Hi.

You ready, Gus?

Okay.

Tell me when you're ready.

Do you want to leave it there for minutes like Dennis, leave it here for minutes?

Dennis.

Almost two months, no problem.

Counselors, would you take your seats?

We're going to be getting beginning in a moment.

Anyone that wants to speak, there is a sign-up sheet at the podium at the door.

If you'd like to go sign up.

I know some people have signed up already and some haven't.

So if anybody wants to, we'll leave it there for a couple more minutes.

So anybody want to sign up?

And the new people that just walked in the door, there's a sign-up sheet if you'd like to speak.

You can sign up at the at the podium.

Okay, counselors take your seats.

Thank you very much.

This is a committee on appointments and briefings.

It is January twenty-eighth, twenty twenty-six and is seven oh three.

No, this meeting is being live streamed and recorded.

City Council and commit committee meetings can be viewed on the CW Bedford's homepage under quick links, then meetings.

So today in the chamber we're joined by a counselor at large, Ian Abro.

I saw him, I walked in with him.

He's not in his seat.

Counselor for Ward 2, Scott Pemberton.

Council for Ward 1, Leo Choquette, Council Ward 5, Joseph Lopes, Council at Large, James Roy, Council for Ward 3, Sean Oliver, and Councillor at Large, Jane Burgo.

Thank you all for coming.

And I'm Naomi Carney, Chair of Appointments and Briefings.

And thank you all for coming.

Would you like anything to read in the record?

Nothing.

Okay.

Item number one is a written motion, Councillors Oliver requesting that the Committee on Appointments and Briefings schedule a meeting prior to Thursday, February twelfth, twenty twenty-six City Council meeting for the purpose of allowing the residents of Illinois, Ohio, Jerry, Maryland, and Appleton Streets a forum in which they may voice any concerns regarding the proposed ordinance amending chapter nine comprehensive zoning specifically as it relates to parking requirements under appendix C.

Table of Parking and Loading Requirements to be referred to the Committee on Appointments and Briefings.

Um be it as it may, there may be some miscommunication or whatever um that the neighborhood might have uh felt uh slighted as far as representation when it came to the the drafting and um uh ultimately voting on this ordinance.

Um most of that obviously had uh circled around a proposed development that's um floating around the idea uh is floating around in for this neighborhood, so they had some additional concerns as well.

Um those two things, uh this ordinance and that development were are running in two different um tandems and in two different venues.

Um I felt it necessary for folks to still come in and uh voice those concerns.

So here we are uh with a additional forum in which that neighborhood can do so.

Um but with that being said, although they have concerns with the development, um it's this is a citywide ordinance.

Um it's not gonna be a uh uh it we have to almost take a one-size-fit-all approach, knowing fair well that it's not going to fit every neighborhood, and that's why we have other mechanisms in place, such as the planning board and zoning board and inspectional services that are going to oversee any developments that come to be anyways.

Um but this is their opportunity to voice what their concerns are with this ordinance.

Um I just hope that the the folks I see it looks like they're here to take advantage of that, so I'm happy that it ended up working out and uh appreciate the opportunity for them to come in and give us their feedback on it.

So thank you for the opportunity to uh counsel Abrew.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Um of the points I was going to made my make my esteemed colleague from War 3 already made, but just to kind of piggyback a little bit off of that, um, just to be clear and transparent.

Um there's no killing of this ordinance tonight.

There's no killing of the China buffet development proposal.

I don't want to make sure anyone's being misled.

That's not the purpose of this hearing.

This purpose of this hearing, which I voted for and I supported, as I believe it was unanimous throughout the entire body, was for folks to come here and speak and speak their piece and give their opinions and views, and it's going to be opinions and views that are well taken because as Sean, or I should say, excuse me, uh the Ward 3 counselor had said, and he's correct.

When this development, no matter what goes on at that China Buffet property, whether it's uh uh uh you know uh fast food joint, whether it's the housing development which is being talked spoken about now and talked about, this will have to go before the planning board called site plan review.

That's where restrictions can get put in place, like parking, lighting, signage, all of that.

Um so that's where this stuff sort of gets litigated.

But the points that are going to be brought forward to us tonight, I think could be points that could be well taken and used in that hearing for the site plan review that we could use and testify on behalf of the neighborhood if and when this development does go forward.

So I just wanted to be clear on everybody so everyone understood, you know, uh the balls and strikes here tonight.

This isn't getting killed, it's not getting stopped.

This is just uh discussion where we can hear the concerns and then we can move forward from there.

So with that I'll yield.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Avery.

Councillor Shocke.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um I'd like to uh continue with what my two esteemed colleagues had said prior.

So nothing has been submitted yet on this issue.

So we are in like what you would call a prototype prototype stage here, and nothing has been submitted.

So this is really kind of you know, us wanting to hear from the you know from my constituents, our constituents in in in Ward 1 in these areas.

Um it's as you all know, I take this very seriously, and I always like to have the people's voice heard far in advance of any surprises or any issues coming about.

Uh I'd like to thank my colleagues for allowing this to happen, and I'd like to thank the constituents we have here tonight for coming in and wanting to be heard.

That's this is all part of the democratic process.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Shoquette.

Anybody else that speak?

Okay.

So we'll start with the people that signed up.

Um we have Caroline Carol Cecilini.

You can approach the podium.

Thank you.

Okay, this is um I just put these notes here because otherwise I would forget half the things I wanted to say.

Um but it's hard to believe the hypocrisy of what's happening in our city.

For years we've been hearing about quality of life, about green spaces, about alternative energy, about planting trees, etc.

Mrs.

Cicelini, could you get a little closer to the microphone?

Okay.

Thank you.

You want to start again?

Sure, please.

Could you give us your address?

Oh, we have it.

Yeah, we she's people that signed up, we have their addresses.

We don't do that anymore.

Okay.

It's hard to believe the hypocrisy of what's happening in our city.

For years we've been hearing about quality of life, about green spaces, about alternative energy, about planting trees, etc.

At infinitum.

Yet all of a sudden it's okay to build a monster-sized apartment house on a postage stamp size lot with no backyard, no porches, no balconies, virtually no landscaping, a very limited parking.

A huge building that will necessitate the stealing of parking spaces currently being used by the existing neighborhood.

A huge monstrosity that will put their neighbors sunny gardens in the shade that will take away the possibility for the surrounding single-story homes to install solar in the future.

This is a nightmare for the current neighborhood, and not exactly offering a quality of life for the future tenants who will be warehoused like rats in cages in order to line the landlord's pockets with gold.

Sorry.

This whole issue is not only hypocritical and ridiculous, but both heartbreaking and cruel for the present neighborhood, but also for the future tenants.

And I wanted to also mention that where I live is on I live in the second house north of the New York Chinese buffet on Ashley Boulevard, and my driveway is what was supposed to be part of Appleton Street.

Half the time when I'm coming out of my driveway and people park along Ashley Boulevard, I can't see the traffic that's coming from the left.

Very difficult that we already have a problem with parking and visibility.

And it's even more compounded when vote gets out and when the people from the um industrial park get out.

And it's already very a very congested area.

So thank you.

Thank you.

John Chabanau, you're up next.

I'm from 142 Illinois Street.

I've been living in that neighborhood for 37 years.

Very residential neighborhood.

The parking there, it's gonna be a nightmare.

You add that many people in that location.

Twenty-two uh complexes.

Most people have two cars.

Where are they gonna park?

They're gonna park on the street.

People aren't gonna be able to get out of their driveway.

When we have a big snowstorm, what are they gonna do?

You you've got people in there that can't get out now.

That's it's it to me it's ridiculous to try and put something like that in that neighborhood.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chabner.

The next one we have is John Preston.

Nope.

John Preston 250 Jerry Street.

I want to thank the council for letting us be heard tonight.

I know we all don't agree on everything, but one thing we do agree on is that healthy debate should never be stifled.

Okay?

And I appreciate I really do.

I mean that.

I appreciate you guys letting us come and say our piece.

I realize that this is about the ordinance specific.

And it just cuts deep because of the timing of where it hit.

And it felt as though the ordinance was specific to that project in the timeline.

And perhaps that's not the case, okay.

And we have a saying, proper prior planning prevents poor performance.

And I, for one, appreciate the fact that we need more housing, okay.

But I'm I'm very concerned about lowering the parking to one spot per unit.

It's going to create traffic nightmares across the city.

Um there's going to be uh an undue strain on infrastructure and school.

I mean, the population really could could explode.

Um I don't want to get into too much detail about that project because that's not really what we're here to talk about.

Um I want to thank Bruce for coming.

Bruce and I have worked with Councillor Schocat and the neighbors.

Um the big the big thing with this parking is the potential for negative impact on the taxpayers on the equity in our homes, you know, uh specifically to our neighborhood.

If there's a 20-unit apartment building at the top of the street and there's cars parked everywhere, and I have an open house to sell my house, that's going to dissuade some buyers and probably gonna get lower offers, and the equity in our homes is going to be affected.

And I think my opinion, on my humble opinion, is that um, and I I don't know, you know, the ins and outs and the and the proceedings of the city council and ordinances and how things you know move forward.

Uh I don't know if there's some kind of caveat that could be added to limit these uh changes in in single-family neighborhoods like that.

It's it's um, you know.

I promise you those are taxpayers and voters.

And people are fleeing.

So please consider our concerns as a neighborhood as it relates to this ordinance.

Um I don't know what the final number will be, whether it'll still be two or one and a half or one or zero.

But those are our concerns.

Thank you for letting me speak.

Thank you.

Those of everybody that signed up, but anybody here would like to speak.

Anyone else would like to approach the podium and say a few words?

Yes.

Please.

We need your name.

You don't have to give you address, just your name.

That's right.

Michelle Pacico, 136 Jerry Street.

He is in Peter, A-C-H-E-C-O.

ECO.

And it's Michelle with two L's if we're really going to get into it.

So I just to summarize or actually just add to what uh we're all hearing here.

Yes, I'm from Jerry Street.

Yes, the project that is currently on the um, well, actually, nothing's been presented, is one of the reasons that I have an issue.

But I want to remind this council or this uh this board that there should be a plan for New Bedford, a vision for New Bedford, and we do need housing.

We're grandfathered into the historic nature of this of this wonderful city, and the parking issues that we already have in a lot of neighborhoods, uh including ours as well.

I mean, let's face it, these one family homes that we do have, we have single family neighborhood, but there's four cars in a lot of houses because you know teenage kids are driving or whatever.

So we have, you know, we're we're trying to make the best we can for what was grandfathered.

But now for the vision and the future of New Bedford, I don't understand how we can be saying, oh, the reality is there's less cars on the road.

Let's make, you know, let's let people build with less space as needed.

Let's maybe add to the congestion that we already see.

You know, again, I'm not just talking about Jerry Street, but you know, I know I was actually very happy to see that I believe it's Kudo Construction, got a five million dollar grant or something like that for an old nursing home that has ingress, egress.

I mean, that can really be, you know, I would but but you know, maybe you know, that could be again where you're looking at your site plan and things like that.

But I feel like there's a responsibility to your constituents, to the residents of New Bedford, that we don't continue by, you know, I don't see how you're solving a problem by saying let's build more units because we have a housing price crisis.

But let's just sort of ignore the fact that you know most people are driving, most one bedrooms are gonna have two cars.

Uh and let's put that in a congested already, you know, narrow street where if you have people on both sides, it's happens to me every day now.

You gotta wait.

You're hopefully in front of someone's driveway so you can let somebody pass because you can't two cars that are not able to go down a lot of these really narrow streets, and I don't see what the vision is and what you're thinking here.

And just to piggyback off, I believe it was uh Counselor Avery who said, Um, I believe, and I haven't seen the motion or the uh draft of this um change in the ordinance, but I believe it's by right.

So no site plan review can be limited.

Is it not by right?

Is it by are you going to give this change in parking?

It's if it's from what I'm assuming, and again, I have not seen it.

Are you not doing isn't this going to be by right?

That it's gonna be one space.

So you can't then come in when a developer comes in and say, oh no, we're gonna change it.

We really want you to have two.

You can't limit and then if you're doing it by right, you can't then limit a site plan review in the planning board and saying, no, no, we want more restrictions.

What you should be doing then is proposing that the change be instead of by right, to you know, uh two cars or only, maybe say that you know, in you know, circumstance certain circumstances it could be by planning board or by zoning, or you know, just like you do with any other use ordinance that you have.

But I don't see why this is a we're just gonna change it across the board to one parking space, no vision, no thought.

I mean, let's face it, this is 2026.

Uh, very few people don't have more than uh a two-car family or a two-car dwelling.

And again, I think that we need to have a little bit more um vision and plan for the city of New Bedford.

Um, and and it's like I said, um I've lived in Boston.

I had to get my Charlestown ticket, I had to get my South Boss.

Are we gonna now soon?

I mean, soon what we're gonna do is we're gonna all have to have parking permissions permits and you know, uh guest spots, and it's gonna be you know, that whole thing.

I mean, I just I foresee just problems and problems and problems.

If we we should be really careful with the changes that we're making.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Anybody else would like to speak?

Council Abreu?

No, I just want to mention something because I was uh mentioned uh by name and she is absolutely correct.

The resident is correct.

What I'm talking about is we're seeing it currently right now before the planning board where you can um mandate that the developer uh figure out and find out um parking uh off-site for their tenants.

We're seeing it right now on the planning board with one of the developments from Ronald Oliveira, for example, that's happening, which I know several others excuse me in this body are aware about as well.

That's been kind of a back and forth.

So you can mandate that.

Okay, you know, we have the 22 parking spots here, but the planning board can say, but for you to go forward, we need to have 20 more spots somewhere.

We gotta find somewhere nearby where you can rent or whatever the case may be.

So that's what I'm talking about.

That could be part of the process.

That could be litigated in planning.

So that's the point that I'm making.

It's been done, it's happening right now, and it could happen here as well.

Thank you.

Sorry, I just want to and again, maybe I mean I didn't think that the planning board could do that.

If you're doing giving them a right to two, how can you say, no, it's no, we're gonna make it a right to one, but you know, now we're gonna add this extra limitation when it's by right.

Again, I still don't understand how the planning board has any authority if the ordinance that you're gonna put in place as one per spot.

So I think you've got to be really careful of what you do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Council Virgo.

I just want to remind those in the chamber as well, because we do have a number of people here that haven't spoken.

They might not feel comfortable uh sharing any testimony, but if they are here to speak out uh against uh the change in the ordinance, I ask that they record themselves um against it.

That is also an option for those in the chamber that don't feel comfortable getting up there to share anything that they can just stand up and say, I'm Shane Burgo, and I uh want to be recorded uh against or in favor of said ordinance.

That's also an option for those that are in the room today as well.

Yes, we can do that.

I will allow that.

So anybody else want to speak before I record.

Would you like to be okay?

You're on the list, so and you made me crash you off.

Now you better expect this.

Okay, Beth Kalanowich, 220 Appleton Street.

Um we do not have sidewalks on our street.

In the summer, well, not summer, spring, fall, there are families walking their dogs, walking their babies.

There are children playing up and down the street constantly.

There's no sidewalks to walk those dogs, or their children.

So if you put more cars there, where are these people gonna go?

So I I just like I said, I didn't expect to speak, but I just thought of that while I was there.

Thank you, Beth.

Does anybody else want to speak?

Okay, at this time, is there I'll take names and we record you whether or not you're in favor against.

So first of all, I'll ask, is anybody in favor?

Anybody in favor be recorded in favor?

Okay.

Anybody might want to be recorded against?

In favor of the ordinance, you've got to give both sides.

In favor of the ordinance.

The parking ordinance, correct?

Yes.

All right.

So folks that are against, raise their hand.

Okay, so we're gonna start recording you.

Name.

If you've already spoke, you don't have to be recorded.

Okay.

Joseph Stephon?

Joseph Seven.

S D E I to D L I'm against We're doing all against right now.

Channels of the Mendoza?

Okay, Mr.

Shabner.

You're you're Mr.

Chabner have already spoken, so we're good with you.

What was your last name again?

Yeah, move your head.

Christopher Susan.

Z.

Wayne Kalanowitch.

Trial.

Who's your last name?

Trial.

Try.

Like in court.

No.

Okay.

Okay, one more round.

Does anybody else want to speak?

Any counselors?

Yes.

Yes.

You know, you need to come to the podium if you want to speak.

So I too.

First of all, I want to welcome our former Ward 4 city councillor.

Thank you.

I too want to thank the counselors for giving us this opportunity tonight to speak.

It's very important.

It's very important to hear from the people, right?

That's why you guys are here, and that's why we're here to have dialogue to talk about things that we think that aren't appropriate for our neighborhood.

And that's what this is all about.

I don't, as well as my neighbors don't think this is appropriate for our neighborhood.

The change, the parking change is going to in effect fast track this development, which is going to be a nightmare for our neighborhood.

A nightmare.

We had the most snow we've had in many years.

Where do people park?

Because people couldn't find places to park their vehicles.

And that's just one thing.

You talk about folks that are walking their children.

I see it every day in the summertime.

Walking the the riding their bicycles or whatever.

There's no sidewalks mostly in our neighborhood.

You know the mayor said on BSM a few weeks ago that this wouldn't affect single family neighborhoods.

Well this is a single family neighborhood and this is going to affect that.

And so I am totally against this.

I want to thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak today because I think it's important as Councillor Chulquet said it's a democratic process that allows us to do this and I thank you for giving us this opportunity.

Thank you counselor.

Counselor Oliver would you like the floor um I I was just gonna with with that being said I was just going to make a motion to um uh referral to the full city council uh taking no further action on this at this time and I'd like to speak on that when able to second speak on no further action no she allows a second counselor made by motion was made by counselor oliver second by counselor abrew on the question uh thank thank you madam chair um I know we normally don't uh speak on on on the qu on uh no final action but I think this is something that is uh a little bit unique and uh you know who cares really we're gonna speak for the people and speak for this process so um I know that folks uh may hear it as no further action and I think that that gets um mistaken as we're not doing anything um that is uh not what it is this is just to discharge it from the committee uh that's how uh our process works um obviously I think all my colleagues that are in attendance tonight have taken what this neighborhood uh has said um and it's you know now up to um this body to make any changes or amendments in which they feel um is warranted uh I'm not sure if any of those will come forward but I think that the comments that were um stated here tonight were were well received by this body and um again just because we're taking no further action tonight merely just to discharge it from this committee um doesn't mean that action still can't be taken before uh the vote on February 12th so I just wanted to do that for for clarity that's all so thank you for the opportunity to do that thank you counselor Oliver anybody else on the question saying none all in all in favor we have to take the vote first all in favor of no further action say aye aye aye opposed the ayes have it motion made to adjourn by counselor abrew second by counselor burgo all in favor say aye aye opposed the ayes have it thank you all for coming coming we're adjourned at 7 33 p.m residents again thank you for coming