►
From YouTube: City Council Sub Committee of 3-21-22
Description
City of Chelsea, Home Rule Petition introduced by Councilor Avellaneda regarding an Act authorizing the creation of a Linkage Fees
https://www.chelseama.gov/city-council/events/125436
A
A
Introduced
by
council
of
asianetta
an
act
authorizing
the
creation
of
linkage,
fees
for
development
in
the
city
of
chelsea,
and
also
an
amendment
introduced
by
councillor
visionaire.
Regarding
the
adoption
of
article
12
in
chapter
14,
titled
linkage,
fees
for
development,
copy
of
the
ordinance
is
provided
and
also
a
copy
of
the
homeroom
petition
members
invited,
or
rather
people
invited
to
attend.
The
subcommittee
meeting
is
the
honorable
members
of
the
city,
council,
city
manager,
tom
ambrosino
city,
solicitor,
cheryl
watson
and
members
of
the
public
so
I'll
this
time
I'll.
A
We
have
two
items
on
our
agenda
for
tonight:
a
homewood
petition
and
similarly,
a
copy
of
an
ordinance
that
will
be
passed.
The
ordinance
that
is
going
to
be
introduced
needs
to
be
ratified
by
the
state
legislature
in
order
for
it
to
go
in.
Hence
why,
in
this
particular
case,
a
zoning
change
or
an
ordinance
change,
mind
you
does
have
doesn't
need
to
be
accompanied
by
our
home
repetition.
A
A
In
our
community
and
the
introduction
or
the
attempt
to
ask
the
charter
review
committee
to
do
so
stated
that
it
was
not
something
that
could
be
done
through
the
charter
process.
I
then,
later
on
last,
towards
the
end
of
last
year,
come
fall,
introduced
a
ordinance
that
would
introduce
that
or
would
rather
adopt
the
ability
for
the
city
council
to
have
the
city
manager
present
to
the
city
council
prior
to
any
special
permit
being
issued
a
mitigation
package
if
you
would,
and
if
the
mitigation
package
was
approved
by
the
city
council.
A
Has
mitigation
happened
in
our
community
in
the
past?
Absolutely
there
have
been
different
ways
that
developers
have
offered
concessions
and
so
forth
on
a
development
in
some
cases
it's,
for
example,
eastern
salt,
when
it
expanded
on
marginal
street
it
offered
years
ago
to
pay
for
the
new
artificial
field
or
an
artificial
field
replaced
the
grass
field
at
highland
park.
A
We
had
a
hotel
development
and
the
upper
broadway
area
offer
mitigation
and
they
paid
towards
a
pathway
around
the
back
and
also
a
donation
to
a
local
non-profit,
we've
had,
and
similarly
so,
some
developers
if
it's
housing
offer
to
go
above
and
beyond
the
15
inclusionary
zoning
can
go
into
20
percent.
So
there
is
mitigation.
The
question,
or
rather
the
issue
that
I
was
trying
to
address,
was
there
was
no
procedure
in
place
for
how
mitigation
is
done.
A
We
charge
a
certain
rate
by
the
size
of
the
project
in
itself
and
then
determine
how
to
use
that
money
later
on
now,
the
only
existing
litigation
or
the
linkage
fee
that
is
on
the
books
right
now
that
I
could
think
of,
or
I
saw,
was
medford
and
medford
has
it
on
its
own.
Has
it
in
its
books,
but
they
specifically
only
use
it
for
open
space
new
parks.
A
The
model
that
I
was
trying
to
adopt
here
was
boston's
in
boston
when
a
project
is
filed
for
permitting
and
if
it
reaches
a
certain
size,
it
triggers
the
creation
of
a
local
neighborhood
mitigation
group.
Who
then
negotiates
this
now
city
of
chelsea
doesn't
have
11.
Neighborhoods
doesn't
need
another
committee
that
we
have
to
create
every
time,
something
like
this
happens,
but
they
do
use
a
sort
of
rate
the
same
way
and
then
the
the
amount
that
they
negotiate.
A
A
A
This
one
was
presented
just
this
past
february
27th
and
it
tells
you
how
the
boston
planning
department,
development
agency
rather
approved,
49
000
distribution
at
its
february
meeting,
and
there
were
13
organizations
that
received
it
and
then
a
more
comprehensive
one
was
the
one
in
charlestown
again
a
breakdown,
a
chart
of
all
the
the
different
agencies
and
non-profits
that
benefited.
Now.
A
So,
if
we
wanted
to
say
mitigate
traffic
impact
of
a
project
itself,
it
can
be
used.
I
made
it
very
broad
so
that
the
project
itself
over
either
the
monies
can
be
used
in
any
which
way,
but
that
is
basically
the
gist
of
it.
Again.
We
did
have
a
meeting
earlier
last
fall
on
the
subject
matter
and
had
reintroduced
it
as
part
of
the
new
session.
So
if
there's
any
questions
either
to
myself
or
the
city
manager,
I
would
just
welcome
them
at
this
point.
A
D
A
A
Recommendations
are
will
be
made
by
the
city
manager
and
then
the
appropriations
out
of
that
fund
would
be
coming
from
the
city
council.
The
city
council
would
have
to
approve
the
recommendations
made
by
the
city
manager,
but
we
ourselves
once
this
passes,
can
then
create
the
app
you
know
the
application
process
and
so
forth.
I
didn't
want
to
get
into
that
without
it
actually
being
on
the
books,
but
I
see
it
to
be
similar
to
the
cpa
process,
except
that
it
won't
be
the
community
preservation
group
that
adopts
the
measures
or
the
applications.
A
D
Okay,
just
to
follow
up
the
obviously,
when
I
go
to
the
state
delegation,
the
whole
delegation
is
going
to
see
it.
Will
this
somewhat
take
away
from
our
ability
to
get
money
from
the
state
now
that
they
see
we
have
another
mechanism
in
incurring
money
from
developers,
20
percent's
a
lot
of
money?
I
mean
I
don't
know
how
many
projects,
but
if
there's
a
lot
of
things
going
on,
the
state
delegation
will
be
able
to
argue
that
the
city
of
chelsea
is
now
creating
money
that
the
state
does
not
have
to
give
them.
A
I
think
that,
because
mitigation
is
already
happening,
they
just
seem
that
this
is
just
something
that
is
done
transparently
and
in
the
process
in
place.
The
city
of
boston
doesn't
get
more
or
less
money
from
the
state
just
because
it
has
a
linkage
fee.
Neither
does
medford
that
doesn't
play
into
it
on
a
local
level.
Mitigation
happens
between
cities,
cities
and
towns
and
developers.
So
I
can't
foresee
any
state
agency,
looking
at
the
city
of
chelsea
on
any
application
for
mass
development,
works,
chapter
90
or
anything
like
that
and
stipulating
that.
A
Well,
since
you
are
getting
already
a
local
mitigation
fee,
we're
going
to
give
you
less
and
so
forth,
because
we
currently
do
have
mitigation,
it's
just
not
a
procedure
in
place
and
that's
what
this
would.
This
would
codify
the
mitigation
process
in
the
books
and
have
a
procedure
and
also
give
the
power
to
the
city
council
to
decide
how
that
mitigation
is
used.
All.
C
A
As
I
stated
earlier
in
the
second
paragraph,
I
read
off
that
the
petition
this
could
be
done.
The
funds,
as
I
read
the
funds
and
the
community
linkage
fee,
may
be
used
by
the
city
and
recommended
by
the
city
manager
for
the
sole
creation
of
either
creation
or
maintenance
of
affordable
housing,
the
support
of
social
services
within
the
city,
workforce
development,
job
creation
and
education,
youth,
recreational
activities
and
public
space,
enhancements
traffic
and
transportation
improvements
in
capital
construction,
provided
that
they
are
part
of
the
five-year
capital
improvement
plan.
A
A
I
I
envision
anyone
like
alex
or
even
john
or
whoever
not
to
be
in
charge
of
the
program,
but
there
would
be
some
sort
of
management
to
take
in
the
applications
or
work
with
the
city
manager
and
how
this
could
be.
The
monies
could
be
suggested
and
then
at
that
point
the
city
manager
would
come
to
us
and
say
this
is
what
we
think
how
the
money
should
be
spent.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
president.
No
this.
This
draft
really
incorporates
the
comments
that
I
had
back
in
the
fall
when
this
was
first
before
the
council,
and
I
think
the
changes
that
have
been
made
reflect
the
concerns
that
I
had
and
the
the
end
product
actually
is
quite
good.
I
think
this
is
a
legitimate
way
for
a
city
in
town
to
do
mitigation
when
it
comes
to
significant
projects
in
the
city.
E
So
if
this
passes,
I
think
we'll
have
a
nice
vehicle
for
generating
some
funds
and
it
would
operate
kind
of
like
a
it
would
be
just
another
fund.
It
would
be
like
a
stabilization
fund
where
we
have
money
set
aside,
and
I
come
to
you
with
ideas
for
spending
it
and
it's
up
to
the
council
to
decide
by
majority
vote
if
that
spending
would
happen
similar
to
what
we
do
with
the
stabilization
fund,
although
in
this
case
it
would
be
a
pure
majority
vote.
E
The
council
president
mentioned
an
application
process.
You
could
certainly
set
something
like
that
up
if
you
wanted
to
open
it
up
to
community
groups
or
residents
to
petition
the
city
to
spend
money
out
of
this
fund.
We
don't
do
that
with
stabilization,
but
nothing
prevents
you
from
doing
that
with
this
kind
of
fund,
so
this
works.
For
me.
I
think
it's
a
good
thing.
E
I
would
recommend
that
if
and
when
the
legislature
approves
this,
and
we
are
ready
to
adopt
the
ordinance
to
implement
it,
we
are
to
at
the
same
time
eliminate
the
community
improvement,
trust
trust
fund,
because
that
would
then
be
a
double
hit
on
developers
and
really
not
fair.
So
until
this
gets
adopted,
we
have
this
community
improvement.
Trust
fund,
which
doesn't
is
not
anywhere
near
as
effective
as
this
will
be
once
the
legislature
allows
us
to
do
something
like
this.
E
We
will
adopt
this
an
ordinance
like
this
and
we
will
at
the
same
time,
strike
the
community
improvement,
trust
fund
and
every
developer
will
be
directed
to
this
language
and
said
this
is
the
mitigation
that
you
have
to
pay
when
you
have
a
project
that
is
triggered
that
triggers
this
and
it's
it's
a
larger
project,
25
000
square
feet
more
than
20
24
or
more
units.
So
it's
not
for
smaller
projects,
and
I
think
that's
a
fair
way
to
go
about.
So
I
don't
really
have
anything
else
to
say.
D
D
E
E
E
E
E
A
You
know
gross
square
feet,
gross
area,
development
projects
are
different
and
most
likely
different
and
one
may
have
more
impact
than
the
other,
and
that
was
the
beauty
of
why
I
wanted
to
pass
my
version
because
it
would
have
been
up
to
the
city
manager
to
negotiate
based
on
a
a
case-by-case
instance
and
then
fine
tune
it.
What
I
mean
by
a
waiver
is
this:
you
could
have,
for
example,
the
chelsea
clock
development.
A
However,
what
is
unknown
to
many
is
that
that
site
was
heavily
contaminated
and
if
you
take
that
project
or
that
size
project
on,
say
the
the
moola's
lot
in
the
back
and
say,
let's
build
the
same
amount.
Demoulas
wouldn't
have
that
contamination,
and
so
the
cost
of
the
project
was
a
lot
lower.
That
cost
of
remediation
of
cleaning-
and
you
add,
on
the
cost
of
say
this
linkage
fee-
could
make
it
undoable.
A
And
if
and
that's
why
I
said
well,
if
it
ever
comes
to
a
point
and
it
would
have
to
be
proven
and
the
city
manager
and
the
staff
would
do
the
due
diligence.
They've
ever
got
to
the
point
of
saying
you
know
no
project
because
of
the
linkage
fee
versus
we
get
a
nice
project
with
a
waiver
of
linkage.
Fee
I'd
want
that
ability,
because
again
they're
undeter.
There
are
unforeseeable
costs
that
we
may
not
be
aware
of.
A
So
I
wanted
the
ability
to
put
the
waiver
in
and
if,
for
example,
if
it
was
residential
and
they
did
instead
of
this
linkage
fee,
they
decided
to
have
a
higher
rate
of
affordable
units
in
the
bill
in
the
in
the
in
the
project.
Instead
of
15
go
to
20
or
25,
then
of
course,
why
not
waive
the
linkage
fee?
But
that
was
something
that
was
forgotten
and
or
missed
in
that
multi
numbers
of
drafts
that
were
sent
to
fatima
and
the
additions
that
were
going
between
the
city
manager
myself.
A
Will
state
this
tnd
on
on
on
a
normal
basis,
usually
does
a
project
that
is
100
affordable
in
the
ordinance
that
I
presented
any
project
that
has
a
minimum
of
25
percent
affordable
because
our
zoning
requires
15
percent.
So
if
a
developer
chooses
to
build
something
that
has
25
percent
affordable
are
higher,
then
they
this
impact
fee
is
not
included.
So
as
it
stands,
there
is
not
one
project
that
tnd
has
done
based
on
its
high
level
of
affordability.
E
So,
just
to
put
a
finer
point
on
it,
as
I
looked
at
this
more
closely
so
the
home
rule
petition,
the
only
thing
you're
going
to
adopt
tonight
doesn't
have
any
mention
of
that
it.
This
is
a
this
petition
simply
gives
you
the
ability
to
draft
an
ordinance,
the
ordinance
that
has
been
proposed
before
you,
which
you
are
not
going
to
finally
vote
on
tonight
as
counselor.
E
14-460
c
that
says
it
doesn't
apply
to
any
project
where
at
least
25
of
the
units
are
deed,
restricted.
So
most
of
the
tnd
projects
that
have
been
built
here
would
have
been
exempt
from
this,
as
this
ordinance
is
currently
drafted
again,
those
are
decisions
you
can
continue
to
discuss
when,
when
the
time
comes
for
you
to
finalize
the
ordinance
itself
tonight,
you're
simply
voting
on
the
simple
home
rule
petition,
which
merely
gives
you
the
right
to
draft
any
kind
of
ordinance.
You
want
on
this.
G
G
E
As
I
read
the
ordinance
as
drafted,
you
would
only
be
exempt
from
its
provisions,
at
least
as
currently
proposed
if
25
of
your
units
met
the
definition
of
affordable,
the
hud
definition
of
affordable,
so
that's
80
or
lower
of
ami
25
would
have
to
do
that
in
order
to
be
exempt
from
this
linkage
fee.
Okay,.
A
Yeah,
so
25
of
the
units
on
on
anything
greater
than
24
would
have
to
be
at
80
percent
or
lower
yeah
to
get
waves
from
linkage
fee
correct
and
again.
If,
for
example,
we
pass
a
waiver
of
the
linkage
fee
and
someone
presented
a
plan
of
affordability
that
had
a
different
scenario
and
one
could
argue-
and
we
look
at
a
project
and
say
I
am
going
to
build
10
units
or,
let's
say
a
number
30
units.
A
10
are
going
to
be
at
80,
10
are
going
to
be
at
100,
10
are
gonna,
be
a
percent
at
120
and
the
developer
said:
look,
I'm
not
charging
market
rates,
these
are
all
affordable
and
I
have
100,
but
it's
not
definition
by
80
percent.
Can
I
get
a
waiver
again?
That's
a
possibility,
but
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
foresee
what
the
project
could
or
could
not
be,
but
counselor
taylor.
H
A
H
If
you're,
exempting
non-profits
from
from
this
fee,
you're
gonna
you're
you're
you're
pushing
everything
over
into
affordable,
going
to
get
a
much
larger
percentage
of
affordable
right,
correct
okay,
so
this
sounds
like
so
so
what
is
the
point,
then,
of
the
inclusionary
zoning?
If
it's
for
for
for
units
that
are
from
10
to
24.,
including.
E
H
H
E
E
E
H
E
A
H
I
think
that
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
do
is
there's
no
particular
concern
only
that
people
both
on
this
council
and
the
people
watching
are
understanding
kind
of
what
is
going
on
here.
That's
all
so
what
it
is
we're
talking
about-
and
this
is,
I
believe
what
this
will
do-
my
apologies.
It
wasn't
20
25,
so
so
it
would
be
an
extra.
E
E
And
so
yes,
but
again
I
you
don't
have
to
decide
that
policy,
because
your
decision
to
ask
the
legislature
to
give
you
the
ability
to
craft
an
ordinance
doesn't
bind
you
to
any
particular
ordinance.
The
one
decision
you
really
do
have
to
make
tonight
is
whether
you
want
to
be.
You
want
the
trigger
on
a
residential
development
for
any
linkage
fee
to
be
24
units,
because
in
this
proposal
that
is
built
into
the
home
rule
petition
and
if
the
legislature
adopts
that
you
will
have
no
wiggle
room.
So
you
could
decide
to
leave
that
blank.
E
Just
talk
about
residential
projects
and
save
for
another
day,
the
particular
trigger
number
of
units.
I
just
bring
that
to
your
attention
that
once
you
vote
tonight
on
the
home
rule
petition.
That
is
one
thing
that
you
will
be
bound,
but
you
certainly
won't
be
bound
on
any
the
just
carving
out
exceptions
to
the
ordinance.
You
could
decide
no
one's
getting
an
exception
from
this
ordinance.
We're.
F
A
You
are
already
providing
four,
I
think
four
affordable
units
and
those
ten
that
cost
tends
to
already
bring
the
the
project
to
a
very
tight
line.
I
want
to
say
of
viability,
and
so
I
wanted
the
trigger
point
only
to
be
above
24..
I
also
want
to
stipulate
that
or
bring
the
attention
to
my
colleagues
that
we're
talking
that
if
a
project
is
about
30
units
and
let's
say
35
000
square
feet,
the
linkage
fee
is
is
a
is,
is
a
small
number.
A
I
would
think
that
they
would
much
rather
pay
that
very
small
number
of
in
the
linkage
fee
than
increase
and
get
a
waiver,
because
the
sales
would
would
be
much
more
lucrative
staying
at
15
and
paying
the
linkage
fee
then
to
go
up
another
10
percent
in
affordability
rates
because
again
the
markup.
So,
that's,
that's
the
that's
the
thing
counselor
taylor.
H
A
A
A
H
H
A
That
this
is
something
again
the
city
manager
and
I
were
working
back
and
forth
on
on
how
the
money
was
spent.
What
are
the
trigger
points
and
the
rate
is
it
finalized?
No,
but
that
was
what
we
suggested
at
the
moment.
So
you
can
read
this
and
you
can
see
what
the
rates
actually
are
right
now,
if
anyone
wants
to
make
an
amendment
six
months,
12
months
from
now
have
at
it,
but
you
have
the
the
the
grounds
of
the
paragraph
for
it,
but.
H
A
E
G
A
G
A
G
H
B
E
C
So
the
question
I
have
a
simple
question
so
by
the
people
wanting
to
do
20
units
and
you're
telling
them
if
you
build
more
affordable
units,
you're
going
to
have
to
pay
less
right.
If
you
build
less
affordable
units,
you're
going
to
pay
more,
so
it
all
depends.
Let's
say
a
developer
comes
in
and
says
I
know
we
did
it
before,
like
one
not
was
like
that
they
come
in
and
say
well
now
we
don't
want
to
build
no
affordable
units
at
all.
C
C
E
E
E
I
think
what
the
council
president
wanted
to
do,
which
is
a
reasonable
position,
is
say
that
leaves
too
much
discretion
to
city
managers
and
it
opens
the
door,
for
you,
know,
inequitable
treatment
among
developers,
and
it
does
I
mean,
because
you're
sort
of
every
developer
comes
in
and
it's
kind
of
a
give
and
take
and
one
developer
could
say
gee
I
ended
up.
I
walked
out
of
a
special
permit
and
I
had
to
give
all
this
stuff
up.
I
had
to.
I
made
a
donation
to
this
one.
I
gave
money
to
fix
the
street.
E
C
E
C
E
All
I'm
looking
for
you
to
do
tonight
is
send
to
the
legislature
a
petition
that
would
allow
us
to
consider
a
linkage
fee
organ
the
details
of
that
ordinance.
We
can
leave
for
another
day,
it'll
be
up
to
this.
Also,
to
do,
and
given
that
it's
an
ordinance
future
counselors
can
make
all
sorts
of
changes
that
they
want,
because
it'll
be
an
ordinance
within
our
control
here
locally.
What
we're
asking
the
legislature
to
do
is:
please
give
us
the
legal
authority
to
do
this,
because
right
now
that
legal.
E
D
President,
we
got
five
minutes
by
the
way,
then
we're
going
to
wrap
up
very
quickly
and
just
again,
we
are
voting
tonight
to
just
have
the
legis
a
piece
of
order
go
forward.
I
know
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
languages
here,
but
we
still
have
the
control
of
the
language.
What
I
understand
I
mean,
if
not
I'd
like
for
someone
to
speak
now,
whether
it
be
the
city,
solicitor
or
the
city
manager
regarding
once
it's
sent
forward,
is
it
set
in
stone.