Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on PILOTs and parking as multiple development agreements advance
Summary
At the July 16 meeting residents criticized the number and length of long-term tax-exemption agreements (PILOTs) and raised concerns about insufficient parking, street congestion and planning-board outreach; developers and council members responded, citing community-benefit payments and planning-board processes.
Multiple residents used the July 16 public-comment period to press the council about the city’s long-term tax-exemption agreements (PILOTs) and the effects of recent development on parking and traffic.
Sharon Nedrowski told the council the city “currently have about 47 pilots active” and argued that the city should not continue to offer long-term incentives; she asked why pilots continue when, she said, development “is doing great.” Nedrowski said she understood some pilots were 20 or 25 years and criticized the perceived length of those terms.
Anna Delicato, an infrastructure designer, and other residents described acute parking shortages near new projects and said permit-zone changes and multiple simultaneous construction projects have worsened the problem. Delicato asked the council and planning board to consider timing and coordination of construction and to require developers to provide adequate parking for unit counts.
Developer representatives and counsel said the administration and council routinely negotiate parking, loading and design changes before final approvals. Michael Miceli, attorney for a redeveloper, said the city and his clients work together on design and parking “and it’s not always the way we want it, but it’s not always the way the city wants it either” and noted developers must make projects “financeable and buildable.” The council noted a recent credit-rating improvement that affects financing.
Council members and staff described recent changes intended to capture community benefits from redevelopment: examples discussed included community-benefit payments (one project cited a $78,000 payment to support parks/parking) and direction from council members to ask developers to allocate more parking spaces in future building designs. The administration said some community-benefit funds are restricted by redevelopment agreement rules to be spent in areas near the project.
Why it matters: residents say parking and traffic are deteriorating in corridors with heavy development; council members say redevelopment brings ratables and revenue that helped reduce a prior multi‑million dollar structural deficit.
What’s next: several financial-agreement ordinances advanced at second reading and final passage; the council asked for continued design and parking commitments during redevelopment-plan and site-plan review stages.
