Monday Feb. 10th 6:30 PM at the Roberts School, the city will be holding a Q&A. This meeting is being billed as an educational opportunity for the neighborhood. So sadly, they likely plan to make no changes based on the questions asked that night. Come! Be heard. Share what you don’t like in the zoning. Share how the zoning will personally affect you. ASK QUESTIONS! They claim they will be dispelling misinformation at this meeting. One would assume that if misinformation was being shared that the city would aim to correct it IMMEDIATELY. Why only do it at a community meeting that they advertised once on Jan. 30th?
Whenever talk begins about new projects in neighborhoods, everyone wants to talk about the parking. Where are they gonna park? Current zoning is 1.5 spaces per unit in an apartment building. There is also an “incentive for alternative minimum residential parking requirements: that allow for .8 spaces when “located within ½ mile of high-frequency transit.”
What definition is the city using to classify transit as “high frequency?” Where does that definition appear in the zoning? Who decides what transit will be classified as “high frequency?” What steps are required to do this to avoid that definition being open to interpretation? What characteristics must exist for transit to be identified as “high frequency?” Will the incentive be allowed before the transit begins? Can a plan from the MBTA with a future date trigger this incentive?
Our research has shown that this addition doesn’t seem to have been fleshed out in any deliberate and clear way. As has been said at Planning and Development Committee meetings multiple times, zoning can be up to interpretation. This is too important to not be clear.
As mentioned in our blog about Matt Leming, we have an email from traffic engineer Todd Blake calling the bus that will travel down Salem Street as a product of the MBTA Better Bus Project a “high frequency” bus. In the same blog, we shared a portion of the email that Kit Collins sent to the Community Development Board when she calls Salem St “transit-proximate” (which means development that is physically near a public transit node (bus station, train station or metro station). A bus stop is not included in this definition, but as Kit is the chair of the Planning and Development subcommittee, it seems that is the intent of this parking zoning.
Further clarity of the working definition of “high frequency transit” is required. This is too impactful of a change in our parking regulations to be open to interpretation. A well-shaped definition of "transit proximate", a non-industry term, is required before that incentive is activated.
The neighborhood node of Park St and Salem St, indicated by a red star in the map above, has 18 parking spaces according to the Parking Advisor Committee Report from Sept. 30, 2009 that was included in our FOIA packet. If hundreds of units are added to that area with an incentive of .8 with an average car ownership of 2 per unit in Medford, there would be enormous stress on an already low supply of parking. This will be particularly stressful with the Salem St zoning calling for business with 5k or less floor area to require zero parking spaces.
The Chamber of Commerce has expressed some concern about the businesses and parking as well. In their letter to the Community Development Board dated on January 22, 2025, they asked the following questions:
1. The public parking incentive is listed as “to be confirmed” (page 15 of Innes Dec. 11 memorandum). What are some of the incentives being considered?
2. Existing businesses need public parking. Currently freestanding parking lots which are not associated with a new business are not allowed (section F 3,4,5). While it’s understood that a parking lot may not be an economically feasible venture in this area it should be an option.
3. For the existing fuel businesses (J1) that are now excluded in this area, what are their options if they want to sell their business?
4. Has a traffic study been done for this area based upon the proposed zoning changes?
These questions from the business community are good; and at the point where we are on the final steps for approval of this zoning, they should all be very easy to find answers to.
Why is anything in this zoning pending? Why are the studies (or messaging of a lack thereof) not included in the zoning data about the Salem Street project and all other zoning items that have already been passed? Why has the city not held a meeting with the owner(s) of the gas stations to explain to them how this zoning will impact them? Is the city essentially devaluing their business in regard to them being able to sell the business in the future?
Parking is a quality-of-life issue. We need a parking audit; we need an impact study. The idea that parking, traffic, or other infrastructure studies should be conducted on a case-by-case basis; building by building, illustrates a lack of awareness and regard from those leading this zoning effort. It is imperative that this information is reviewed wholistically to craft a mitigation plan. In short, once the buildings are built and the cars are scrambling for parking, it will be too late. The neighborhood should not have to battle poorly studied zoning impacts building by building. The city needs to do their due diligence.
Comments