City Council Planning & Development Committee

Planning & Development Standing Committee and Committee of the Whole Meeting

Wednesday, September 2, 2026 – 6:00 p.m. City Hall Kyrouz Auditorium 9 Dale Avenue Gloucester, MA 01930

-Minutes-

Planning & Development Committee Present: Chair, Councilor Jason Grow; Councilor Hannah Kimberley

Committee of the Whole Present: Council President, Tony Gross; Councilor Marjorie Grace; Councilor Patti-Ann Page

Absent: Vice Chair, Councilor Dylan Benson

Also Present: Community Development Director, Alex Koppelman; General Counsel, Suzanne Egan; Planning Director, Gregg Cademartori; Legislative Aide, Lynds Jones

This meeting was conducted in person and remotely through ZOOM

Councilor Grow called the P&D meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

Councilor Gross called the Committee of the Whole meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.

Councilor Grow announced the names of the P&D Committee members in attendance.

1. Memorandum from the Community Development Director regarding the draft Housing Compass Plan referral

Summary of Discussion: Community Development Director, Alex Koppelman shared his screen.

[Slide: Gloucester Housing Compass – A policy guide for a more affordable community today and tomorrow; Planning & Development (P&D) Subcommittee of City Council Review and Comment | September 2, 2026 6:00 pm]

Alex Koppelman stated the above. He stated that the Housing Compass Plan was based off the most current data and on public input gathered over the past year.

[Slide: Project Timeline] - 09/25 Start - 03/26 Housing needs assessment - 04/26 Development constraints analysis - 7/26 Draft plan - Fall: Local adoption / State approval - ("We are here" marker between 7/26 and Fall)

Community engagement: - Five Focus groups - Tabling at six events - Citywide survey - March community forum - July community forum - Public comment period 7/29 – 08/29 - Planning Board - City Council

[Slide: Plan Components] - Housing Needs Assessment - Current Housing Toolkit - Housing Goals - Development Constraints and Opportunities - Recommendations

(Cover image shown: Gloucester Housing Compass 2025-2030, A policy guide for a more affordable community today and tomorrow)

[Slide: Housing Needs Assessment – Housing needs and goals vary for everyone and change as people age.] - 19.2% Families with Kids Age 0-21: Since 2014, enrollment in Gloucester schools has declined by 7%. The share of Gloucester households with children is only 22% today. Gloucester's limited supply of housing that families can afford impacts these trends. - 8.5% Young Professionals Age 18-24: Young professionals living independently for the first time are typically looking for smaller, more affordable homes to rent. Just 36% of the city's housing stock is rental. One-bedroom or studio apartments make up 19% of the housing supply. - 21.4% First-time Homebuyers Age 35-49: A young person or family looking to purchase a home would need $143,000 in savings to put a standard 20% downpayment on the median-priced single family home in Gloucester - $715,000. These housing costs are out of reach for many Gloucester households. Condominiums, typically found in small multi-family buildings, offer a relatively more attainable homeownership option at a median price of $395,000. - 25.5% Empty Nesters Age 50-64: Adults without children may find a large home is no longer necessary or too cumbersome to maintain. They may be seeking a smaller homeownership option or the flexibility offered by a rental. Downsizing choices are limited in Gloucester as 56% of the housing stock is single family homes. - 25.5% Older Adults Aged 65+: As residents retire, much of their wealth is tied up in home equity that is difficult to access, while rising property taxes strain fixed incomes. Seniors make up about half of very low and extremely low-income households in Gloucester. Many seniors wish to age in place but often need home modifications, particularly as ability changes with age or if they live alone. If they wish to downsize, options are limited and they may stay longer in existing homes, reducing the availability of single-family homes for younger families. - Age Distribution in Gloucester (ACS 5-year estimates, 2019-2023)

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: What does the existing housing supply look like?] - Single Family: 56% of Gloucester's existing housing supply - Multi-Family 2 to 4 units: 32% of Gloucester's existing housing supply - Multi-Family 5 or more units: 12% of Gloucester's existing housing supply - 13,896 total year round housing units - An estimated 8% of all housing units are used seasonally

[Slide: What does housing cost in Gloucester?] - OWNERSHIP – Median Single Family Home Sale Price: $715,000 (The Warren Group, 2025) - A household would need an income of $182,500 to pay for a mortgage based on Median Sale Price - Median costs are more than the median Gloucester household can afford: +$94,000 more per year than the median Gloucester household income ($87,900) (ACS 5-year estimates, 2019-2023) - RENTAL – Median 2-Bedroom Rent: $2,200 per month (MAPC Rental Listings Database, 2024) - A household would need $100,000 to rent a home based on Median 2-Bedroom Rent - +$1,000 more per month than the median Gloucester household can afford (ACS 5-year estimates, 2019-2023)

[Slide: A lack of affordable housing choices impacts our local economy.] - 41% of Gloucester households pay more than they can afford for housing. - Cost-burdened households that spend more than 30% of income on housing costs have less income available to support the local economy or invest in their own business. - Workers across all economic sectors are affected by limited housing supply and affordability challenges in Gloucester. Workers on the waterfront, manufacturing, service and hospitality, and the cultural sector all face housing pressure. - Additional housing options can: Expand the workforce and improve employee retention; Strengthen the local market with a larger year-round consumer base; Support Gloucester's cultural richness

[Slide: Affordable Housing in Gloucester] - 1,133 units of deed-restricted affordable housing - 6,835 households eligible for affordable housing - 1 unit of affordable housing for every 6 households eligible for affordable housing based on income - What's affordable? Generally, a home is considered affordable when a household spends no more than 30% of their income on housing costs (Housing Costs = Rent, Mortgage Payments, Utilities, Insurance, etc.)

[Slide: Community Engagement Summary] "Meeting people where they are" / "Over 600 people engaged"

| Timing | Engagement | Purpose | ~ Number of Participants | |---|---|---|---| | Fall 2025 | Housing Focus Groups | Unhoused and housing-insecure residents | 6 – 10 per group | | Fall 2025 | Roadshow – Phase 1 | Tabling at community events | 75+ | | Oct. 2025 – Apr. 2026 | Citywide Survey | Needs, aspirations, and preferred housing types | 224 | | Jan. 2026 | Roadshow – Phase 2 | Senior Center, GHS, and Sawyer Free Library | 100+ | | Spring 2026 | Targeted Focus Groups | Creative sector, Brazilian community & local employers/workforce housing | 6 – 10 per group | | Mar. 23, 2026 | Community Forum #1 | Housing needs assessment and locations | 100 attendees | | Jul. 29, 2026 | Community Forum #2 | Review and feedback on draft Housing Compass Plan | 75 attendees | | Jul. 29 – Aug. 29, 2026 | Public Comment | Feedback on draft recommendations | 91 total comments |

Alex Koppelman stated that the Housing Compass Plan had gotten input from a variety of different communities within the City, and through a number of different avenues as can be seen above.

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: Plan Goals] - Housing for an Aging Community: Support and create housing that meets the needs of an aging population, especially limited-income seniors. (Downsizing choices, smaller home types, connected neighborhoods) - Diverse Housing Choices: Expand attainable housing choices, especially for young adults and young families who lack housing choices in Gloucester's housing market. (Supports for homeownership, small multifamily home types, year-round rental choices) - Affordability for Gloucester households: Expand the supply of Affordable homes, especially for vulnerable households and essential workers at the heart of Gloucester's economy and small businesses. (Deeply affordable homes, workforce housing, opportunities for attainable homeownership) - Build Local Capacity: Improve local capacity to monitor and maintain Affordable Housing, resources, and supports for residents. (Regional collaboration, strengthen, coordinate, and promote existing tools)

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: Protect strategy table – priority items marked] 1. Expand opportunities for homeownership - 1.1 Strengthen and promote first-time homebuyer & Affordable homeownership programs (Programs & Resources) 2. Protect vulnerable households from displacement - 2.1 Adopt a Tenant Rights & Resources Notification Ordinance (TRRN) (Local Policy) - 2.2 Advocate for statewide Older Adult Housing Bridge program funding (State Policy) 3. Protect and support local workers and creatives - 3.1 Modernize home occupation zoning (Zoning) - 3.2 Extend the existing allowance for "Arts, crafts and sale of arts or crafts if made on the premises" to other appropriate districts (Zoning) - 3.3 Adopt an Agent of Change Sound policy (Local Policy)

[Slide: STRATEGY 1 - Priority: Expand opportunities for homeownership] - Increase the amount of CDBG-funded first-time homebuying assistance (currently $15K loan) - Create a centralized City digital resource for federal, state, and local homeownership tools and resources - Expand supply of attainable homes

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: STRATEGY 2.1 - Priority: Adopt a Tenant Rights & Resources Notification Ordinance] - Leverage rental registry to disseminate written rights and resources to tenants - Produce in a variety of languages, including Spanish, Brazilian, and Portugese - Reference examples from Cambridge and Medford - Must be adopted by the City Council

[Slide: STRATEGY 2.2 - Priority: Advocate for statewide Older Adult Housing Bridge program funding] - Rental assistance to seniors and veterans when on the waiting list for affordable housing - Coordinate with the Council on Aging, the Center for Aging Well, Cape Ann Veterans Services, and service providers like Action Inc. - Expand age-friendly, accessible housing options

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: Preserve strategy table – priority items marked] 4. Strengthen Affordable Housing monitoring - 4.1 Evaluate and establish municipal standards for regulatory agreements for Local Action Units (Municipal Capacity) - 4.2 Advocate for statewide regulations limiting rent increases for Affordable Housing (State Policy) 5. Monitor short-term rentals and consider a lease-to-locals program - 5.1 Monitor Short-Term Rental permitting and rental registry data (Municipal Coordination) - 5.2 Consider implementation of tools to incentivize year-round rentals (Local Policy) - 5.3 Explore a voluntary artist lodging or cultural residency lodging partnership (Local Policy) 6. Increase local housing capacity through a regional housing service (Regional Collaboration) 7. Consider establishing a "Buy-down" program (Local Policy)

[Slide: STRATEGY 4.1 - Priority: Evaluate and establish municipal standards for regulatory agreements for Local Action Units] - Even deed-restricted units increase in rent as the Area Median Income goes up - Advocate for statewide reform, including a new model regulatory agreement - Give authority to the City to limit rent increases. - Increase capacity or participate in a shared housing service office to monitor deed-restricted housing units

[Slide: STRATEGY 5.1 - Priority: Monitor and regulate Short-Term Rentals to expand choices for year-round residents within the existing housing supply.] - Evaluate trends and changes over time - Identify non-compliance and enforcement needs - Consider amendments to the ordinance if needed

[Slide: STRATEGY 6 - Priority: Consider forming or joining a Regional/Shared Housing Services Office.] - Examples in North Reading and Hudson - Share staff with a specialty in affordable housing administration and desired skills - Pay into office based on expected demand

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: STRATEGY 7 - Priority: Consider establishing a "Buy-down" program for units with expiring affordability restrictions or the conversion of existing market-rate units.] - Complete a financial feasibility study to identify appropriate value and costs - Work with the Affordable Housing Trust to identify priorities for use of funds

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: Produce strategy table – priority items marked] 8. Create a Smart Growth Zoning Overlay for Railroad Ave (Zoning) 9. Right-size Zoning Requirements (Zoning) - 9.1 Consider an Infill Housing Overlay (Zoning) - 9.2 Right-size dimensional requirements to match existing built conditions (Zoning) - 9.3 Streamline Special Permit process (Zoning) - 9.4 Consider adoption of pre-approved or pre-vetted plans for infill and small multifamily housing types (Local Policy) - 9.5 Advocate for changes to the state building code to support infill and small multifamily housing types (State Policy) 10. Establish an Affordable Housing Loan Pool (Local Policy) 11. Continue to support the Gloucester Affordable Housing Trust (GAHT) (Local Policy)

• 11.1 Create a lending product to help finance ADUs for homeowners, as well as other small housing types. (Local Policy) 12. Advocate for state designations to build access to tools and resources
• 12.1 Gateway City Designation (State Policy)
• 12.2 Seasonal Community Designation (State Policy)

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: STRATEGY 8 - Priority: Create a Smart Growth Zoning Overlay for Railroad Ave.] - Goal for housing above a small grocery store - Establish standards for design and leave flexibility for financing - State incentive payments - MassWorks and HousingWorks grants

[Slide: STRATEGY 10 - Priority: Establish an Affordable Housing Loan Pool] - HUD Section 108 – borrow against CDBG allocation: 3 x $680k = ~ $3.23M - Utilize to support high-impact affordable housing development - Need for a grant administrator or consultant to manage the program

[Slide: STRATEGY 11.1 - Priority: Create a lending product to help finance ADUs for homeowners, as well as other small housing types.] - Accessory dwelling units, three-family homes, and other small housing types - Example in Salem, MA - Income-eligibility and application requirements - Affordable Housing Trust to design and manage program

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

Alex Koppelman stated the above was a map of the development constraints within the City.

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: Development Constraints and Opportunities – map legend] - Adjacent Municipalities - Areas not suitable for development: Wetlands; Protected Open Space; FEMA Floodplains; 2070 Sea Level Rise; Areas zoned for Industrial & Business Park; Steep sloped parcels - Areas potentially suitable for new homes - Commuter Rail Station

[Slide: Promoting attainable housing for Gloucester's neighborhoods] - Recommendation: Consider an area specific attainable housing overlay district to allow for smaller homes like ADUs, cottages, and small multifamily. Consider a 40Y "Starter Home District" - Recommendation: Offer financial support for income-eligible households through the Affordable Housing Trust to close the financing gap for building small attainable homes - Utilize the ADU Incentive Program from Massachusetts Housing Partnership providing property owners with technical assistance to determine feasibility of ADU development

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

Alex Koppelman stated the above were locations that had been identified in the City where there were opportunities for development. He stated that these weren't locations that the City would build housing on, but places that would make sense for the City to encourage it.

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

[Slide: Identifying Opportunity Sites for Downtown Gloucester]

| Address | Recommendation Summary | Timeframe | |---|---|---| | 272 Washington St | Consider smart growth overlay zone to facilitate clustered small multifamily | Near-term | | 7 Railroad Avenue | Consider a smart growth overlay zone to create a smaller grocery store with housing above | Near-term | | 100 Gloucester Crossing Rd | Utilize current multifamily overlay zone for medium-scale multifamily | Near-term | | 33 Emerson Avenue | Consider a smart growth overlay zone for medium-scale multifamily | Mid-term | | 58/58R Prospect St | Support small-scale multifamily or vertical mixed-use | Mid-term |

Alex Koppelman stated the above were locations that had been identified in the City where there were opportunities for development. He stated that these weren't locations that the City would build housing on, but places that would make sense for the City to encourage it.

[Slide: Smart Growth Overlay District] - Locally adopted, meets state standards - Planning Board + City Council collaboration with a development partner - Local dimensional and design standards - When process is complete, development is permitted by right

[Slide: Smart Growth Overlay District Incentives]

| Allowed housing units | Payment for zoning adoption | Payment once built | School-aged children | |---|---|---|---| | Up to 20 | $10,000 | $3,000 per unit | Annual reimbursement | | 21 - 100 | $75,000 | | | | 101 – 200 | $200,000 | | | | 201 – 500 | $350,000 | | |

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

Councilor Page asked for clarification on the implementation of the plan. Alex Koppelman stated that the Housing Compass Plan was a roadmap, and there would be a process for implementation. He stated that during this implementation process was when details were decided, such as questions regarding infrastructure capacity, or size and scale of development. He stated that which recommendations were implemented would be a decision by the City and this would include public engagement. He stated that in the case of a Smart Growth District, there would be a development partner which would create assessment studies on the impacts of the project.

Councilor Page asked for clarification regarding the fiscal impact of the recommendations on the City. Alex Koppelman stated that while there were financially oriented recommendations, the plan looked towards funding sources that were already dedicated to affordable housing. He stated these were funding sources such as the Affordable Housing Trust and the Community Development Block Grant Program. He stated that there was no recommendation in the plan that would require the City to use the General Fund as a funding source except for a staff member that would be shared with other communities.

Councilor Kimberley asked if housing on Railroad Avenue would have a local preference. Alex Koppelman stated that when affordable housing was created the City had the ability to apply for local preference of up to 70% of units. He stated that the City did this every time affordable housing came up.

Councilor Kimberley asked what the public feedback had been regarding the sites identified in the plan. Alex Koppelman stated that there had been enthusiasm from the public.

[Slide: Public Comment Summary] "91 total comments" - Railroad Avenue and a Downtown Grocery Store - Accessory Dwelling Units, Smaller Housing, and Homeowner Assistance - Short-term Rentals and Year-Round Housing - Infrastructure and Location of Future Housing - Implementation and Public Participation

Scan the QR code below to view the housing compass plan and public comment form: www.gloucester-ma.gov/1587/Gloucester-Housing-Compass

Alex Koppelman stated the above.

Councilor Kimberley asked what was the strategy to create the missing middle in housing, and decrease the cost of building small scale housing or smaller multi-family buildings. Alex Koppelman stated that the City could create a starter home district through the State's 40Y program. He stated that the City should be wary of creating City wide zoning changes, as there were different development constraints in different areas in the City. He stated the plan also recommended creating financial packages to help finance smaller multi-family development.

Councilor Gross asked if 40Y was mainly meant for undeveloped land. Alex Koppelman stated that was the case.

Councilor Gross stated that the lease to locals program that Provincetown had piloted had drained their Affordable Housing Trust.

Councilor Grace asked how many seasonal homes were in the City. Alex Koppelman stated that it was 8% of all housing units.

Councilor Grace asked for clarification regarding funding sources. Alex Koppelman stated that the Affordable Housing Trust was being suggested as a funding source, as there was $300,000 that was contributed annually by the Community Preservation Committee.

Councilor Page asked for clarification regarding the payments that the State would make under a 40R Smart Growth District. Alex Koppelman stated that there would be a one-time payment based on the units created.

Councilor Page asked if the proposed streamlining of permitting would remove City Council oversight. Alex Koppelman stated that any changes to permitting would have to be approved by the City Council itself, and there were many permitting bodies in the City that could have their processes simplified.

Councilor Page asked for clarification on the Agent of Change Sound Policy. Alex Koppelman stated that this was a recognition that there are areas of the City where housing was that had noise due to cultural activity.

Councilor Page stated that if the former Shaw's was developed then the housing would most likely not be affordable, and would be market rate. She stated if a grocery store were opened in a mixed-use development it would most likely be a high priced store.

Councilor Page asked what sort of grocery store could move into the former Shaw's location. Alex Koppelman stated that the City could not mandate what grocery store went in, but the City could use tools to facilitate the development such as a Smart Growth District. He stated that the current recommendation was meant to serve the neighborhood.

Councilor Kimberley asked what recommendations in the plan were achievable within the next year. Alex Koppelman stated that once the Housing Compass Plan was officially adopted, the priority recommendations would be a good place to start.

Councilor Gross stated that the City could not use the City's AMI to determine the rates on affordable housing, as HUD would not remove the City from the Greater Boston AMI district.

Councilor Gross asked for clarification regarding pre-approved architectural plans for development in the City. Alex Koppelman stated that the City could create pre-approved architectural plans for different sizes of buildings that would fit the development constraints of a given area. He stated that this would be a proactive approach for the City to take to support development, and when the development process was a reactive process, it could kick applicants between different permitting authorities in the City.

[Slide: What is a Housing Production Plan?] In Massachusetts, Housing Production Plans (HPPs) are plans that help municipalities better understand local housing needs, development constraints, and opportunities to guide future housing development. HPPs are typically drafted in accordance with Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, a state statute encouraging cities and towns to maintain a supply of Affordable Housing that amounts to 10% of their total year-round housing stock. For this purpose, Affordable Housing is housing eligible for inclusion on the Massachusetts Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI), which includes housing that is deed-restricted to be affordable to eligible low- and moderate-income residents without paying more than 30% of their annual household income, as well as market-rate units in mixed-income rental housing developments where 20-25% of units are Affordable Housing. This means the SHI is typically an over-estimation of each municipality's Affordable Housing supply.

In communities where less than 10% of housing units are included on the SHI, developers may petition the local Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for a comprehensive permit for housing developments that do not fully comply with local zoning, provided at least 20-25% of homes in the development are Affordable Housing. Under Chapter 40B, the ZBA has limited grounds for refusal in this case. Communities that are above 10% may claim "Safe Harbor" and thereby deny a developer a comprehensive permit. Gloucester has 13,896 year-round housing units, per the 2020 Decennial Census, of which 1,117 (or about 8.04%) are included on the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI) as of September 2025. Gloucester can also achieve temporary Safe Harbor through incremental increases to the SHI. One year of Safe Harbor is achieved through a 0.5% increase in the SHI over one calendar year. Two years of Safe Harbor is achieved through a 1% increase in the SHI over one calendar year.

Though the City has seen an increase in Affordable Housing in recent years, even meeting the state's target on the SHI does not mean that the local need for Affordable Housing will be met. This target considers development (housing supply) but not residents (housing demand). There is just 1 unit of Affordable...

Councilor Gross asked for clarification on what SHI as seen above. Alex Koppelman stated that SHI in this context meant that when 40B developments were built in a community, both affordable and market rate units were added to the State's estimation of affordable housing stock, which created an overestimation in the available affordable housing.

[Figure 29: Residential Building Permits by Building Type, 2017-2025 – bar chart showing Single Family, ADU, and Multifamily units by year, 2017-2025]

Councilor Gross asked for clarification regarding the discrepancy between the number of permitted units in 2024 in the two graphs above. Alex Koppelman stated that the data source for each graph was different.

Councilor Gross stated that the State had 609 short-term rentals registered in the City.

Councilor Gross stated that the above graph added up to 12,816 total units, and elsewhere in the Housing Compass Plan, higher figures were referenced. Alex Koppelman stated that the figure referenced in the table was from a different data source which was a survey.

There was a brief discussion regarding the percentage of non-conforming lots within the City.

Councilor Grow asked if right-sizing the zoning within the City would spur development. Alex Koppelman stated that zoning within the City was not consistent with what was on the ground, which caused residents to have to go to multiple permitting authorities during development. He stated that the Compass Housing Plan was focusing on housing development opportunities through overlay zones rather than doing the monumental work of correcting the zoning nonconformities throughout the City.

Councilor Grace asked what was the benefit for the City for the 272 Washington Street development moving from a 40B development to a 40R. Alex Koppelman stated that the City would receive incentive payments for the development under 40R.

[Figure 30: Estimated Units Permitted by Building Type, 2017-2025 – bar chart showing 4 or more units, 3-Family, 2-Family, Accessory Dwelling Unit, and Single Family by year]

Councilor Gross asked for clarification regarding the discrepancy between the number of permitted units in 2024 in the two graphs above. Alex Koppelman stated that the data source for each graph was different.

Councilor Gross stated that the State had 609 short-term rentals registered in the City.

[Figure 44: Cost-Burdened Households, Gloucester – bar chart: Cost Burdened (30 to 50% of Income) 2,659; Severely Cost Burdened (50% of Income or More) 2,652; Not Burdened 7,505]

Councilor Gross stated that the above graph added up to 12,816 total units, and elsewhere in the Housing Compass Plan, higher figures were referenced. Alex Koppelman stated that the figure referenced in the table was from a different data source which was a survey.

There was a brief discussion regarding the percentage of non-conforming lots within the City.

Councilor Grow asked if right-sizing the zoning within the City would spur development. Alex Koppelman stated that zoning within the City was not consistent with what was on the ground, which caused residents to have to go to multiple permitting authorities during development. He stated that the Compass Housing Plan was focusing on housing development opportunities through overlay zones rather than doing the monumental work of correcting the zoning nonconformities throughout the City.

Councilor Grace asked what was the benefit for the City for the 272 Washington Street development moving from a 40B development to a 40R. Alex Koppelman stated that the City would receive incentive payments for the development under 40R.

Councilor Grace asked if there were any changes from the proposed 65 units at 272 Washington Street. Alex Koppelman stated that there had not been, and the City Council would have a hand in shaping the Smart Growth District for the project.

Councilor Gross asked if a 40R development required mixed-use. Alex Koppelman stated that it did not have to be.

[Site profiles: 100 Gloucester Crossing Rd and 33 Emerson Avenue, showing existing conditions, current zoning, ownership, constraints, and recommendations]

100 Gloucester Crossing Rd: The Gloucester Crossing site is an undeveloped portion of the existing shopping center parcel, located near the Halyard Apartments development. Existing wetlands, wooded marsh, and required buffer areas on the north and east portions of the undeveloped area reduce the developable area to approximately 0.8 acres. The site was included in a substdistrict of the Multifamily Overlay Zoning District (MFOD) adopted by City Council on October 1, 2024, as a part of the process to comply with the MBTA Communities Act (3A). The zoning currently allows multifamily housing by right subject to dimensional standards. Existing Conditions: Lot Area 7.7 acres (~335,000sf) - parcel; 0.8 acres (~35,000 sf) - developable. Existing Use: Undeveloped. Current Zoning: 3A Multi-family Overlay District – Min. Lot Area: 40,000sf; Max. Height: 55ft; Density 40 units/acre. Ownership: Private. Constraints & Considerations: Wetlands and wooded marsh on the north and east sections of the property leave only about... Recommendation: Market the site to Affordable Housing developers to maximize number of homes available to Gloucester households.

33 Emerson Avenue: 33 Emerson Ave is a vacant industrial site located north of the high school and near several non-profits, including Pathways for Children and Open Door, as well as public properties including the Division of Marine Fisheries and the Lincoln Park Public Housing property. The City completed a feasibility study for a networked geothermal system connecting the high school and properties nearby. The study shows new residential development in this location could also be served by a networked geothermal system. Existing Conditions: Lot Area 6.41 acres (~280,000sf). Existing Use: Vacant, Industrial Storage. Current Zoning: General Industrial (GI); Min. Lot Area: 10,000sf; Max. Height: 40ft; Residential Use is not allowed. Ownership: Private. Constraints & ... Environmental constraints... Recommendations: Medium-scale multifamily housing; Require considerations for flood mitigation in building and site design; Consider opportunities for active open space; Consider Smart Growth zoning to allow for multifamily housing by right and...

There was a brief discussion regarding the exact locations of the other proposed areas of development as can be seen above.

Councilor Grace asked what was the amount of annual reimbursement for school age children living in a 40R development. Alex Koppelman stated that it was determined by the State.

Councilor Grace asked for clarification regarding the 40Y starter home designation and where such a district could be zoned. Alex Koppelman stated that 33 Emerson Avenue was one opportunity location. He stated that the Housing Subcommittee was working to identify areas.

Councilor Grow asked if development of City owned properties would be a good avenue for 40Y development. Alex Koppelman stated that there were no City owned properties that could be developed under 40Y due to development constraints and other factors. He stated that there may be properties owned by the Housing Authority that could be a 40Y district.

Councilor Page asked for clarification regarding the proposed townhouses at 272 Washington Street. Alex Koppelman stated that the developers had proposed to build affordable townhouses that would be financed through the Commonwealth Builder Program. He stated that the City did not meet the State's criteria to be a Gateway City and therefore the funding could not be secured. He stated that the Housing Compass Plan recommended the City seek Gateway City or Seasonal Community designations.

Councilor Page asked if other communities had met the 10% affordable housing threshold set by the State. Alex Koppelman stated that there were several, and they were detailed in the Housing Compass Plan.

Councilor Gross stated that one issue restricting housing growth was the building codes adopted by the City over the years, and that the City should lobby the State to create a commission to examine these building codes.

Councilor Gross stated that the Housing Compass Plan included provisions for in-home businesses for artists, but it would not be a blanket recommendation.

Councilor Gross asked for clarification regarding the funding of the Affordable Housing Trust. Alex Koppelman stated that Affordable Housing Trust was funded by taxes on short-term rentals, annual funding from the Community Preservation Committee, and in-lieu payments from developers who did not want to build required inclusionary housing.

Councilor Gross asked for clarification on the definition of Local Action Units were. Alex Koppelman stated that they were Affordable Housing units that were created through a local mechanism.

Councilor Grace stated that there should be more work done to create engagement with the public. Alex Koppelman stated that the Housing Compass Plan was based off the engagement that had been received from the public.

Councilor Grow asked if the City knew how many multi-family units were currently vacant and not being rented out. Alex Koppelman stated that there was limited data on the matter.

Councilor Grow asked if there was an implementation plan for the Housing Compass Plan. Alex Koppelman stated that there would be one developed and it would most likely be led by the Affordable Housing Trust.

Councilor Gross asked for clarification regarding the Seasonal Community designation. Alex Koppelman stated that it was a relatively new designation, and only a year old. He stated that though the City may not meet all the criteria, the City's housing stock was heavily affected by seasonal use.

There was a brief discussion regarding if there would be a public hearing held regarding the Compass Housing Plan. It was determined that there would be a joint special meeting of the Planning Board and City Council on September 15, 2026 where a public hearing would be held.

MOTION TO ADJOURN: On a motion by Councilor Grace, seconded by Councilor Page, the Committee of the Whole voted 3 in favor, 0 opposed, to adjourn at 7:38 p.m.

There was a brief recess taken at 7:38 p.m.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On a motion by Councilor Grow, seconded by Councilor Kimberley, the Planning & Development Committee voted 2 in favor, 0 opposed, 1 absent to recommend that the City Council accept the draft Housing Compass Plan as submitted by the Community Development Director and presented on September 2, 2026.

2. SCP#2026-008: The application of 187 Atlantic Ave Holdings, LLC, Map #255, Lot #1: GZO Sec. 5.2 "Earth Fill and Removal Regulations," 5.2.2 "Permit from the City Council," to permit the movement of more than 3 acres or 1,000 cy of soil in the R-20 district.

Summary of Discussion: Doug Macdonald, Procopio Companies, stated he was representing the applicant.

Doug Macdonald shared his screen.

[Image: Locus map showing seven adjacent lots and 187 Atlantic Avenue]

Doug Macdonald stated that this special permit was unique as the proposal was to not remove the earth fill off site, but to relocate it from seven adjacent lots to the lot at 187 Atlantic Avenue. He stated that the other seven lots had approved septic and building permits, and about 2,000 cubic yards (cy) of fill needed to be removed from those seven lots, for a total of roughly 15,000 cy. He stated that earth fill would be stored and then used to grade the lot at 187 Atlantic Avenue which the applicant was intending on performing a subdivision on the property. He stated that by storing the 15,000 cy at 187 Atlantic Avenue it would prevent 750 truck loads of earth fill being removed from the site and trucked out of the neighborhood.

[Image: Site plan showing proposed stockpiling and material processing area for special permit at 187 Atlantic Avenue, with setback lines shown]

Doug Macdonald stated that the fill would be placed in the light purple area of 187 Atlantic Avenue. He stated that he would be having an informal meeting within the next sixty days with the Planning Director regarding the applicants plans for the site, and the site would need earth fill to grade the site.

Councilor Grow asked what the colored lines surrounding the property represented. Doug Macdonald stated that they represented required setbacks.

Doug Macdonald stated that he believed the reduction in trucks both in and out of the neighborhood would be a benefit to the area.

Councilor Grow stated that this was not a typical application that the City Council received. He stated there were concerns regarding the thoroughness of the application, as it did not provide much of the information that GZO 5.2.2 required. He stated that it was unclear if the application for 187 Atlantic Avenue could be used for earth fill on adjacent, but legally separate lots, especially when there were no current building permits or subdivision permits in place for 187 Atlantic Avenue.

Councilor Grow asked if a registered land surveyor or engineer had developed the plan, as was required by GZO 5.2.2. Doug Macdonald stated that he was unsure who had developed it, but could get the plans the proper stamp.

Councilor Grow asked if there was an accompanying soils engineering report with the application. Doug Macdonald stated that he did not have such a report.

Councilor Grow asked if there was a soil removal plan for the seven adjacent lots. Doug Macdonald stated that he could have a sequence and plan put together.

Councilor Grow asked if there was an erosion control plan. Doug Macdonald stated that he believed there was such a plan. Councilor Grow stated that it had not been included and would need to be submitted.

Councilor Grow asked if there was a restoration plan as required under GZO 5.2.5. Doug Macdonald stated that he did not have a restoration plan, but one could be made showing where the soil would be laid.

Councilor Grow stated that the amount of earth fill removal that was being proposed was magnitudes larger than what the Zoning Ordinance was written for. He stated that the proposed special council permit was for a lot that had no other active permits yet. He stated that the applicant would also need to post a bond before the work began.

Councilor Grow asked for General Counsel, Suzanne Egan to state any concerns regarding the application. General Counsel, Suzanne Egan stated that a number of the deficiencies in information in the application had already been stated. She stated that the application was also unusual as it was in conjunction with the development of abutting lots, and 187 Atlantic Avenue was being proposed as a staging area for the construction of the residential lots. She stated that because the application did not have information regarding where the earth fill would be removed from and where it would be used to fill, the proposed use fell under a contractor's yard in the Zoning Ordinance, which was not an allowed use in a residential zone and would require a special permit.

Councilor Grow stated that if the applicant was operating only on an individual lot, and removing the earth fill and storing it on the same lot, that would be an allowed use. He asked if the storage of earth fill on another unpermitted lot as a contractor's yard would be a separate permit. Suzanne Egan stated that it would be a different permit and a different use for what a residential zone was zoned for.

Doug Macdonald asked if a plan was designed and presented for a contractor's yard could that be permitted. Suzanne Egan stated that the special council permit before the Committee was for earth fill and removal, not a contractor's yard, and she did not believe that was an appropriate use in a residential district on a lot that did not have an active building permit.

Councilor Grow asked if the applicant would actually need a separate permit for each lot that was having earth fill removed. Suzanne Egan stated that the use on each site would need to be examined, and an adjacent lot shouldn't be used as an accessory to that activity.

Councilor Grow asked Planning Director, Gregg Cademartori for his concerns regarding the application. Planning Director, Gregg Cademartori stated that the seven lots that had active building and septic system permits and there were no concerns regarding grading on those sites, as earth fill and removal fell under the review of the grading and drainage plan associated with the building permit. He stated that the proposed earth fill at 187 Atlantic Avenue should have a plan for what the final state and stabilization would be.

Councilor Grow asked if there were any conservation concerns. Gregg Cademartori stated that the proposed area of fill would fall outside the area of conservation jurisdiction. He stated that there was no current permit on the site, but with plans of a subdivision on the lot, the Planning Board would want to review the current conditions of the property and the proposed fill would limit the Planning Board on seeing the existing conditions.

Councilor Grow stated that due to the lack of information in the application and the zoning concerns the applicant should withdraw the application and submit a more complete application, but there were still concerns regarding the proposed use as a contractor's yard. Doug Macdonald asked that the matter be continued.

Cynthia Fortier, 194 Atlantic Avenue, stated her concerns regarding abutters receiving notice of the meeting. She asked if all the lots would be developed at the same time and if the driveways would go onto Atlantic Avenue. Doug Macdonald stated two or three lots would be developed at a time, but they would all be finished before next summer to decrease the impact on traffic and the driveways would go onto Atlantic Avenue.

This matter was continued to the September 16, 2026 Planning & Development Committee meeting.

MOTION TO ADJOURN: On a motion by Councilor Kimberley, seconded by Councilor Grow, the Planning & Development Committee voted 2 in favor, 0 opposed, 1 absent, to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m.

Submitted by: Lynds S. Jones, Legislative Aide

Documents submitted at the meeting: Presentation by Alex Koppelman.

Matters appearing on the agenda that are to be continued:

1. CC#2026-012 (Memhard): Amend GZO Sec. 3.2.1 "Dimensional Requirements for Single, Two-Family and Three-Family Dwellings" by increasing the minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sf) requirement for the RC-40 (Coastal Residential) zoning district by DELETING "20,000 sf" and ADDING "40,000 sf." (cont. from July 8, 2026) (cont. to September 16, 2026)
2. SCP2026-007: The application of Seaside Legal Solutions, P.C. (Owner, Billiken Investments LLC), Day Court #4, Map #219, Lot #155: GZO Sec. 2.3.1(7) "Conversion to or new multi-family or apartment dwelling, four to six dwelling units," and Sec. 3.2.2 fn (e) "No principal building shall be closer to another principal building on the same site than the sum of their respective heights; provided, however, that the City Council may by special permit authorize a reduction in said distance upon a finding that such reduction is not detrimental because of view obstruction, overshadowing, service access or visual crowding" in the R20 district. (cont. from July 22, 2026) (cont. to September 16, 2026)

Meeting Recording: http://gloucester-ma.gov/1097/Past-Remote-Public-Meeting