I
was
just
gonna
say
that
you
know
I
think
I
I
mean
first,
I
I
just
I
do
want
to
say
you
know
to
our
bpda
colleagues.
I
think
that
within
the
existing
system,
dnd
and
bpda
staff
work
closely
together
to
try
to
do
what
we
can
within
the
existing
system
to
help
to
help
these
projects.
K
I
just
want
to
lay
that
out,
because
I
know
that
it
takes
a
lot
of
work
on
both
of
our
sides,
and
I
I
hear
what
brian's
saying
about
how
there
are
these
neighborhood
variations,
where
there
are
definitely
some
places
where
it's
harder
to
think
about
a
parking
relief
than
than
others.
K
But
I
I
mean
to
me:
I
guess
what
that
means
is
that
in
some
kind
of
expedited
review
process
would
have
could
have
the
biggest
sort
of
blanket
impact,
because
within
that
you
could
make
nuances
if
you
wanted
to
for
specific
neighborhoods
right,
but
but
if
there
just
was
a
way
to
make
sure
that
affordable
projects
were
treated
differently
because
of
their
community
benefit,
then
that
might
be
an
approach
where
you
could
build
in
some
modifications.
K
But
at
least
you
know,
the
the
developers
and
the
community
and
the
future
recipients
would
would
be
able
to
build
different
expectations
into
how
we
could
get
these
projects
through.
I
don't
know
if
tim
wants
to
add
anything
to
that.
H
Yeah,
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
expedited
process,
the
bpda
currently
has
the
power
to
waive
some
parts
of
article
80
review
for
affordable
projects,
although
I
do
not
think
they've
done
it
of
late.
H
They've
been,
of
course,
worked
hard
to
get
them
through
the
process,
but
specifically,
there
have
been
a
couple
of
projects
where
they
were
basically
renovations
of
existing
buildings
that
triggered
article
80,
and
that
was
ones
where
it
seemed
like
those
are
the
ones
we
most
likely
could
have
given
that
waiver,
the
in
terms
of
some
something
like
parking
or
some
of
the
other
zoning
variance
issues.
As
you
probably
know,
once
you
have
one
zoning
variance,
you
have
to
kind
of
it,
there's
a
zoning
variance
for
the
whole
project.
H
It's
not
so
simple,
as
if
we
have
a
difference
on
the
parking
that
that
solves
all
the
problems
in
terms
of
the
process,
it
still
has
a
zoning
variant
somewhere
and
it
still
has
an
issue.
H
I
think
that
parking
is
certainly
something
that,
if
that
is
the
one
thing
that
is
hanging
out
the
community
against
the
project,
that's
where,
if
we
have
some
citywide
policy,
saying
that
this
is
what
a
city-wide
policy
is
around
parking
would
be
very
helpful.
Of
course
we
don't
want
any
buildings.
I
have
no
parking,
though,
because
we
also
want
to
have.
We
almost
always
have
to
have
at
least
a
little
parking
for
handicap,
accessibility.
L
So
I
can
touch
tim
mentions
so
good
good
morning.
Everyone
and
thank
you
for
having
us
today,
the
the
we
do
have
the
ability
to
waive
certain
requirements
released
article.
The
the
project
that
tim
references
is
the
linux
streets,
apartments,
which
is
a
bha
owned
property,
was
a
renovation
and
we
waived
the
iag
process
and
ran
that
kind
of
public
meetings.
It
always
comes
with.
You
know.
L
Whenever
you
kind
of
wave
a
process,
there's
always
some
red
flags
that
do
go
up,
so
we
have
to
be
we're
always
trying
to
be
sensitive
to
that
100,
affordable.
Obviously,
when
we,
when
they
come
in
from
an
article
80
perspective
where
our
eye,
our
ears
and
eyes,
are
always
kind
of
wide
open
relative
to
kind
of
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
can
get
this
through
the
process
in
a
way
that
is,
is
beneficial
to
keeping
it
moving
and
getting
it
into
the
funding
round.
L
You
know
relative
to
like
the
waiving
fees
and
stuff,
like
that's
more
of
a
question
that
we'd
have
to
kind
of
get
back
to
on
relative
to
when
we
talk,
like
you
know
the
permitting
fees
at
ist
and
something,
I
think,
that's
a
bigger
question
that
we
would
have
to
we'd
have
to
circle
back
with
you
on,
but
you
know,
I
think,
we're
we're
today.
Really
just
guys.
L
You
know
want
to
be
continue
to
work
through
this
and
kind
of
come
up
with
different
ideas
in
here
kind
of
some
of
the
different
thoughts
that
can
kind
of
help
us
think
through
this,
and
if
there
is
potential
you
know,
process
changes
that
we
could.
We
could
look
at
changing.
I
think
we're
we're
definitely
open
to
better
understanding
kind
of
how
we
can.
We
can
make
these
processes
more
fluid
so
that
they
can
get
into
the
funding
rounds.
I
And
just
to
circle,
back
on
on
what
jessica
started
with
you
know,
the.
I
You
know
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
isd
for
sure,
but
what
one
thing
we
did
do
on
to
was
to
fast-track
small
homeowner
projects
and
small
business
projects
by
having
the
thursday
night
sessions,
which
sort
of
took
them
instead
of
being
in
the
queue
with
you
know,
a
20-story
building.
You
know
they
were
sort
of
on
their
own
track
and
that
loosened
things
up
a
lot
for
them.
It
made
a
lot
more
manageable,
for
you
know
small.
I
You
know
one
and
two
family
homeowner
project
they're
putting
in
a
dormer,
or
you
know
that
extending
living
space
in
the
basement,
they
didn't
have
to
wait
in
the
you
know
the
six
month,
long
queue-
and
maybe
that's
something
we
can
we
can
think
about-
is
expedited
review
for
100
affordable,
so
that
they're
not
in
the
queue
with
these
other
projects
that
have
been
sort
of
grinding
it
out
for
a
while,
and
that
that
may
help.
You
know
reduce
the
time.
J
Thank
you,
counselor
bach.
I
want
to
recognize
that
counselor
edwards
had
joined
and
will
go
next
to
council
o'malley
and
just
to
give
a
sense
of
the
order
for
everyone
else.
Councillor
o'malley
will
be
followed
by
councillor
flynn,
mejia,
braden,
wasabi,
george
campbell
and
then
edwards.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
good
morning
again,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
brian
I
want
to
follow
up
on
sort
of
the
last
point
that
the
expedited
review
talk
a
little
bit
about
what,
because
I
do
think
the
thursday-
and
you
know
I'm
old
enough
to
remember
when
the
tuesday's
vba
hearings
would
last
routinely
six
seven
eight
hours
long,
and
I
think
the
thursday,
as
addition
for
the
small
projects,
has
been
enormously
helpful
but
flush
that
idea
that
you
just
sort
of
mentioned.
A
I
I
The
homeowner
projects,
out
of
the
big
long
queue
yeah,
gave
them
a
a
chance
to
to
meet
on
under
terms
that
are
a
lot
easier
for
small
homeowners
and
small
business
owners
to
manage,
which
is
the
you
know
the
thursday
evening
thing
and
because
there's
only
you
know
a
handful
of
projects,
the
the
subcommittee
members
are
able
to
spend
a
little
more
time
with
them.
I
You
know
sort
through
the
issue
make
sure
that
they've
they've
covered
all
the
issues
and
then
they
make
a
recommendation
of
the
full
board,
which
you
know
generally
ratifies
whatever
the
subcommittee,
so
something
along
along
those
lines
could
could
potentially
speed
up
the
process.
You
know
if
you've
got
a
four
to
six
month,
queue
for
the
for
the
zba.
I
Go
through
a
subcommittee,
and
it
may
be
that
the
subcommittee-
it's
there's
a
special
subcommittee
just
for
this.
It
feel
this
is,
I
feel
like
this
is
jeopardy.
I'm
taking
obscure,
enabling
references
for
2000
here,
but
one
of
the
components
with
the
enabling
legislation
change
that
that
happened
earlier
this
year.
Was
it
authorized
the
the
zba
on
make
their
own
zba
and
the
zoning
commission
have.
I
They
have
the
ability
to
make
their
own
subcommittees
and
make
their
own
rules,
and
this
is
something
I
I
would
think
and
again
I'd
defer
to.
I
isd
and
the
city
legal
team
that
the
zba
could
consider
having
a
subcommittee
to
to
just
deal
with
these
affordable
housing
projects.
I.
A
I
like
it-
and
I
think
again,
we're
just
this
is
the
purpose
of
this
working
session
is
to
kick
around
these
ideas,
but
as
we
talk
about
expediting
the
per
the
process,
which
is
probably
the
most
attractive
aspect,
who
would
be
the
developer,
who
be
looking
at
100,
affordable
project
allowing
for
some
ad
hoc
committee,
rather
than
just
saying
we're
going
to
expedite
that
four-month
process
and
make
it
a
two-month
process?
A
This
gives
a
little
more
teeth,
a
little
more
certainty
to
the
developer
that
they
will
have
an
opportunity
to
expeditiously
get
through
the
community
process.
None
of
us
are
saying
we
should
abandon
the
community
process.
Of
course
that
exists
for
a
reason,
and
there
are
certain
laws
what
there
are
certainly
legal
rights
that
any
a
butter
would
have,
but
you
know
when
we
think
about
the
pine
street
and
project.
As
all
of
you
know,
in
my
ten
years
on
this
body,
this
was
probably
the
most
universally
supported
major
development
project.
A
In
my
district
there
was
certainly
parking
relief.
I
don't
know
how
many
parking
spots
it
ended
up
having,
but
it
was.
It
was
a
fraction
of
the
number
that
was
needed
by
a
lot.
They
were
set
back.
Really
everything
went
through
that
we're
talking
about,
but
it's
still
being
held
up
by
one
by
one
of
butter.
The
landlord,
I
should
say
not
necessarily
at
a
better
list
there.
A
So
I
guess,
as
we
talk
about
the
pine
street
project,
how
many
other,
how
many
other
projects
are
in
the
pipeline
across
the
city
that
would
be
sort
of
a
large
scale.
You
know
100
plus
units
of
deeply
affordable
currently
on
the
books
or
in
sort
of
any
you
can
use
it
as
liberal
and
interpretation
of
in
the
pipeline,
as
you
want
to
you
know,
I
don't
know
mike
mike.
What
would
you
say
how
many,
how
many
times
you
didn't
like
projects?
Apparently
I.
L
Mean
pisgre
is
definitely
unique.
I
I
don't
know
how
many
we
have
relative
to
actually
jessica
or
tim
might
know,
because
we
just
did
a
we
just
kind
of
had
a
funding.
L
So
sometimes
counselor,
you
know,
as
you
know,
there's
there's
projects
that
come
in
at
a
higher
affordability,
so
say
around
20
or
or
something
like
that,
but
as
far
as
all
affordable
they
are,
they
are
unique
and
then
we're
also
dealing
with
some
of
the
bha
redevelopments
that
are
introducing
market
housing
with
the
preservation
in
new
bui
housing.
So
that's
kind
of
a
another
another
layer
on
this,
but
as
far
as
all
affordable
yeah,
I
don't
think
we
have
a
huge
pipeline
on
that,
but.
A
No,
no
and
another
reason
why
we
want
to
make
it
easier,
not
harder
for
a
position.
I
asked
the
question:
knowing
the
answer
would
be
probably
very
small
if,
if
any
on
this
scale,
but
I
think
it
underscores
the
need
to
offer
every
incentive
and
carrot
as
we
can
to
a
would-be
developer
and
that's
that's.
H
Yeah,
so
I
can
answer
that
in
terms
of
what's
in
the
pipeline,
it's
actually
is
a
small
number,
so
I'll
start
at
74
units
just
because
it's
sort
of
it's
sort
of
large
enough.
The
william
barton
rogers
middle
school,
which
is
in
hyde
park,
which
is
74
units,
is
a
dnd
owned
building
the
jj
carroll
with
77
units.
It's
a
bha
property,
it's
additional
units
on
a
vha
property,
so.
C
K
H
H
It's
in
brighton
right.
We
have
bha
old
colony,
phase
six,
which
has
134
new
units.
Those
are
mostly
a
rebuild.
We
have
290
tremont,
which
is
on
hold
at
the
moment.
That
is
the
vpdaom
parcel
in
chinatown
that
was
proposed
to
have
168
units
and
the
marielle
and
mccormick
the
rebuild
there
in
south
boston
and,
of
course,
the
rebuild
of
the
charlestown
public
housing
project
as
well
are
the
big
ones
so
they're,
primarily
they're,
primarily
that
size
so
can.
K
I
add
a
couple
of
them.
Can
I
add
a
couple
more
sure,
so
I
would
add.
Well
if
tim
had
said
that,
just
to
go
a
little
bit
below
70,
we
also
have.
We
also
have
2147
washington
street
in
in
nubian
square,
which
will
be
62
units
and
1599
columbus
ave
in
roxbury,
which
will
be
65
units
and
then
currently
going
through
the
permitting
process.
Right
now
is
140
clarendon
street,
which
will
be
210
units
so.
A
L
Just
on
those
bha
ones-
and
I
know
the
counselors
that
are
involved-
you
know
particularly
counselor
edwards,
with
the
one
child
they
are
introducing
in
council
flint
over
in
south
boston.
They
are
introducing
market
rate
units,
which
makes
this
a
little
more
complicated
relative
to
when
you
think
about
a
permitting.
L
You
know
a
streamlined
permitting
mechanism
in
the
sense
of
they
are
introducing
more
density
and
that
it
that
will
increase
traffic.
You
know
urban
design,
height
and
stuff,
like
that,
so
the
be
some
of
the
of
the
three
that
were
mentioned,
mary
ellen
mccormick,
one
charlestown,
which
is
the
bunker
bunker
hill
bha
and
the
one
matt
you
just
mentioned.
They.
C
L
They
are
introducing
market
rate
units
all
at
different
levels
relative
to
kind
of
scale,
but
each
one
of
those
is
introducing
market
rate
units,
which
kind
of
puts
it
on
its
own
path,
relative
to
review,
and
it's
more
of
a
standard
arctic,
lady,
because
the
density
is
kind
of
being
viewed
as
a
kind
of
a
large-scale
review.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
know
that.
A
Fairpoint
might
get
in
and
back
to
sort
of
the
matter
at
hand.
I
think
that
we
should
be
talking
about
levels
of
relief,
not
unlike
a
lot
of
the
goals,
which
I
very
much
support
in
the
jp
rocks
corridor
study,
which
would
allow
for
for
a
certain
levels
of
density,
increase
based
on
an
affordability
that
would
hit
20
25,
perhaps
even
30,
so
we
can,
we
can
do
both
here.
We
could
allow
for
certain
incentives
for
a
developer
to
hit
those
far
exceeding
idp
numbers
and
then
the
higher.
A
The
number
goes,
the
the
more
incentives
and
and
carrots,
so
to
speak
that
we
we
offer
them,
which
is
why
I
think
I
think
this
is
an
exciting
conversation.
I
think
counselor
bach
has
identified
a
number
of
things
that
we
can
do
within
our
purview
as
it
relates
to
to
density
setback.
A
Restrictions
as
it
relates
to
parking
guidelines,
as
it
relates
to
what
the
speed
would
look
like,
so
I'm
gonna
wrap
it
up
for
this
round
of
questions
hear
more
from
my
colleagues
but
appreciate
everyone
spending
some
time
with
us
today.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
C
K
And
I
you
know
that
is
that
has
has
is
still
working
through
the
community
process.
So
you
know
it
may
have
been.
K
C
Okay,
could
we
speak
offline
about
that?
Absolutely
I
don't
want
to
see
any
projects
in
my
district
stalled
for
any
reason,
especially
affordable
housing
projects.
I
have
the
most
public
housing
of
any
district
in
the
city
and
I'm
proud
of
that,
but
I
also
want
to
continue
building
more
affordable
housing
throughout
my
district.
C
So
the
last
thing
I
want
is
anything
stalled
in
my
district
and
if
they
need
anything
is
stalled,
I
want
to
know
about
it,
so
I
can
work
to
get
it
resolved
all
right,
so
obviously
with
the
recession
here
taking
place,
but
I
don't
want
anyone
to
use
any
excuses
that
we're
not
building
affordable
housing
because
of
a
recession,
not
that's
not
going
to
happen
in
my
district,
so
I
just
want
to
let
developers
know
that
I'm
not
going
to
accept
that
going
forward.
C
D
Hi
good
morning,
wow
flynn
is
going
in
these
days.
Y'all
better
watch
out.
I
love
it.
Thank
you
counselor
flynn,
for
all
of
that.
So
I
just
have
a
few
questions.
I'm
just
curious.
How
are
we
currently
defining
quote-unquote
hardship
in
the
city
just
want
to
get
a
real,
clear
sense
of
what
hardship
looks
like
and
how
we're
defining
that
and
then
I
also
am
curious
if
we
could
talk
a
little
bit
about
usually
people
who
need
affordable
housing.
D
The
most
are
not
at
the
table
in
these
development
spaces
and
how
can
we
make
sure
that
we
are
centering?
The
voices
of
the
people
in
the
process
would
just
really
love
to
hear
what
that
looks
like
for
y'all
and
then
I
think
a
lot
of
people
want
to
be
a
part
of
the
process
to
that
point
when
it
comes
to
zoning
but
often
get
lost
in
the
vocabulary
and
difficult
terminology.
D
So
I'm
curious:
how
can
we
make?
How
can
we
be
a
little
bit
more
intentional
about
reaching
out
to
community
in
a
way
that
they
can
understand
and
not
to
say
that
you
know
we
can't
take
the
time
to
google
something
or
look
at
it
the
source,
but
I
just
I'm
wondering
how
can
we
just
like
make
all
of
this
so
much
more
easier
for
everyday
folks
to
really
understand
what
all
of
this
jargon
means
so
that
we
can
organize
and
and
and
and
speak
on
these
matters
with
a
little
bit
more
of
confidence?
I
Counselor,
I
think
you're
you're
your
first
point
about
hardship,
I'll
I'll,
take
a
crack
at
that,
one
that
that
you
know
when
we
talk
about
hardship
and
in
the
context
of
a
zoning
board
of
appeal.
You
know,
generally,
the
hardship
is
when
the
due
to
the
size
or
shape
of
the
parcel
that
the
development's
proposed
on
or
soil
conditions,
or
you
know
some
other
physical
feature
of
the
of
the
property.
I
It
makes
it
hard
to
develop
it
and
you
know,
get
a
reasonable.
You
know
return
on
any
investment
there,
because
it's
difficult
to
build
on
that's
a
very
narrow
definition
of
hardship,
but
it's
built
into
the
enabling
legislation
and
it's
it's.
It's
been
part
of
zoning
law.
You
know
since
the
beginning
of
time,
and
that
makes
it
challenging
when
the
board
of
appeal
gets
a
good
project
that
it
wants
to
approve
and
need
zoning
relief.
I
So
you
know
sometimes
that
they
sort
of
stretch
that
that
definition
and
grant
grant
variances
for
a
wide
range
of
reasons
on
deserving
projects
and
that's
where
the
legal
challenge
comes
in,
because
then
an
abutter
can
potentially
challenge
a
project
in
court
and
it's
very
hard
for
courts
to
uphold
it.
If
the.
If
the
board
hasn't
you
know,
pointed
to
those
those
kinds
of
real
hardships.
D
So
to
that
brian
I'm
just
curious,
like
does,
that
is,
does
that
have
any
reason
why
we're
not
building
affordable
in
the
seaport
and
other
areas
does
does
that
have
something
to
do
with
why
we
are
being
priced
out
of
certain
neighborhoods
at
least
we're
not
able
to
build
affordable
in
certain
spaces?
Does
that
have
anything
to
do
with
it?.
I
I
think
it's
I
you
know
and
I'll
defer
to
my
other
bpda
colleagues,
mr
christopher
probably
you
know
could
speak
to
that,
but
in
some
of
these
larger
article
80
projects,
particularly
ones
where
they
have
to
build
the
infrastructure,
so
not
only
they,
you
know
they're
building
the
building,
they
have
to
build
the
streets
and
the
sewer
systems
and
so
on,
because
it
didn't
exist
before
the
seaport's,
a
classic
example
of
that
you
know
very
high
up
lane
acquisition
costs,
high
infrastructure
costs,
everything
about
it
is
expensive
to
build
down
there
and,
as
a
result,
we
don't
see
as
much
affordable
as
as
we
might,
if
it
were
an
infield
project
somewhere
else.
D
I
I
kind
of
struggle
with
that
whole
notion,
but
tim
you
know
I
have
nothing
but
love
for
y'all,
so
help
me
understand
why
that
is
well.
H
One
of
one
of
the
largest
issue-
the
big
issue
in
the
seaport
district-
is
that
we
don't
own
any
of
the
land
that
we
can
build
housing
on.
Obviously,
the
bpa
owns
big
chunks
of
the
marine
industrial
park,
but
there
are
state
laws
that
regulate
what
can
be
used
with
that
land,
and
so
it's
that's.
H
The
major
reason
why
we
have
not
been
able
to
build
100,
affordable
buildings
in
the
seaport
is
because
the
land
values
have
been
too
high
for
affordable
housing
developers
to
compete
with
private
developers
and
we
don't
own
any
of
the
land.
As
you
can
see,
the
large
projects
that
we
discussed
earlier
were
almost
all
on
bha
or
dmd
on
properties.
H
That's
where
we've
been
able
to
really
get
scale
has
been
on
our
own
properties.
D
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
So
I'm
just
curious.
I
want
to
be
super
mindful
of
time
and
everyone
else's,
but
I
just
I'm
just
curious
about
what
are
we
doing
to
center
the
voices
of
the
people,
and
what
can
we
do
to
better
articulate
in
ways
that
everybody
can
understand
what
it
is
that
we're
articulating.
L
I
mean,
I
think,
the
more
you
know,
obviously
the
more
we
can
go
out
and
gauge
separate
and
apart
from
projects
right
more,
you
know.
Obviously
we
do
it
through
our
planning
initiatives,
but
I
think
the
more
we
can
have
conversations
around
what
is
affordable
housing.
What
does
it
mean?
You
know
it
is
a.
It
is
a
very
quirky.
L
L
I
think
what
happens
when
we
are
introducing
projects
in
neighborhoods,
and
all
of
you
know
this,
because
you're
out
in
the
neighborhoods
that
sometimes
it
gets
lost
in
the
conversation
around
the
specific,
you
know
whether
it's
a
setback
or
parking
or
height
or
density,
and
really
the
the
mission
of
what
we're
trying
with
the
what
the
developer
if
it's
100
affordable,
is
trying
to
do
gets
lost.
L
So
I
think
the
more
we
can
have
conversations
and
kind
of
educate
folks
around
kind
of
what
what
it
is,
we're
doing
and
kind
of
what
the
you
know.
What
the?
What
the
housing
goals
are
for
the
city
and
kind
of
the
the
big
initiatives
we
have
around
some
of
these
these
projects.
I
think
that
is
that
is
you
know,
a
way
to
really
kind
of
separate
the
conversation
from
individual
projects,
but
more
of
just
kind
of
a
broader
policy
discussion.
D
Thank
you
for
that,
and
I'm
just
my
last
question
before
counselor
wu
shuts
me
down
with
my
mic
here.
I'm
curious
just
is
that
okay,
council,
who
could
I
ask
one
more
question,
go
for
it?
Okay,
thank
you.
So
I
I
I
do
really
appreciate
that
mike
I'm
curious
like
have
you
ever
done
a
survey
of
the
community
in
terms
of
how
they're
experiencing
development,
what
are
some
of
the
initial
points
of
like
tension
and
what
we
can
do
to
better
engage
them.
L
You
know,
as
far
as
like
a
broad
approach,
we
you
know,
there's
definitely
been
a
lot
of
conversation
as
of
late
of
kind
of
taking
a
taking
the
bpd
on
the
road
and
going
into
the
communities
and
really
having
a
conversation.
Like
I
mentioned,
stepping
apart
from
projects
we
get
into
the
planning
initiatives,
we
really
do
do
deep,
dives
and
kind
of
what
all
this
means
right.
So
what
does
parking
mean?
What
does
affordable
housing
mean?
What
does
open
space
mean?
L
What
does
height
density
mean
and
try
to
really
educate
the
community
as
much
as
possible
and
bring
the
experts
across
the
city
agencies
into
these
different
rooms
or
finale
zooms,
and
really
talk
through
kind
of
what
is
planning
and,
ultimately,
what
is
what
is
the
goal?
So
you
know,
I
think
it's
it's
it's
something
that,
as
we
you
know
continue
to
think
about
it.
L
We
we
do
feel
like
these
conversations,
are
a
lot
more
important
relative
to
kind
of
surveys
and
stuff,
like
that,
I
I
don't
have
any
specifics
on
that,
but
I
do
think
it's
something
that
you
know
could
be
helpful
to
kind
of
help
shape.
Some
of
our
conversations
as
it
relates
to
kind
of
the
things
I
mentioned
about
kind
of
going
out
into
the
communities.
K
K
It
feels
like
there's
been
mostly
drawbacks
to
not
being
able
to
be
in
person,
because
so
many
of
these
things
have
to
happen
with
in-person
conversations,
but
one
thing:
that's
happened
for
us
on
a
project
level
is
that
we've
been
able
to
piggyback
some
developer
communications
about
specific
projects
onto
neighborhood
association
meetings,
so
that
we're
not
just
using
dnd's
outreach
capacity,
but
we're
also
really
relying
on
local
groups
to
you
know
to
to
go
to
where
people
are
are
going
already.
K
K
I
think
there's
there's
a
lot
of
things
we
could
be
doing,
but
we
are
talking
internally
about
how
can
we
sort
of
continue
to
build
on
the
ways
that
pandemic
outreach
has
forced
us
to
to
try
to
be
more
more
strategic
and
thoughtful
about
going
to
places
that
people
already
might
be
at
least
virtually
going
to,
rather
than
trying
to
recreate
spaces?.
I
And,
and
just
to
look
back
to,
I
can
only
really
speak
for
the
sort
of
the
planning
division
part
of
bpda.
But
you
know
we
have
a
a
much
more
robust
community
engagement
section
than
we've
ever
had
before
a
few
new
staff
and
then
jessica's
right.
I
This
has
forced
us
to
re-examine
how
we
engage
with
the
community,
but
pre-covert
we
were
having
you
know,
lunch
with
planners
and
and
neighborhood
walks
with
planners,
even
when
we
didn't
have
an
ongoing
planning
initiative
in
that
neighborhood,
and
even
though
there
wasn't
a
project
in
front
of
us
at
the
time
we
sort
of
felt
like
the
time
to
have
good.
I
You
know
establish
good
relationships
with
folks
is
not
when
we're
in
the
middle
of
of
decision
making,
but
when
there's
sort
of
nothing
you
know
no
burning
issue,
issues
on
the
table
and
we've
we
tried
to
continue
that
in
the
virtual
world
by
having
lots
of
those
kinds
of
virtual
engagements
where
people
can
just
ask
questions,
questions
and
we
can
sort
of
share.
You
know
what
we're
thinking
and
get
that
kind
of
feedback.
D
I
Not
too
long
before
we
we
got
shut
down,
we
did
have
over
in
east
boston.
We
had
poo
pooses
with
planters,
so
we
we.
We
worked
pretty
hard
to
to
find
the
good
the
good
food
in
every
neighborhood.
D
J
You
councillor
mejia
next
up
is
councillor
braden.
Thank
you.
E
Madam
chair
and
thank
you
everyone.
This
is
a
very
important
conversation.
As
I
said
earlier.
I'm
really
excited
to
think
that
my
my
christopher
is
so
excited
talking
about
planning
initiatives.
E
So
I
think,
with
regard
trucking
issue,
you
know
very
often
we
are
asked
by
developers
to
reduce
the
amount
of
parking
because
it
is
an
added
cost,
but
I
think
one
of
the
critical
issues
in
and
depending
on
and
it's
a
neighborhood
by
neighborhood
conversation,
but
one
of
the
critical
issues
is
to
make
sure
that,
if
you're
reducing
parking
that
you
have
access
to
really
reliable
and
affordable
mass
transit
that
works
on
a
schedule
that
reflects
the
works,
the
work
working
hours
of
people
are
going
to
live
in
the
project
so
in
in
in
that
part
of
the
neighborhood
so
evening
evening,
hours,
late,
late,
late,
third
shift
schedules
for
transit
is
really
important
and
you
know
I
really
feel
as
well
that
it's
really
frustrating
here
and
austin
brighton
have
built.
E
Seven
thousand
are
in
the
process
of
planning
or
permitting
or
building
seven
thousand
units
of
high
of
new
housing
in
the
last
ten
years,
and
so
often
we
talk
about
the
affordable,
it's
affordable
and
and
it's
the
idp
policy
of
13
is
what
the
most
of
what
we've
been
getting
is
13
and
that
has
been
pegged
at
70
percent
of
the
area
median
income,
while
in
allston
brighton
the
area
median,
the
median
income
in
alston,
is
45
to
50
of
the
ami
and
then
brightness
slightly
higher.
E
So
really
what
we're
building
is,
you
know
essentially
totally
unaffordable
for
the
folks
who
actually
live
here.
So
I'm
really
aggressively
about
mixed
income.
Developments
is
sort
of
critical
and
having
a
much
higher
proportion
of
deeply
affordable
middle
income.
E
Housing
alongside
market
rate
is,
is
has
to
be
the
way
to
go,
because
you
know
we're
incrementally
building
deeply
affordable
housing
on
the
on
the
very
little
available
land
that
we
have
left
out
here
and
then
the
the
rest
of
it
is
sort
of
you
know,
get
in
the
ring
and
fight
it
out
with
developers
to
see
if
you
can
get
them
to
17
of
the
of
an
idp
and
and
then
and
then
maybe
haggle
with
them
to
get
a
few
units
at
50
percent
of
the
ami
and
they
offset
that
with
going
going
into
workforce
housing
which
is
120
to
150
of
the
area
median
income.
E
So
it's
really,
you
know
like
scratching
around
and
fighting
for
breadcrumbs
when
we
really
need
a
much
more
aggressive
approach
to
mixed
income
development,
a
higher
proportion
of
deeply
affordable
and
higher
proportion
of
middle
income,
and
then
the
and
then
the
market
we
had
peace.
On
top
of
that,
that's
the
icing
on
the
kick-
and
I
know
you
know
I.
I
feel
that
that
is
a
recession-proof
approach
to
housing.
You
know
we.
We
have
hundreds
of
units
of
luxury,
housing
and
austin
brighton
laying
empty
right
now
because
of
this
recession.
E
If
we
had
a
more
inclusive
approach
to
truly
mixed
income
development,
then
we
would
not
have
we
would
have.
We
would
be
housing
and
mindfulness
about
the
sort
of
people
that
were
housing
like
housing,
for
families,
housing
for
artists,
housing
for
retirees
in
the
same
community
and
right
now
we're
sort
of
segregating
people
out
from
deeply
affordable
housing
for
really
low
income
elders.
E
We
have
housing
for
young
professionals,
we
need
to
start
to
start
integrating
it
and
and
building
a
a
living,
dynamic,
sustainable
community
of
intergenerational
people
living
in
living
together.
I
I
maybe
I'm.
No.
I
don't
know
what
I'm
talking,
maybe
I'm
being
a
total
idealist
about
this,
but
I
really
think
we
have
to
really
aggressively
think
about
mixed
income.
Housing.
E
A
deeply
affordable
is
essential,
but
we
have
to
really
find
a
way
to
get
to
developing
projects
that
are
mixed
income
that
are
sustainable,
resilient
and
equitable
going
forward
and
that's
more
of
a
statement
than
a
question.
But
I
don't
I'd
love
to
know.
Are
there?
E
Are
there
examples
of
that
sort
of
a
project
that
have
succeeded,
like
I
hear
people
talking
about
tent
city
in
the
south
end
that
that
was
a
project
in
the
in
the
past
that
worked.
Maybe
we
need
to
go
back
to
that
model,
but
I'd
love
to
hear
from
you
folks
about
what
you've
seen
work
and
what
doesn't
and
what
what
am
I
am
I
out
of
talk
am
I
am
I
totally
obsessed
and
thinking
that
might
not
work.
H
I
I
think
I'll
jump
in
here,
counselor
brayden,
tent
city
was,
is
a
mixed
income
project.
It
was
built
on
public
land.
J
Tim
we're
getting
a
lot
of
feedback
from
you.
I
don't
know
if
there's
another
device
on
or
can
you
try
one
more
time
speaking.
J
H
So
I'll
make
it
brief,
then,
because
of
the
ringing,
the
intensity
isn't,
is
a
successful
mixed
income
project.
H
I
think
the
versions
of
that
that
we're
doing
today
are
examples
such
as
the
work
that
is
being
done
at
the
margaret
mildred
haley
apartments
that
are
being
done
at
amory
street
that
involve
you
know
those
are
partnerships
between
the
bha
community
builders,
urban
edge
and
jpmbc,
and
they
are
really
committed
to
doing
truly
mixed
income
projects,
and
those
are
the
examples
that
we're
doing
today
and
again,
it's
been
it's
being
built
on
publicly
owned
land
in
terms
of
encouraging
private
market
projects.
To
do
that,
we
are
hopeful
for
that.
H
We
also
are
hopeful
that
they
knew
as
the
implementation
of
the
new
affirmatively
furthering
fair
housing.
Zoning
process
rolls
out.
That
will
be
a
way
to
encourage
more
private
market
developers
to
include
a
broader
range
of
incomes,
both
for
very
low
low,
moderate
income
and
even
middle
income
units
within
you
know
the
projects
that
also
have
market
rate
units.
So
that's
what
we're
hopeful
for
that.
I
know
there's
anyone
else
from
our
team
would
like
to
respond.
L
So
I
would
just
add,
on
the
on
the
the
good
examples,
the
stuff
going
on
newbie
and
square
as
well,
which
is
also
publicly
owned
land.
I
think
that
is
a
big
factor
in
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
that
discussion,
but
the
nubian
square.
There
was
several
parcels
put
out
that
are
a
third
or
third
or
third,
so
a
third
deeply,
affordable,
third,
affordable
and
then
a
third
market.
So
I
think,
as
we
work
through
this,
I
think
you
know
we've.
L
You
know
we
try
to
take
the
the
kind
of
as
we
learn
and
implement
that
in
you
know
the
public
disposition.
When,
when
we're
doing,
we
have
full
control
on
the
broader
idp
policy
and
and
and
that
I
I
would
kind
of
defer
to
you-
know,
dnd
and
or
michelle
to
kind
of
weigh
in
on
the
amis
and
how
we
view
that
relative
to
kind
of
workforce,
housing
and
and
deeply
affordable
and
kind
of
how
we
work
through
all
that.
H
So
I
mean,
in
terms
of
the
amis,
are
set
through
the
inclusion
and
development
policy
for
those
units,
and
I
think
that
there
will
be
certainly
some
review
of
that
in
the
next
year,
as
we
hope
to
kind
of
work
towards
whether-
and
this
is
really
bpda's
mission
will
have
to
be.
You
know,
lead
the
process
in
terms
of
how
and
where
to
put
idp
into
the
zoning,
and
then
there
could
be
a
rethink
about
imis
in
concert
with
the
new
administration.
E
I
think
as
well,
you
know
and
exploring
ways
in
which
we
can
do
private
and
non-profit
development
partnering
with
private
developers
to
and
and
make
really
make
the
concept
of
a
density
bonus
work
in
the
sense
that
I
think
we're
getting
a
lot
of
added
density
out
here
and
we're
not
getting
any
bone,
we're
not
getting
any
any
benefit
for
for
in
terms
of
affordable,
more
affordable
housing.
E
So
I
think
you
know
I'm
hoping
that
with
this
new
administration,
we'll
see
some
new
initiatives
and
more
money
to
really
help
explore
new
new
territory
and
develop
new
new
models
for
how
and
maybe
dust
off
some
of
the
old
models
so
that
we
can
really
get
to
a
place
where
we're
consistently
building
mixed
income.
E
Housing
at
that
that
will
house
more
more
of
our
more
of
our
population
and
then
and
then
the
premium
on
on
on
luxury
development,
like
I
think
we
almost
night
like
take
a
pause
on
on
all
this
luxury
stuff
and
start
building
housing
for
for
for
for
the
people
who
really
need
it
like.
We
have
a
seventeen
thousand
waiting
list
for
in
and
cdc
in
boston,
brighton.
E
For
for
affordable
housing
and
it's
just
what
we're
doing
it,
I
know
you
folks
are
working
really
hard
and
I
really
appreciate
that
and
you
do
innovating
in
ways
that
no
other
municipality
in
the
country
is
doing,
but
I
still
think
we
have
a
ways
to
go
before
we
get
there
anyway.
These
are
all
more
statements
and
questions.
I
thank
you
so
much
for
your
work
and
I
I'll
continue
to
listen
to
the
conversation.
Thank
you.
M
You,
madam
chair,
and
I'm
unfortunately
not
in
a
place
where
I
can
like
fully
engage
in
question
and
dialogue
for
this
hearing,
but
I
have
been
listening
and
will
follow
up
just
via
email
with
some
questions
for
the
panel.
I
am
grateful
for
my
colleagues
questions
today.
It's
been
a
very
thoughtful
and
engaging.
I
love
the
idea
that
came
up
with
tim
and
counselor
o'malley
around.
M
J
G
G
Many
of
my
questions
were
asked
and
answered
by
my
colleagues
and
you
know
fully
support
the
cutting
of
red
tape
and
bureaucracy
and
streamlining
processes
in
order
to
be
able
to
build
more
affordable
housing,
but
also
to
council
braden's
point
which
continues
to
also
come
up
in
every
conversation,
just
being
intentional,
of
course,
on
what
we're
building
as
we're
building
more
affordable
housing,
how
we
building
more
more
units,
not
just
rental
but
home
ownership
opportunities
for
families.
You
know
two
bedrooms:
three
bedrooms,
four
bedrooms,
single
family
homes,
etc.
G
Critically
important
comes
up
all
the
time:
intergenerational
housing,
the
same
thing
there's
a
great
project.
Of
course.
In
roxbury,
we've
been
trying
to
activate
city-owned
vacant
lots
for
intergenerational
housing
project
with
that
same
developer,
who
actually
happens
to
be
a
person
of
color,
and
so
there
are
a
lot
of
folks
in
my
current
district
dorchester
matapan.
G
But
I
also
know
in
other
neighborhoods
in
the
city
that
are
looking
to
downsize,
but
not
go
into
assisted
living
right.
G
They
want
to
move
right
in
their
neighborhood
stay
in
their
neighborhood,
but
be
in
a
place
where
they
can
interact
with
folks
who
are
of
a
different
demographic,
which
is
a
you
know,
create
more
community,
and
so
I
think
the
energy
intergenerational
housing
is
a
great
opportunity
to
think
about
how
we
expand
that
and
be
more
intentional
on
projects
of
playing
a
role
there,
because
then
it
frees
up
these
seniors
homes
and
through
some
creative
planning
and
ideas.
G
We
can
make
sure
that
they
go
to
folks
who
want
to
stay
in
the
city
who
maybe
are
in
public
housing
or
in
a
current
rental,
but
need
a
home.
So
there's
been
some
creative
things.
I
think
communities
done
to
connect
some
of
these
senior
homes
where
seniors
are
moving
out
to
folks
who
are
in
need
and
when
I
say,
creative
setting,
setting
a
pricing
point
that
is
affordable
frankly
for
folks
in
the
community,
so
just
just
lifting
some
of
those
up.
G
Based
on
what
my
colleague
said,
I
maybe
this
isn't
really
the
right
hearing,
but
I
do
think,
as
we
talk
about
processes
and
doing
better
with
process,
I've
been
thinking
about
this
quite
a
bit
on
the
once
the
affordable
housing
units
are
built
once
we
actually
have
affordable
projects
on
the
market
and
where
we
all
agree,
they
are
indeed
affordable
and
at
pricing
points
that
people
can
afford,
and
they
are
new
how
long
it
takes
to
get
people
into
those
units.
G
You
know
I
had
a
developer,
who
lives
in
the
city
who
prioritizes,
I
think,
maybe
all
of
what
he
does
is
affordable.
Just
continue
to
be
frustrated
on
how
long
it
can
take
for
through
the
lottery
processes,
et
cetera,
to
get
folks
into
those
units
and
in
some
instances
it
can
take
years
right
where
these
units
are
sitting
vacant.
G
When
we
know
that
there
are
folks
in
need-
and
so
what
you
know,
I
know
there's
been
some
work
done
to
to
streamline
processes
and-
and
you
know
all
of
you
have
been
doing
great
work-
I
mean
mike-
we
talked
quite
a
bit
right,
so
it's
but
it's
I.
I
think
that
is
another
critical
piece
to
this
conversation
too.
How
we
streamline
processes,
cut
red
tape
to
get
folks
into
those
affordable
units
once
they
are
built
quickly.
G
We
shouldn't
have
units
that
are
affordable
sitting
vacant
for
two
years
and
in
one
particular
example,
it
was
almost
two
years
which
is
just
astounding,
and
so
I'm
I'm
adding
that
to
this
conversation,
because
I
think
that
is
critically
important
too.
We
can
build
it
quickly
quickly,
but
if
we
don't
get
our
folks
into
the
housing
units,
that's
a
problem,
so
I
don't
necessarily
have
any
questions.
I
guess
it's
more
comments
and
appreciate
the
work
you
guys
are
doing
mike.
G
Congratulations
on
the
baby
and
just
appreciate
everything
you
guys
are
doing
and
we'll
stay
in
contact
with
the
makers
on
this,
but
also
on
the
other
pieces
around
getting
folks
actually
into
the
units,
and
I
know
there's
a
hearing
later
today
on
idp,
so
looking
forward
to
that
as
well.
Thank
you
all.
Thank
you.
Councilwoo.
J
Thank
you,
okay
and
then
next
up
is
councillor
edwards.
N
Thank
you
very
much.
I
heard
baby
so
again.
Congratulations,
I
think
it's
wonderful.
I
would
encourage
you
to
bring
said
baby
on
screen
and
when
you
can,
I
think
it
helps
you
you'll
note
that
it
definitely
changes
the
mood
tone
and
everything.
That's.
N
You
pulled
the
baby
off
his
defenseman,
so
I
I
kind
of
wanted
to
make
sure
I
I
kind
of
put
in
some
buckets
my
questions
and
thoughts
about
this
first.
The
first
one
is,
I
think,
if
we're
working
for
this
from
the
understanding
that
housing
is
a
public
good
right
and
a
public
necessity
right,
then
I
think
that
we
should
think
about
it
in
three
three
ways
and
using
our
zoning
in
which
we
have
right
for
for
civil
rights
and
for
probably
furthering
for
housing.
N
Marrying
the
two
we've
used
zoning
to
get
and
advance
other
initiatives
or
moral,
moral,
moral
points
or
more
moralities
of
the
city
that
we
have
adopted.
N
So
the
other
point
is,
I
completely
agree
with
being
able
that
an
increase
in
affordability
should
also
result
in
a
decrease
in
red
tape,
and
that
it
should
be
that
perfect
kind
of
balance
that
we're
finding
and
it
should
be
a
clear
policy
that
is
citywide
because
we're
doing
it
technically
each
project
by
project.
We
come
to
the
table
and
try
to
leverage
and
get
more
out
of
the
developer,
but
I
think
what
this
would
do,
or
if
zoning
women
or
some
sort
of
a
policy
would
make
it
almost
by
city-wide.
N
This
is
this
is
the
guarantee.
So
I
do
support
that.
I
think
there's
a
couple
areas
where
I'd
like
to
see
how
this
could
be
beyond
or
how
this
could
be
interpreted
in
terms
of
ownership
versus
rental
and
I'm
curious,
and
maybe
we
could
talk
about
how
we
leverage
and
get
more
affordable
housing
for
folks
to
own
and
also
decrease
red
tape
in
that
process.
N
That's
one
and
then-
and
maybe
that
could
be
just
simply-
when
developers
come
through
and
they're
going
to
do
a
bunch
of
condos,
they
have
decreased
red
tape
and
decreased
zoning
requirements
because
they're
going
to
be
overwhelmingly
affordable.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
part
of
our
conversation
is
about
ownership,
not
just
rental.
I
think
this
is
a
problem.
N
I
wanted
to
also
note
that
I
think
with
key
in
this
policy
analysis
is
how
the
city
starts,
because
what
I
found
that
the
city
is
able
to
do
is
when
the
city
owns
the
land.
You
can
leverage
the
most
right
in
terms
of
affordability.
You
brought
up
one
charlestown
or
the
bunker
hill
housing
development
you
brought
up.
I
mean
you
could
talk
about
dudley.
N
I
think
in
that
area,
on
some
of
the
lots
we
got
a
third
or
third
or
third,
so
when
opportunities
strike
or
come
up
for
the
city
to
own,
why
aren't
we
purchasing
more
so
that
we
could
turn
around
and
leverage
this?
N
For
example,
loftel
in
east
boston
yeah
is
up
for
auction,
apparently
on
the
14th,
and
that
is
we
talked
about
this
in
the
hearing
on
high
end,
like
actually
that
counselor
campbell
and
councillor
o'malley
put
on
and
now
that
same
mess
is
up
for
auction,
and
I
would
I
mean
it's
starting
at
150
000
in
case
anyone
is
curious
and
with
mortgage
bids
we
do,
but
it's
a
huge
building
that
is
empty,
and
that
is
I'm
wondering.
N
Why
isn't
the
city
able
to
come
in
and
purchase,
or
at
least
start
to
compete
to
purchase
buildings
so
that
we
could
turn
around
and
do
exactly
what
we
want
here?
Why
I
mean
I
know
that
we
as
the
bpd,
we
are
managing
city,
owned,
lots
and
and
leveraging
and
getting
certain
things
and
developing
what
the
city
already
had.
But
why
aren't
we
in
the
business
of
acquiring
more
so
that
we
can
do
that?
And
finally,
yes
for
everyone's
comments
about
idp
policy.
N
We're
having
that
hearing
today
today,
where
we're
going
to
be
discussing
increasing
the
percentage
and
we're
going
to
be
discussing
its
applicable
applicability
to
you,
know,
units
or
buildings,
less
than
10
units.
We're
going
to
be
discussing
all
the
things
about
idp.
So
so
those
are
my
kind
of
comments
and
questions
again,
supporting
completely
a
city-wide
policy,
about
an
increase
in
affordability,
resulting
in
a
decrease
in
red
tape,
or
you
know,
requiring
zoning
variances
and
then
the
rental
versus
ownership.
N
How
we're
going
to
make
sure
that
they're
part
of
this
conversation,
and
then
I
saw
mike
you're
ready
to
answer
about
why
we
aren't
purchasing
up
more
things,
to
make
sure
that
we
aren't
getting
and
leveraging
the
power
of
the
purse
of
the
city
to
also
to
also
leverage
that
together
when
it's
developed,
get
more
affordable
units.
L
Yeah
I
mean
I
can
touch
just
I,
and
our
dnd
can
probably
weigh
in
on
there,
and
I
know
that
this
is
definitely
something
that
has
has
come
up
in
our
conversations
relative
to
trying
to
get
at
the
heart
of
some
of
the
affordability
issues,
obviously
land
being
a
premium
and
and
that
presenting
its
own
challenges
relative
to
kind
of
being
able
to
what
is
our
purchase
power?
I
think
we
have.
You
know,
I
think
it's
I
would
defer
to
kind.
I
don't
hate
to
defer,
but
I
it's
a
broader
question.
L
That
is
a
good
question.
That
is
not
a
newer
question.
Obviously
we
have
the
history
of
urban
renewal
and
I
know
there
I
mean
there
was
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
negative
history
associated
with
it,
but
there
was
also
a
lot
of
positive
history
relative
to
what
we
were
able
to
do
with
land
we
acquired.
L
You
know
when
that
all
happened.
There
was
federal
money
that
came
with
that.
So
we
had
the
ability
to
really
have
purchasing
power.
You
know,
I
think
now
it's
more
or
less
kind
of
understanding
kind
of
where
we're
at
on
our
balance
sheet
and
what
we
have
the
ability
to
kind
of
go
out
and
pursue
and
where
the
opportunities
are-
and
I
think
you
know
I
would-
I
would
have
to
circle
back
with
you
on
that.
L
But
it's
definitely
something
that
has
been
talked
about
and-
and
you
know
as
of
late
of,
is
this
potentially
something
that
we
could
look
at
doing.
N
My
great
in
terms
of
the
afford
100,
affordable
units
on
city,
land,
bunker,
hill
lots,
for
example.
I
understand
that
that's
going
to
be
a
potential
development
that
is
owned
by
the
city
council
braden
brought
up
that
she
really
believes
in
mixed
income.
I
do
too
as
well
and
I'm
hoping
again,
maybe
that's
an
example
of
where
we
can
integrate
ownership
right,
affordable
units,
because,
if
you're
going
to
make
it
100
affordability,
I'm
concerned
about
concentrations
of
poverty.
N
Generally
and
honestly,
I
do
believe
in
mixed
income
and
I
do
believe
in
ownership.
So
I'm
wondering
if
the
city
could
come
up
with
a
plan
for
any
part
that
for
at
least
charlestown
or
that
particular
lot
that
there's
a
hundred
percent.
If
it's
going
to
be
100
it'll
be
ownership
as
well,
because
it's
city,
it's
city-owned
property.
I
think
yeah.
L
We
see,
I
mean
we
we're
going
to
continue
to
work
through
the
the
plan
charlestown,
but
we
see
one
bunk.
We
see
the
bunker
hill
lots
as
a
huge
opportunity
to
do
creative
housing
relative
to
you
know
getting
at
some
of
the
the
stuff
that
the
private
market
can't
do
so.
You
know
we're
not
there
yet,
but
we,
we
know
we'll
be
working
closely
with
you
and
the
community
relative
to
kind
of
figuring
out
what
is
the
right
fit
there,
and
your
comment
has
heard
about
the
the
homeownership.
K
Oh-
and
I
I
do
just
want
to
throw
in
that-
you
know
on
the
city-owned
parcels
in
nubian
square,
there
is
a
mix
of
rental
and
home
ownership.
Your
point
is
very
well
taken
and
it's,
it
is
the
the
four
d
and
d
owned
parcels
have
a
large
amount
of
rental
housing,
but
three
of
the
projects
have
have
significant
home
ownership,
including
about
one
parcel
that
is
100
home
ownership.
K
So
we
did
open
up
for
a
mix
of
that
and-
and
I
I
don't
think,
there's
there's
certainly
no
reason
on
dnd's
part
why
we
would
prior
to
community
process
and
to
really
understanding
a
site.
You
know
sort
of
from
an
absolute
value
values,
not
value
of
the
land
but
value
for
types
of
housing.
K
We
always
go
into
a
community
process
around
this
piece
of
dnd
owned
property
interested
in
in
the
neighborhoods
feeling
about
need
for
rental
versus
home
ownership
and
and
open
to
to
either
or
so
I
think
it's
a
really
great
point
to
be
looking
at
some
of
these
really
large
parcels,
and
I
think
we
can
build
on
some
of
what
we've
done
in
nubian
square.
K
In
terms
of
doing
a
mix
of
of
rental
and
home
ownership-
and
I
I
also
I
do
want
to
add
on
the
acquisition
side-
I'm
I'm
glad
that
mike
talked
to
bpda
acquisition,
capacity
and
thoughts.
But,
as
you
know,
well,
counselor
edwards
we
have
had
you
know
we
have.
We
have
an
acquisition
program
out
of
dnd
for
that's
been
primarily
focused
on
rental
units.
K
We
are
having
some
internal
conversations
about
how
we
can,
I
think,
about
home
ownership
through
that
program,
because
it's
just
structured
financially
better
right
now
for
for
rental,
but
but
but
we
know
that
there's
an
interest
in
doing
both.
We
also
have
city
funds
in
an
acquisition
program,
that's
administered
by
cdac,
which
is
a
quasi
public
agency.
K
They
leverage
the
city
investment
with
private
capital
so
that
it's
a
larger
fund
but
those
funds,
it's
officially
called
a
vacant
land
acquisition
fund,
but
the
but
they're
we
can
use
those
funds
for
buildings
that
are
not
currently
housing
that
so
so
a
building
like
the
one
you're
talking
about
where
the
use
might
be
changed.
Nonprofits
have
been
able
to
use
those
for
acquisitions.
K
So
that's
been
a
nice
partner
to
our
acquisition
opportunity
program,
all
that
to
say
that
dnd
is
very
interested
in
and
has
really
prioritized
our
ability
to
participate
in
acquisitions
as
a
funder.
To
you
know
to
a
third
party
who
will
privately
own
and
and
manage
that
affordable
housing
in
you
know,
in
exchange
for
an
income
restriction
and
agreements
about
affordability
and
all
that,
but
that,
but
that
we
really
we.
We
share
your
concerns
and
recognize
that
you
know.
K
No
one
has
has
contacted
me
about
this
particular
property
to
date,
but
as
soon
as
we
finish,
this
hearing
I'll
tell
you
the
legal
notice
that.
N
Yeah,
that
would
be
great.
That
would
be
great
I'd
love
to
look
into
it.
More
auction
is
april
14th.
The
last
thing
I
wanted
to
say
is,
I
think,
we're
another
area
where
I
would
love
for
the,
and
we
discussed
this,
I
think
in
other
meetings,
but
I
wanted
to
say
this
out
for
this
moment
as
well,
where
creative
housing
is
getting
ahead
of
our
zoning
and
then
we
question
whether
our
idp
policies
and
housing
policies
apply,
for
example,
when
it
comes
to
floating
houses
right.
N
I
think
that
I
would
really
like
to
see
dnd
and
bpda
get
so
far
ahead,
so
that
it's
very
clear
in
a
blanket
statement,
residential
use
in
housing
building
over
whatever
amount
of
units
in
whether
it's
floating-
I
don't
know
if
it's
the
gondola,
whatever
we're
going
to
do
like
the
the
trucks
that
they're
you
know,
the
whatever
creative
form
of
it
idp
needs
to
apply
after
a
certain
square
footage,
and
that
that
I
think
we.
N
So
so
I
would
like
for-
and
I
brought
this
up
before
with
rich,
because
we
were
talking
about
waterfront,
but
I'm
bringing
it
up
now.
Can
we
just
go
ahead
and
commit
to
a
like
idp
should
apply
to
all
residential
at
certain
points
you
know
certain
heights
or
certain
square
footage
period
and
linkage
period,
but
I
mean
since
we're
talking
about
residential,
because
you
know
their
plans
are
put
out,
they're
they're
beautiful
plans,
and
then
they
you
know
they're,
like
I
don't
know.
N
If
affordable
housing
applies
to
us,
it
absolutely
should-
and
I
just
would
like
for
those
regulations
to
be
very
clear
up
front
as
well.
Sorry,
counselor
will.
I
know
it
took
a
little
longer
than
than
my
other
colleagues.
J
Thank
you
so
much.
Anyone
else
have
final
comments
to
what
counselor
edwards
was
saying
from
the
administration,
good.
Okay,
I
I
have
one
question
and
then
all
I
know
some
colleagues
have
a
second
round
and
then
you
want
to
get
jessie
in
on
the
conversation
as
well:
jesse,
canson
ben
enough.
J
Okay.
So
let's
see
I
you
know,
I
just
wanted
to
understand
some
of
the
learnings
from
the
initiatives
over
the
planning
initiatives
over
the
last
couple
years.
I
know,
for
example,
there's
been
some
work
into
density
bonuses
or
thinking
about
plan.
jp
rocks.
What
are
some
of
the
takeaways
from
you
know
related
to
focusing
on
the
topic
that
we're
talking
about
today.
J
What
are
some
of
the
takeaways
coming
out
of
those
two
planning
initiatives
or
pilots,
and
you
know,
are
those
basically
considered
finalized
with
what
they
are,
or
will
they
end
up
being
codified,
more
into
zoning
or
or
what
more,
in
these
two
particular
cases
and
what
can
be
generalized
from
them?.
L
So
I
think
you
know
by
and
large
they're,
so
as
far
we're
still
we've
not
made
the
decision
to
bring
them
both
to
zoning.
They
were
kind
of
two
different
variations
of
of
planning
relative
to
kind
of
how
we
one
was
ben.
So
this
plant.
L
Was
based
off
of
a
density
bonus
that
really
unlocked
some
significant
height
and
density
that
wasn't
able
to
unlock,
affordable
housing,
but
also
public
realm,
affordable
commercial
space,
whereas
in
jp
rocks
there
was
a
bigger
conversation
around
you
know,
neighborhood
preservation
and
a
part
of
that
is
due
to
plant.
South
boston
was
a
light
industrial
corridor,
whereas
jp
rocks
has
a
whole
different.
You
know:
has
a
bunch
of
different
areas
touches
relative
to
industrial
relative
to
kind
of
existing
neighborhood
fabric,
so
I
think
you
know
there.
L
I
think
that
planning
is
very
difficult
and
to
get
to
consensus
is
very
difficult
and
and
trying
to
balance
everything
in
order
to
make
a
plan
that
works
and
that
actually
unlocks
development
is
is
one
of
the
bigger
challenges
and
that's
kind
of
why
we
haven't
moved
on.
The
zoning
is
because
we're
still
kind
of
evaluating
that,
because
we've
seen
some,
you
know
we're
seeing
some
traces
of
of
development
in
both
corridors.
It's
not
you
know
it's
not
a
waterfall
in
the
sense
of
kind
of
unlocking.
L
These
things
do
take
time,
but
they're.
So
I
think
it's
it
really.
The
big
high
level
things
I
would
say
is
that
that
this
is
difficult
and
the
balancing
of
what
you
know
the
community
and
the
activists
want
versus
kind
of
what
can
be
built
is
always
a
is
always
the
challenge,
and
I
think
we're
always
trying
to
work
to
get
to
that
point,
and
both
of
those
in
in
both
those
instances
present
those
kind
of
two
areas
that
we're
continuing
to
work
through.
J
Do
you
I
mean
I'm
just
curious
because
it
feels
like
it
was
multiple
years
of
meetings
and
process
and
we're
still
sort
of
working
through
it
at
this
stage?
Is
it
something
that
you
would
recommend
or
think
about
in
other
places
across
the
city,
or
you
know,
even
just
with
two
corridors?
It's
just
been
a
lot
of
residential
energy
as
well
with
all
the
community
groups
and
just
to
kind
of
see
another
set
of
of
guide.
I
Well,
just
to
just
to
mention
one
quick
thing
on
that
and
that's
that,
with
the
change
to
the
enabling
legislation,
it
puts
another
tool
in
the
toolbox,
namely
you
know
being
able
to
have
actual
inclusionary
zoning
itself,
and
so
it
it
may
it
may
change
how
we
use
things
like
density
bonuses
rather
than
have
to
have
that
sort
of
carrot.
We
can
build
it,
build
it
directly
in
and
that's
you
know,
that's
something
that
I
think
we're
we're
thinking
about.
I
You
know
all
day
every
day
as
we're
looking
at
these
planning
initiatives
going
going
on,
so
it
it.
It
changes
slightly
that
you
know
our
our
approach,
but
density
bonus
is
still
still,
I
think,
a
viable
tool
in
some.
In
some
cases,.
L
Yeah-
and
I
just
you
know
the
the
the
the
guidelines
that
were
passed,
both
the
jp
rocks
and
plant
south
boston
are
the
guidelines
that
the
development
the
developers
are
following
when
they
come
in
now
them
not
being
to
your
point.
I'm
not
being
kind
of
in
zoning
does
a
lot
of
flexibility.
L
I
think
sometimes
flexibility
in
rn
can
can
help
with
progress
relative
to
certain
initiatives.
I
think
we've
kept
an
open
mind
to
that,
but
just
to
be
you
know
those
those
are
strategic
corridor
planning
studies
and,
as
you
know,
as
you're
aware
we're
doing
planning
in
matapan
in
east
boston
kind
of
full
neighborhood
planning
scales,
whereas
these
were
kind
of
focused
on
nodes
that
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
development.
L
So
you
know,
I
think,
as
we
continue
to
look
at
planning,
we
we're
always
kind
of
looking
at
how
it
can
evolve,
how
we
can
look
at
it
differently.
Ultimately,
our
end
goal
is
always
to
get
to
zoning,
but
trying
to
get
to
that
consensus
to
be
able
to
move
to
zoning
is
always
a
challenge.
O
J
I
may
have
taken
myself
off
by
accident.
Okay,
just
wanted
to
make
sure.
Thank
you,
okay!
Thank
you.
Everyone
I'm
seeing
interest
in
second
round
from
a
lot
of
counselors,
so
I
in
in
consultation
with
our
co-sponsors
here,
let's
bring
jesse
into
the
conversation
to
make
a
statement,
and
then
we
can
go
to
second
round
and
incorporate
jessie
into
that
as
well.
J
E
J
E
A
couple
of
things,
one
thing
we're
we're
bumping
into.
E
That
harvard
is
a
significant
landowner
and
they
are
ground
leasing,
large
pieces
of
their
holdings
to
developers
and
when
we
talk
to
developers
about
the
potential
for
home
ownership,
which
is
a
big
priority
here
in
olson
brighton
in
austin,
the
homeownership
is,
is
around
nine
percent
and
brightness
about
21.
E
we're
very,
very
low
in
terms
of
home
ownership,
but
the
the
developers
turn
around
and
say:
well,
we
we
have
a
ground
lease
from
harvard
or
we
have
a
grand
lease
from
the
catholic
church.
So
we
cannot
do
homeownership,
and
I
know
it
may
be
more
difficult
to
do
homeownership,
but
I
don't
think
that
should
be
an
impediment,
and
so
that's
something.
I
think
we
need
to
dig
deeper
into
as
we
as
we
go
further
into
these
conversations.
E
So
I
really
feel
we
need
to
do
a
little
forensic
investigation
into
what
exactly
the
problem
is,
but
I'm
also
hearing
from
folks
who
worked
in
the
nonprofit
sector,
who
are
landlords
and
also
from
professionals
who
work
in
the
real
estate
industry,
that
the
the
red
tape
around
this
processing,
a
section
8
applicant,
is,
is
onerous
and
is
discouraging
and
frustrating
and
that
it
means
that
they
have
units
available
as
well,
that
that
they
have
units
that
they're
they
would
like
to
lease
or
that
the
section
8
processes
is
is
cumbersome,
fraught
with
red
tape.
E
Can
we
dispense
with
in
those
contexts,
and
one
issue
might
be
with
regard
to
inspectional
inspection
of
units
before
a
tenant
moves
in
make
sure
that's
done
in
a
timely
manner,
but
there
should
really
be
no
way
that
we
are
fighting
for
idp
units
and
and
they're
sitting
vacant
for
two
years
like
that
is
just
crazy.
E
We
fight
law
really
hard
to
get
those
units
and
those
folks
who
really
desperately
need
to
have
them,
so
we
need
to
make
sure
we
get
away
make
sure
that
we
can
find
some
solutions
to
that
problem
and
those
are
really
the
two
points
I
wanted
to
make
about
how
leaseholding
in
the
city
and
and
also
trying
to
scout
and
and
improve
the
section
yet
process
and
id
and
and
the
delivery
of
idp
units
to
the
folks
who
really
need
them.
Thank
you.
K
I
just
I
just
want
to
say
really
heard,
and
you
know
I
think
sometimes
our
challenge
in
the
city
is
that
there
are
different
people,
you
know
have
vouchers
from
different
places,
and
sometimes
that
makes
it
you
know
difficult
to
track,
but
all
I
can
say
is
of
course,
if
you
ever
have
hear
from
someone
directly
who's
having
trouble
that
you
know
that
they
should
always
reach
out
to
reach
out
to
us
to
see.
If
we
can
support
it
doesn't
solve
the
more
macro
problem
that
I
know
that
you're
talking
about
that.
K
O
Yeah,
thank
you
counselor
wu
and
members
of
the
council,
and
you
know
I
want
to
say
also
again
thank
you
to
councillors,
o'malley
and
bach
for
getting
this
conversation
started
in
boston
yeah.
I
have
been
very
interested
and
and
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
participate.
I
didn't
realize
I
am
perhaps
the
only
member
of
the
public
speaking
today,
so
perhaps
it
affords
me
a
little
bit
more
authority
than
I'm
worthy
of,
but
I
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
so
I'm
mostly
responding
to
the
document.
O
I
know
there's
been
a
lot
of
great
comments
from
counselors
in
the
administration.
So
far,
I'm
mostly
responding
to
the
document
that
followed
up
from
the
hearing
last
year,
looking
at
different
ways
that
other
communities
are
are
doing
this.
O
I
was
able
to
jump
on
this
needs
to
be
a
citywide
conversation
which
it
is
I'm
and
I'm
grateful
for
that
to
make
sure
we
have
affordable
homes
that
can
be
built
in
every
neighborhood.
In
terms
of
the
document
that
was
provided
and
and
the
models
from
other
cities,
I
think
it's
a
great
menu
of
options.
I
think
it's
critical.
O
Well,
let
me
just
step
back
for
those
who
don't
know.
My
name
is
jesse
canton,
benin.
I
am
the
incoming
executive
director
of
abundant
housing
massachusetts
and
I
spent
a
number
of
many
years
working
in
affordable
housing
development,
both
in
boston
and
in
the
boston
suburbs,
presently
at
the
neighborhood
housing
in
brighton.
So
I
bring
both
the
knowledge
of
an
affordable
housing
developer
and
an
advocate
to
this
conversation.
O
So
as
I
was
starting
to
say,
you
know,
I
think
it's
important
to
look
at
both
the
underlying
zoning
and
the
process
of
creating
affordable
housing,
because
I
think
both
the
zoning,
which
regulates
what
and
and
how
things
can
be
built
as
well
as
the
process
for
getting
them
built,
are
both
what
make
the
creation
of
affordable
homes
in
the
city
of
boston
difficult
at
times,
and
not
just
boston
in
many
communities.
O
O
Looking
at
austin
in
particular,
you
know
I
I
would
say
that
for
a
hundred
percent
affordable
developments,
although
I
know
there's
a
parallel
conversation
around
concentration
of
poverty
and
mixed
income,
which
I
am
strongly
in
support
of-
but
you
know
in
in
the
case
of
cdc
development,
100,
affordable
housing
developments
that
meet
whatever
dimensional
requirements
and
affordability,
tiers
of
the
city
sets
as
a
goal
under
such
an
ordinance
like
this,
the
goal
really
should
be
elimination
of
a
cumbersome
public
process.
O
Besides,
perhaps
courtesy
meetings
with
with
neighbors
and
community
groups,
but
as
long
as
a
proposal
is
within
the
confines
of
what
an
ordinance
says,
I
I
really
believe
we
need
to
focus
on
expediting
the
process,
with
a
single
point
of
contact
in
city
hall
to
facilitate
review
from
the
various
departments
and
in
addition
to
that,
eliminate
processing
fees.
Altogether,
you
know,
while
the
permitting
fees
are
not
necessarily
the
biggest
budget.
O
Buster
in
you
know
an
affordable
pro
forma,
you
know,
kids,
cost
of
construction,
and-
and
you
know,
other
elements
of
the
development
process
are
rising.
Construction
costs
in
particular,
are
rising
in
our
region,
so
any
relief
that
the
city
can
give
to
help
keep
that
magic.
Total
development
cost
per
unit
below
that
you
know,
500
000,
limit
essentially
set
by
the
the
department
of
housing
community
development
to
the
state,
I
think,
would
be
critical,
particularly
for
those
like
tech
funded
projects.
O
You
know
one
of
the
main
priorities
on
the
zoning
relief
front
for
affordable
housing.
You
know,
as
we
heard
last
time
from
representatives
counselors
in
cambridge
and
somerville,
where
similar,
affordable
housing
overlays
were
passed,
should
be
to
give
developers
of
affordable
housing
a
competitive
advantage
over
market
rate
developers
in
the
acquisition
of
new
lands
and
sites
for
their
if
they're
their
developments.
O
O
Therein
lies
their
advantage
and
it
will
make
these
affordable
developers
much
more
competitive
on
the
market,
particularly
potentially
in
neighborhoods
that
haven't
seen
as
much
of
the
development
affordable
housing
development,
particularly
so
I
agree
that
the
fact
that
much
of
the
development
in
boston,
the
fact
that
is
done
by
variants-
means
that
a
simpler
bonus
above
base
zoning
as
they
have
set
in
cambridge
and
somerville,
doesn't
at
least
at
this
point,
work
to
give
affordable
housing
developers.
O
This
competitive
advantage
the
benefit,
however,
of
having
a
clear
formula
codified
into
zoning
and
done
by
right.
Although
I
am
not
an
attorney
is
that
it
makes
it
much
more
develop
much
more
difficult
for
a
butters
to
sue
versus
when
it's
done
by
variants
as
we're
currently
facing
the
situation
of
pine
street
in
development
on
washington
street
in
jamaica
plain.
O
However,
I
would
caution
that
we
think
fully
about
the
implications
of
this.
When
I
read
that
that
concept,
what
occurred
to
me
is
that,
while
in
development
boom
times
in
the
city
of
boston
like
in
recent
years,
this
formula
may
result
in
beneficial
higher
density,
affordable
housing
developments,
I
would
hate
to
see
it
result
in
smaller,
affordable
housing
developments
being
built
during
more
lean
years
or
more
recessionary
times
when
the
need
for
affordable
housing
may
be
even
greater.
O
Of
course,
the
need
for
affordable
housing
is
always
great
in
our
city,
so
just
you
know.
Finally,
you
know
in
drafting
this
ordinance.
I
would
encourage
the
council
and
the
administration
to
continue
to
make
sure
to
bring
in
affordable
housing
developers
to
this
conversation
as
well
as
users
of
affordable
and
residents
of
affordable
housing.
O
You
know
in
in
my
I
have
my
experience
in
the
field,
both
as
a
developer
and
housing
advocate,
but,
as
we
all
know,
boston
is
rich
with
local,
affordable
housing
entities
nonprofits
like
cdc's
and
a
number
of
boston-based
national
developers
that
can
speak
to
what
other
cities
may
or
may
not
be
doing.
O
I
know
that
in
somerville
and
cambridge
they
both
worked
closely
with
those
who
produce
the
affordable
housing
to
make
sure
that
the
ordinances
were
set
in
a
way
that
would
actually
result
in
more
units
being
built,
and
so
you
know
I
just
think
that's
important
to
do
I'm.
I
feel
fortunate
to
be
part
of
this
conversation,
and
I
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today
and
I
would
like
to
see
others
in
the
affordable
housing
world,
I'm
also
included,
which
I
know
they
have
been
to
some
degree
already.
O
So
those
are
the
comments
I
have
you
know.
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
if,
if
they
may
be,
if
there
may
be
any
otherwise
I'm
you
know
happy
to
hand
it
back
over
to
counselor
woo.
J
Much
for
your
presentation
well
back
back
to
counselors
for
a
second
round
of
questions
for
any
of
the
panelists,
including
jesse,
and
the
administration
councilor
bach.
B
Great,
thank
you
so
much
counselor
wu
and
thank
you
jesse
for
those
really
helpful
comments.
B
I
I
strongly
agree
with
you
that
you
know
the
objective
here
needs
to
be
that
some,
like
the
thing
is
not
just
that
we
need
to
come
up
with
things
that
are
going
to
save
time
and
money,
but
that
they
need
to
sufficiently
predictably
save
time
and
money
that
a
developer
looks
at
the
opportunity
to
develop,
affordable
housing
at
a
site
and
says:
oh,
I
know
I'm
going
to
achieve
some
of
those
costs
and
time
which
is
really
a
form
of
cost
right
savings,
because
it's
in
many
ways
it's
that
it's
that
decision
to
purchase
the
land
or
that
decision
to
launch
an
affordable
housing
project
that
we're
trying
to
incentivize.
B
And
so
that's
where
you
know
developers
talk
all
the
time
about
predictability.
I
think
you
know
and
that's
in
tension
with
the
community's
just
desire
to
customize
right
and
that's
what
comes
out
through
our
development
review
process.
B
I
just
I
think
that
part
of
the
point
of
an
affordable
housing
overlay
is
to
say
we
have
such
a
strong
public
need
for
affordable
housing,
that
it
is
worth
it
to
us
to
standardize
some
of
these
things
and
remove
some
of
the
opportunities
for
customization
by
the
community
of
the
project
right
in
order
to
and
that's
and
that
should
be
a
high
bar.
B
I
don't
think
that's
something
we
need
to
do
for
everybody
who
wants
to
develop
anything,
but
I
think
when
it
comes
to
affordable
housing,
we
have
such
a
need,
and
you
do
see
projects
get
stretched
out
over
time
and
you
see
people
just
not
propose
projects,
because
they,
it
doesn't
feel
like
a
sure
enough
thing
that
they're
going
to
be
able
to
get
it
through
in
a
way
that's
going
to
add
up
from
a
former
perspective.
So
I
I
strongly
agree
with
you
on
that.
I
did
just
want
to.
B
O
Yeah
so
as
as
I
read
it,
the
suggestion-
and
I
know
it's
just
a
sort
of
a
the
suggestion-
was
that
because
boston
uses
variances
to
a
larger
degree
than
cambridge
or
somerville
using
the
you
know
the
most
local
examples
of
this
type
of
ordinance
that
just
setting
a
simple
threshold
of
density,
bonus
or
whatever
it
may
be
above
base.
Zoning
doesn't
necessarily
work
in
the
city
of
boston.
O
This
is
this
is
what
was
written
in
the
document,
and
so
the
suggestion
was
that
perhaps
the
percentage
and
I'm
just
thinking
through
this
I
mean
I
don't
you
know.
I
think
this
is
you
know
this
is
a
new
idea,
perhaps
that
it
should
be
set
sort
of.
Essentially,
the
density
bonus
for
affordable
housing
should
be
set
as
a
percentage
above
the
density
approved
for
recent
market
rate
developments
in
that
area.
So
you
know
they
didn't
in
the
document.
It
wasn't
written
how
many
years
recent
is.
O
Certainly
if
we
use
let's
say
five
years
right
now
in
the
city
of
boston.
That
would
result
in
a
great
bonus
for
affordable
housing,
given
what
has
been
permitted
over
the
last
five
years
or
so
in
boston
thinking
about
what
happened
immediately
after
you
know
the
last,
not
the
current
recession,
the
last
recession,
where
development
for
a
number
of
years
did
tank
in
the
city
of
boston.
You
know
my
concern
is
just
that.
O
N
O
B
K
B
It's
really
in
many
ways
it's
their
heads
that
we
have
to
get
in
because,
what's
going
to
make
people
actually
you
know,
do
these
projects,
but
the
challenge
we
face
in
boston-
and
I
alluded
to
at
the
top-
is
that
you
know
in
somerville.
B
They've
now
got
this
like
really
simple,
form-based
zoning,
that's
sort
of
like
oh
here
you
can
do
four
stories,
and
here
you
can
do
five,
and
here
you
can
do
six
and
it's
like
very
simple
and
zone
based,
and
so
it's
really
easy
to
say:
oh
plus
one
plus
one
right
at
all
these
different
levels
in
boston.
It's
really
not
like
that,
and
often
we're
seeing
you
know
it's
like
every.
On
the
one
hand,
every
new
development
needs
a
variance.
B
On
the
other
hand,
that
variance
can
bring
relief,
that's
considerably
more
than
like
what
somerville
is
talking
about,
and
so
the
challenge
is
kind
of
like
how
do
you?
How
do
you
think
about
something
across
the
board,
and
so
we
were
trying
to
think
a
little
bit
about.
Is
there
a
way
to
use
parcel
data
and
kind
of
and
kind
of,
have
some
average
number
in
an
area
that
sort
of
lets?
B
You
know
that
you're,
basically
giving
you're
basically
going
to
give
an
all
affordable
project
a
little
bit
of
a
boost,
and
so
I
think
we
still
have
to
play
around
with
that
data
wise.
If
I,
if
I'm
allowed
to
share
my
screen,
madam
chair,
is
that
is
that
permissible?
B
Thank
you
team.
I
think
I'm
allowed.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
before
I
do
it.
Are
you
okay
with
it?
If
I
do
it?
Yes,
yes
of
course,
okay,
all
right
so
well,
I'm
gonna
do
a
very
risky
thing
and
share
my
whole
screen,
because
I
can't
figure
out
how
to
do
you
guys
see
this
table
right
now.
Are
you
seeing
a
table?
B
B
Okay,
all
right
there
we
go
how's
that
can
you
see
that
so
this
is?
I
just
wanted
to
draw
people's
attention
to
in
the
memo
we
actually
linked
to
this.
But
this
is
an
la
proposal.
Well,
not
proposal.
It's
a
program
in
l.a
for
granting
these
discretionary
housing
permits
administrative
housing
permits
where
basically,
housing
development,
that's
affordable
in
a
certain
way,
and
it's
described
in
this
red
below.
I
won't
linger
on
it,
but
it's
basically
like
you
know
it's
a
significant,
affordable
development.
B
They
basically
have
this
sliding
scale
where
the
more
housing
you're
setting
aside,
affordable
and
then,
depending
on
what
ami
you're
setting
it
aside
affordable
at
you,
get
these
different
density
bonuses
off
the
base
of
what
you're
authorized
to
have,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
draw
people's
attention
to
that
as
a
kind
of
interesting
case
to
counselor
edward's,
point
of
sort
of
thinking
about
density
bonuses
and
thinking
about
again,
if
we
did
something
with
parcel
data,
is
there?
B
Is
there
a
sort
of
creative
way
to
do
something
like
that
in
our
system?
That's
that's
something!
I'm
I'm
wondering
about
I'd
love,
bpda
thoughts
on
that.
I
I
guess
the
one
oh
and
the
one
other
comment
I
wanted
to
enter
before
just
going
to
the
bpda
for
any
thoughts
on
that
is
I
I
know
a
number
of
counselors
have
mentioned
the
importance
of
mixed
income
housing
and
I
totally
agree,
but
I
want
to
say
a
couple
things
so
one
is
that
100,
affordable
projects
can
be
mixed
income.
B
B
We've
got
eighty
to
a
hundred
with
some
of
the
idp
for
affordable
home
ownership
options,
and
then
we've
got
some
even
above
that
in
projects
where
we've
really
been
trying
to
get
that
kind
of
middle
middle
middle
high
tier
to
be
able
to
also
stay
in
the
city,
so
I
think
there's
a
way
of
defining
a
policy.
That's
sort
of
about
100,
affordable,
quote,
unquote.
That
is
still
creating
those
kind
of
mixed
income
communities
that
the
council
is
focusing
on.
B
I
also
think
that
100,
affordable
buildings
within
the
context
of
a
mixed,
economically
diverse
neighborhood,
can
be
part
of
a
true
mixed
income
community.
So
I
think
we
often
see
you
know,
economies
of
scale
and,
frankly,
frankly,
like
really
positive
community
benefits
of
having
seniors
all
in
a
building
together,
there's
sort
of
shared
amenities-
and
I
think
also
I
mean
throughout
my
district-
I
can
think
of
you-
know-
there's
a
really
great
100,
affordable
building
at
the
corner
of
gurney
and
tremont.
B
It's
technically
across
the
line
and
council
president
now
mayor,
janie's
district,
but
I
sort
of
counted
as
mine.
But
it's
you
know
it's
100,
affordable,
family
housing
that
allows
you
to
concentrate
some
amenities,
but
it
is
very
much
mixed
into
a
mixed
income
neighborhood.
So
I
do
think
that
I
want
to
stress
that
there's
an
opportunity
for
for
us
to
support
100,
affordable
housing
without,
I
think
it
being
part
of
of
sort
of
doubling
down
on
housing
segregation.
B
I
actually
think
it
could
be
the
way
to
actually
get
units
at
scale
into
some
of
our
more
economically
segregated,
neighborhoods
and
and
mix
them
up
more
and
and
to
jesse's
point.
The
one
other
thing
I
want
to
add
is
just
jesse
mentioned.
In
addition
to
permits
to,
like
you
know,
freeing
up
fees
mentioned
the
possibility
of
having
a
kind
of
single
point
person
and
definitely
a
thing.
B
I've
heard
from
affordable
housing
developers
is
the
challenge
of
sort
of
going
through
article
80
and
then
feeling
like
you've
only
just
begun
in
the
process
of
like
talking
to
isd
talking
to
water
and
sewer.
Talking
to
you
know
just
like
btd
all
of
our
groups,
and
so
you
know,
I
think
the
pda
does
a
lot
to
try
to
centralize
those
with
scoping
sessions
and
such
but,
but
I
would
be.
B
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
to
think
about,
as
we
think
about
an
expedited
review
process,
not
just
a
kind
of
hearing
spot.
That's
maybe
separated
and
special
for
them
at
the
zba,
but
also
like
how
to
kind
of
how
to
how
to
collate
more
of
that
department
response
and,
and
also,
I
think
that
waiving
permit
fees.
Obviously
it
costs
the
city
money.
So
we
have
to
think
about
doing
it
judiciously.
That's
why
I
think
100
affordable
projects
is
a
high
enough
bar
for
it
to
make
sense.
B
I
I
also
think
that
it's
part
of
sending
a
signal
like
I
think,
if
we
waive
an
isd
fee,
we're
also
sort
of
telling
isd
hey.
This
is
a
real
policy
priority
for
the
city
of
boston,
and
so
this
is
something
that
we
like
want
department,
time
to
be
dedicated
towards
and-
and
I
just
think
in
terms
of
expediting
that
that's
also
important.
B
So
those
were
mostly
comments,
but
I
did
want
to
ask
bpda
what
you
think
about
kind
of
the
idea
of
density,
bonusing
and
density
bonusing
off
of
some
kind
of
average
of
parcel
data
or
like
something
else
outside
of
the
box,
just
kind
of
any
initial
reactions.
I
Oh
I'll
take
a
quick
shot
at
that.
You
know,
I
think,
that's
something
we
need
to
sort
through
a
little
bit
and
sort
of
you
know.
You
know
game
gamify
a
little
bit
test
it
out
and
see
what
that
actually
looks
like
on
the
ground
in
different
neighborhoods.
What
would
that
produce?
But
you
know
one
thing:
I'd
like
to
suggest
that
you
know
when
we
talk
about
density
bonuses,
a
lot
of
times,
the
way
we
try
and
look
at
it
is
look
at
it
through
the
lens
of
good
urban
design.
I
First,
what
makes
sense
on
on
the
site
in
terms
of
height
and
density
and
massing
and
so
on,
and
and
that
that
plays
out
all
the
time.
I
don't
think
we
do
anybody
any
favors.
If
we
we
can't
figure
out
what
good
design
is
and
then
say:
oh
yeah,
to
get
affordable,
we're
going
to
attack.
You
know
a
few
more
floors
on
it
or
add
another
point
of
far
because
now
we've
gone
beyond
what
what
a
good
urban
design
is.
No
one!
No
one's
going
to
be
happy
with
the
result.
I
If,
if
we
have
buildings
that
just
don't
work
in
their
neighborhoods,
so
I
think
you
know
figuring
out
what
the
that
form-based
codes
sort
of
approach.
What's
the
good
urban
design
first
and
then
for
developers,
if
you
want
to
get
to
the
good
urban
design
you're
going
to
have
to
you,
know
over
perform
on
the
affordability
part.
So
it's
it's.
I
It's
just
a
different
way
of
looking
at
the
density
bonus,
but
I
think
sometimes,
when
people
hear
density
bonus,
they
think
you
take
a
good
building
and
then
tack
a
few
more
floors
on
it
and
that's
what
you
get
and-
and
I
don't
think,
that's
quite
the
direction.
You
know
we
we
should
be
going.
You
know
I
looked
at
the
cambridge
and
somewhere
built
and
you're
and
you're
absolutely
right,
for
you
know
three
four-story
buildings.
You
can
do
that
and
and
not
have
much
of
an
impact.
I
But
you
know,
if
you
add
20
to
a
you,
know
a
10-story
building.
You
know
it
begins
to
have
an
impact,
and
so
we
need
to.
We
need
to
be
mindful
of
that.
L
I
think
the
density
of
the
development
kind
of
can
vary
in
what
you're
able
to
extract
relative
to
density
bonuses,
but
I
think
we're
we're
obviously
always
looking
at
creative
ways
to
try
to
get
at
the
heart
of
this
issue,
so
I
think
we'd
be
open
to
if
you
want
to
share
that
with
us,
so
we
can
look
at
it.
J
You
councillor
bach,
okay,
I'm
running
down
the
list
to
see
who
else
is
still
here.
I
believe
counselor
mejia
is
next.
J
Okay,
I'll
give
counselor
mejia
a
minute
in
case
there's
tech
issues
or
she
might
have
stepped
away
counselor
edwards.
Thank
you
for
stepping
in
thank.
N
You
is
jessie
still
here.
N
I'm
great,
thank
you
so
much
so
I
am
so
happy
to.
I
couldn't
agree
with
you
more
about
a
standardized
understanding
of
what
is
above
normal
and
I
think
as
what
or
what
is
typically
given
out
in
order
to
incentivize.
I
think
that's
one
of
the
the
key
things
I
walked
away
from
your
comments,
which
is
it's
got
to
be
financially
beneficiary
right
for
folks
to
develop,
affordable
housing.
It's
got
to,
there's
got
to
be
a
like
an
understanding.
N
This
is
where
the
money's
at
right,
and
so
I'm
one
of
the
things
I
think
I
I'm
curious
about
is
convincing.
Not
only
people
that
this
is
where
the
money's
at.
But
what
are
we
supposed
to
do
when
it
comes
to
developers
in
in
long-term,
affordable
affordability,
affordable
housing,
because
I
don't.
I
don't
know
that
it's
really
been
clear
to
a
lot
of
people
that
permanently
affordable
housing
is
where
the
money's
at,
I
think,
a
temporary
relief
or
a
temporary
kind
of
like
the
the
short
shorter
term.
N
Affordable
housing
has
gotten
that
that
understanding
or
tax
credit,
affordable
housing
has
gotten
that
understanding,
but
I
am
finding
that
there's
a
yeah
permanently
make
this
affordable
and
people
are
not
understanding
how
that's
financially
incentive.
So
you
could
speak
to
permanently
affordable
housing
and
and
financial
incentives
that
make
sense
or
the
financial
narrative
that
makes
sense
for
that.
That's
where
the
money's
at
I
also
really
would
love
for
you
to
speak
to
the
ownership
component
versus
rental.
N
I
think
that
that
is
that's
really
key
in
terms
of
dealing
with
the
racial
wealth
gap
right
which
we
have,
which
we
have
a
disgustingly
huge
one
here
in
boston,
I'm
sure
in
cambridge
too,
but
you
know
so
so,
if
you
could
speak
to
those
two
things.
I'd
really
like
to
just
hear
your
perspective
on
that.
O
I
don't
know
that
I'm
completely
clear
on
the
question
about
permanent.
So
are
you
a
counselor?
I
guess.
N
The
question
is,
dude:
is
there
still
the
same
kind
of
the
money
could
be
there?
The
money
is
where
it's
at
when
it
comes
to
permanently
affordable,
housing
permanent,
like
you
know,
with
the
land,
trust
and
the
deeds,
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
as
opposed
to
what
I
think,
what
we're
getting
a
lot
of,
which
is
a
kind
of
a
temporary
or
right.
A
N
At
the
the
the
berkeley
and
beverly
excuse
me
downtown
that
there
are
people
who
came
in
were
able
to
get
in
at
an
affordable
rate
and
the
rents
went
up.
N
O
Sure
yeah,
so
so
I
don't
know
that
I
have
a
great
answer
for
you.
You
know,
and-
and
maybe
I
don't
know
maybe
dnd
can
can
address
this
to
some
degree.
But
you
know
when
I'm
thinking
about
projects
that
would
be
eligible
under
this
type
of
ordinance,
similar
to
the
types
of
projects
that
are
eligible
under
the
cambridge
and
somerville
ordinances.
I'm
generally
thinking
these
are
your
more
traditional
tax
credit
developments.
O
You
know
funded
with
federal
and
state,
low-income
housing,
tax
credits
with
some
project-based
section
aid
and
other
subsidy
from
from
the
state,
as
well
as
from
dmd
and
in
those
cases.
Yes,
rents
can
go
up,
but
it's
not.
You
know
it's
not
set
by
the
market.
It's
set
under
guidelines,
you
know
governed
by
by
hud
and
dhcd
and
dmd,
and
so
there's
at
least
some
predictability
in
those
types
of
developments
in
terms
of
the
long-term
rent
level.
O
For
for
these
types
of
units,
and
then
you
know
under
the
tax
credit
program
with
most
of
the
units,
you
know
no
more
than
60
percent
of
ami
and
and
some
of
them
lower
than
that.
You
know
the
red.
The
rents
are
theoretically
already
set
at
a
somewhat
more
affordable
level
than
at
least
the
market
rent
in
the
city
of
boston.
So
you
know
I
I
I
think
the
conversation
about
how
to
you
know
prevent
you
know:
owners
of
of
affordable
housing.
O
You
know
how
to
prevent
them
from
raising
rents,
larger
or
higher
year
after
year
is
a
is
a
politics
policy
discussion
around
you
know,
you
know
project-based
rental
subsidies.
Perhaps
the
city
can
help
fund,
but
I
do
generally
see
these
types
of
projects
under
this
ordinance,
primarily
being
those
done
by
you
know
the
great
cdc's
we
have
across
the
city
of
boston
rather
than
under
idp.
O
N
N
If,
if
we're
only
talking
about
them,
getting
zoning
relief,
which
is
you
know
what
prompted?
I
think,
one
of
our
co-sponsors?
Certainly
the
lead
sponsors
on
this,
because
you
know
there
was
a
hundred
percent.
You
know
affordable
housing
that
was
done
by
an
incredible
non-profit
that
was
just
shot
down
due
to
ridiculous
zoning
opposition.
N
I
think
that
then
we
have
a
different
narrative.
I
mean
they're
they're,
not
totally
motivated
by
profit,
they're
they're,
motivated
by
it's
it's
what
it
makes
sense
to
do.
I
feel
so.
I
think
I
think
that's
where
I'm
not
even
saying
we're
saying
different
things.
I
just
I'm
I'm
asking
about
the
for-profit,
where
the
money's
at
narrative
that
you
discussed.
How
do
we
make
sure
that
they
buy
into
or
that
it's
still
really
it's
where
the
money's
at
to
do
permanently:
affordable
housing.
O
I
I
I
think
what
what
I
was
referring
to
was
more
around
the
cost
and
and
making
it
so
that
those
you
know
primarily
non-profit
developers.
Cdcs
can
be
more
competitive
against
market
rate
developers
for
land
in
the
city
of
boston
right.
If,
if
a
non-profit
developer
or
putting
non-profit
aside,
if
a
developer
of
100,
affordable
housing
can
acquire
a
site
at
a
high
cost,
but
then
spread
that
cost
over
more
units
than
a
market
rate
developer,
can
that's
what
I
think
the
competitive
advantage?
O
Is
it's
easier
for
them
to
make
the
case
to
dnd,
to
dhcd
that
they
are
worthy
of
funding
for
this
development
or
for
for
assistance
to
acquire
the
property?
So
so
I
wasn't
so
much
concerned
about
the
profit
motive.
I
was
trying
to
say
it
should
be
structured
so
that
affordable
housing
developers
have
an
advantage
against,
or
you
know,
in
competition
with
market
rate
developers.
Who
can
just
you
know
who
can
spend
a
ridiculous
amount
of
money
per
unit
to
acquire
sites
and
they're?
Therefore,
disadvantaged,
non-profit
developers,
okay,.
O
The
with
the
profit
motivated
developers-
in
this
scenario-
you
know
on
your
second,
your
second
question
around
home
ownership.
Absolutely
I
think
that
needs
to
be
part
of
the
conversation.
O
You
know,
I
think
you
know
the
elements
I
talked
about,
whether
it's
you
know
permitting
relief,
single
point
of
contact
and
some
of
the
zoning
considerations
can
just
as
easily
apply
to
home
ownership
of
affordable
development
as
it
can
to
rental,
and
it
should-
and
I
agree
with
you
that
when
it
comes
to
wealth
building,
home
ownership
is
critical.
You
know
one
of
the
problems
that
we
face.
We've
in
the
affordable
housing
industry
is
that
there
is
not
a
lot
of
subsidy
available
from
the
state
to
do
home.
O
Ownership
like
there
is
to
do
rental
housing,
so
that
is
also
a
policy
question
consideration
I
think,
for
for
the
city
of
boston
and
for
the
state,
but
you
know
I
absolutely
agree
with
you:
affordable,
affordable
home
ownership
needs
to
be
part
of
this
conversation
as
well,
and,
however,
we
can
incentivize
that
perhaps
over
rental
in
some
scenarios,
I
think
we
should
we
should
do,
and
I
will
give
thoughts
to
that
and
share
them
with,
with
with
you
and
other
members
of
the
council,.
N
Yeah-
and
I
think,
when
we
go
to
discuss
this
afternoon,
idp
increases
and
figuring
out
what
those
could
look
like.
I
think
ownership
will
have
to
be
tied
up
to
a
higher
idp.
N
Excuse
me
a
higher
ami,
but
I
still
think
that
there's,
if
there's
a
better
mix
of
home
ownership
in
there,
that
we
should
also
be
thinking
about
zoning
relief
as
well,
so
there's
there's,
there's
a
certain
mix
that
we're
going
to
have
to
come
up
with.
I
just,
I
think,
because
it's
I
think
we'll
be
beyond
for
most
of
us
are
beyond
just
keeping
people
housed
it's
keeping
people
housed
and
also
helping
to
have
generational
wealth
and
growth,
which
is
what
has
been
of
the
o.
N
You
know
which
has
created
the
the
wealth
gap,
so
I
I
can't.
I
don't
think
anyone
here
is
saying
not
to
consider
it.
I
just
feel
that
it's
being
considered
as
an
afterthought
too
much
in
terms
of
this,
and
I
think
it
really
should
be
a
forethought
in
the
home
ownership.
I
think
just
just
to
respond
to
counselor
box
comment
on
the
100
housing.
N
I
agree
and
thank
you
for
the
clarification.
So
folks
understand
we're
not
talking
about
100
publicly
subsidized
housing,
we're
talking
about
varying
a
amis
on
a
bell
curve
right
as
audubo
with
a
with
a
the
curve,
starting
at
a
different
ami
in
the
middle,
maybe
a
little
bit
lower
than
where
it
starts
right
now,
not
at
the
70,
maybe
a
little
bit
lower.
But
it
does
spell
curves
that
there
are
people
who
are
paying
100,
maybe
even
more
than
the
100
ami,
but
it
is
on
a
bell
curve.
N
D
H
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
I
I
do
want
to
thank
the
counselor
for
bringing
up
the
issue
of
homeownership.
I
think
that
all
along
we've
we've
thought
about
100
zoning
for
100
affordability.
We
were
including
homeownership
and
rental.
So
just
thank
you
for
calling
that
out
separately
and
in
response
to
the
question
about
the
beverly.
The
beverly
is
in
some
ways
a
unicorn,
but
what
it
does
have
that
is
common
of
of
any
building
is
it
has
an
income
restriction
on
all
the
units
and
that
income
restriction
sets
what
the
maximum
rent
is.
H
I'm,
not
I'm
not
in
the
know
about
what
the
beverly's
rent
policies
were,
but
I
know
they
have
units
that
go
up
to
165
percent
of
ami
and
then
the
initial
rent
up
they
may
have
rented
those
units
at
rates
that
were
below
their
maximum
rent
and
then
the
following
year
raised
them
to
the
maximum
rent.
So
it
there's
still
that
predictability.
H
But
yes,
that
is,
that
is
a
specific
kind
of
situation
to
be
watchful,
for
is
where
that
tenant
moves
in
thinking,
they're
going
to
be
paying
1500
a
month
and
then
it's
all
of
a
sudden
1800,
and
yet
it's
still
at
the
maximum
of
it's
still
below
what
they
can
charge.
Or
is
it
what
they
can
charge
them
most,
not
sure
if
that
was
clear
enough.
J
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
great.
So
I'm
gonna
give
just
call
counselor
mejia
if
in
case
she
had
questions
and
if
not,
I
know,
counselor
bach
can
close
up
your
good
counselor,
michael
okay,.
B
Counselor
bach
yeah,
thanks
so
much
madam
chair,
I
wanted
to
just
a
couple
comments
on
on
the
points
raised
by
councillor,
edwards
and
then
yeah
and
then
just
to
thank
everybody,
but
on
on
the
on
the
profit
incentive
you
know,
I
do
think.
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that
so
right
now
there
are
lots
of
for-profit
developers
in
the
city
who
do
do
affordable
development.
B
I
mean
just
off
the
top
of
my
head
right,
win
trinity,
beacon
more
that
I
can
think
of
obviously
like
mccall's
doing
it
in
your
district
corcoran.
So.
K
B
There's
a
there's:
a
substantial
industry
of
for-profit,
affordable
housing
developers,
in
addition
to
our
non-profit,
cdcs
and,
and
the
good
thing
that
I
wanted
to
sort
of
reassure
you
on
this
point-
is
that
any
of
those
folks
when
they're
doing
affordable
housing
development
they're
doing
it
on
a
pro
forma?
That
kind
of
make
like
ensures
them
that
they're
going
to
have
the
kind
of
profit
and
fee
that
they
can
finance
across.
B
Now,
in
practice,
often
people
have
gotten
to
that
point
right
with
our
40-year
restrictions
and
gotten
to
sell
and
have
that
windfall,
but
because
of
the
distance
and
time
and
the
windfall
being
uncertain,
you
can't
actually
get
the
banks
to
to
finance
the
projects
on
that
basis.
So
all
of
that
is
just
a
way
to
say
that.
I
don't
think
that
I
think
that
we
should
assume
when
we're
talking
about
this,
that
we're
talking
about
trying
to
get
permanent
affordability,
and
I
don't
think
that
making
it
permanent
affordability
limits
the
financiability.
B
I
think
it
just
limits
the
opportunity
for
that
windfall
down
the
road.
So
I
I
wanted
to
flag
that
I,
and
I
also
wanted
to
I
mean
I
wanted
to
underscore
your
point
that
you
know
I
in
in
my
optimal
world.
Of
course
we
would
be,
we
would
be
pursuing
this
100
affordable,
like
you
know,
zoning
relief,
and
we
would
be
talking
about
opportunities
for
the
city
to
do
it
directly
on
public
land.
B
I
think
when
that's
something
counselor
and
I
have
talked
about
in
our
other
hearing
these
things-
all
kind
of
have
a
synergy
on
the
home
ownership
front.
Jesse
brought
this
up,
but
you
know
there
is
a
real
lack
of
affordable
homeownership
money
in
the
state,
and
that
was
a
big
part
of
the
coalition
that
pushed
the
community
preservation
act
was
the
fact
that
it
could
be
used
for
home
ownership
and
obviously
the
council
has
before
it.
B
B
But
I
think
I
think
the
undergirding
thing
is:
how
do
we?
How
do
we
make
these
projects?
The
word
unicorns
come
up
several
times.
B
I
guess
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
mass
produce
more
unicorns
right
like
how,
instead
of
every
great
accomplishment,
100
affordable
building
in
the
city
being
like
this
wild
thing
that
comes
together
as
the
result
of
a
whole
bunch
of
improbable
circumstances
having
it
be
something
that
our
zoning
is
more
actively
encouraging
and
smoothing
the
way
for,
and
I
think
I
think
there
is
room
to
improve
on
that
front
and
and
that's
really
where
I'm
I'm
grateful
for
and
looking
forward
to,
the
partnership
of
council
colleagues
and
also
the
departments
on
this
call
today:
vpda
and
dandy
and
and
jesse,
and
the
advocate
community,
and
also
the
affordable,
cdcs
and
just
like
everybody
in
this
mix,
because
I
I
don't
think,
we've
quite
gotten
there
yet
for
kind
of
smoothing
the
way
and
now
I'm
mixing
metaphors,
but
yeah
mass
producing
unicorns
on
the
affordable
housing
front.
B
That's
my
that's
my
goal
and
thank
you
so
much,
madam
chair,
for
your
indulgence.
K
Can
I
respond
to
one
thing
or
two
things?
Actually
that
counselor
bach
just
said
one?
I'm
really
glad
that
you
I've
been
trying
to
figure
out
when
to
interject
a
point
about
financiability
and
affordability
and
perpetuity.
K
So
for
my
whole
time
at
the
city,
which
you
all
know
is
not
super
long,
but
but
as
long
as
I've
been
here
and
and
for
a
few
years
before
that,
we
have
required
affordability
in
perpetuity
on
all
rental
projects
and
and
what
comes
out
to
usually
50
years
of
affordability
on
home
ownership
projects,
which
has
to
do
with
with
state
law
about
financing
home
ownership.
But
on
the
rental
side,
where
we
have
required
in
perpetuity
for
any
project
that
accepts
city
funds.
K
Those
projects
have
had
no
trouble
getting
financing
on
the
private
market.
So
there's
we
have
real
life
experience
to
say
that
that's
not
a
problem,
and
so
I
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
out
there
and
also
you
know.
Tim
said
earlier
from
d
d's
perspective.
K
You
know
we
don't
sort
of
view
rental
and
home
ownership
as
as
different
when
it
comes
to
getting
those
projects
permitted
and
ready
to
go,
and
so
the
one
thing
that
I
would
encourage
the
council
to
think
about
is
we
had
started
the
conversation
today
talking
about
very
large
projects
and
we
do
have
a
fair
number
of
all
homeownership
projects,
but
they
tend
to
be
smaller
for
various
reasons.
K
So
I
would
encourage
the
council
to
think
if
you're
going
to
do
any
any
kind
of
change
to
make
it
easier
for
affordable
projects
to
get
permitted
to
not
distinguish
between
rental
and
home
ownership.
But
perhaps
if
you
want
to
be
sure
to
hit
home
ownership
projects
to
think
about
a
smaller
threshold
on
on
unit
number,
that's
really.
J
B
Just
to
thank
everybody
again
and
say
we're
gonna
be
actively
working
on
this,
so
my
office
will
be
reaching
out
to
everybody
to
follow
up
on
getting
something
drafted,
but
really
grateful
for
the
participation
today.