Residents urge moratorium on new 4+ unit developments, citing parking, water and displacement concerns

Several residents used the public-comment period to press the council to consider Item 20, a resolution that would place a moratorium on new residential developments of four or more units.

Juan Solar Ramos read a letter urging the council to use a moratorium period to revise Everett’s zoning, create an Office of Housing Stability and lower inclusionary zoning thresholds that he argued are currently tied to 80% AMI and are out of reach for many residents. Peggy Serino and Mary Fortin described parking congestion, infrastructure pressure and neighborhood change and urged elected officials to slow the pace of multiunit construction. Gorham and others raised concerns about sewer and water capacity and accessibility of veteran services.

Speakers asked how the inclusionary-zoning lottery is monitored, questioned the city’s TDM rules that limit parking, and sought specifics on large proposed appropriations from free cash. One commenter also asked about Encore Boston Harbor reporting on local hiring; another cited Mass Gaming Commission employment data to show a low percentage of Everett residents employed at the casino.

During council debate on Item 20, outside counsel Jonathan Silverstein explained legal constraints on adopting moratoria: a zoning moratorium must itself be adopted as an ordinance, be referred to the Planning Board, include public hearings and be subject to legal challenge; it cannot be imposed informally as a stop to permitting simply because recodification is underway. The council voted to refer Item 20 to the Committee on Legislative Affairs and Elections and invited the city solicitor for committee consideration; Councilor Smith was recorded as voting 'no' on that referral.