[00:00:05]
[ROLL CALL]
EVERYONE.I'M GOING TO CALL TODAY'S MEETING TO ORDER WITH THE QUORUM BEING PRESENT.
UM, THE CALL OF TODAY'S MEETING IS TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HELD ON MARCH 11TH, 2026, UH, REGARDING ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS TO STRENGTHEN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AND MASS AVE.
AS A FOLLOW UP ON THE RECENTLY ADOPTED ZONING PETITIONS, THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS PRESENT.
ABSENT, COUNCILLOR SABRINA WHEELER.
AND I BELIEVE COUNSELOR, UH, SIMMONS AND SUZY WILL BE HERE MOMENTARILY.
UH, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER TWO OF THE ACTS OF 2025, ADOPTED BY THE MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL COURT AND APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE CITY, IS AUTHORIZED TO USE REMOTE PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS OF THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS COMMITTEES.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDS THIS MEETING AND MAKES IT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR FUTURE VIEWING.
IN ADDITION, THIRD PARTIES MAY ALSO BE AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDING THIS MEETING.
IN ADDITION TO HAVING MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL PARTICIPATE REMOTELY, WE HAVE ALSO SET UP ZOOM TELECONFERENCE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE VISIT THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION OF THE CITY'S WEBPAGE, INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOW TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK OR POSTED THERE.
ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED THE SIGNUP PROCEDURE, YOU'LL RECEIVE A LINK TO THE ZOOM MEETING.
TO WATCH THE MEETING, PLEASE TUNE INTO CHANNEL 22 OR VISIT THE OPEN MEETING PORTAL ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
WITH THAT, ALL VOTES, IF ANY, WILL BE VIA ROLL CALL, UH, COUNCILOR ZUI.
[COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER CITY OFFICERS]
GOOD MORNING FOLKS.UM, JUST TO KIND OF GROUND US AGAIN IN WHERE WE ARE, UM, WE DID HAVE A MEETING BACK ON MARCH 11TH WHERE WE DISCUSSED, UH, TWO OPTIONS THAT WERE PUT BEFORE US BY CDD, UH, TO ACTIVATE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL ON, UH, THE NORTHERN MASS AVE CORRIDOR, SORT OF, YOU KNOW, NORTH OF HARVARD SQUARE AND CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, I THINK WE, WE KIND OF, UH, I THINK THERE WAS GENERAL AGREEMENT ABOUT THE MASS AVE PIECE THAT, UM, AND I THINK CAMBRIDGE STREET STILL REMAINS THE, UH, THE QUESTION.
UM, WE HAD ASKED CDD TO GO BACK AND, AND MAYBE TAKE A LOOK AT A POSSIBLE THIRD OPTION, WHICH IS TO CREATE THESE SORT OF ACTIVE NODES OR ZONES, UM, WHERE WE COULD, UH, WHERE, WHERE OPTION ONE WOULD BE IN EFFECT, AND, AND OTHER PARTS WHERE OPTION TWO WOULD BE IN EFFECT, KIND OF A, A COMBINATION.
UM, THEY DID COME FORWARD WITH THAT TODAY, SO THEY'LL PRESENT THAT TODAY.
UH, AND THEN WE'LL LET A PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE WILL GO INTO COUNCIL QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION.
SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ASSISTANT MANAGER PETERS, AND YOU CAN INTRODUCE EVERYBODY AND TAKE IT FROM THERE.
THANK YOU, UH, CHAIRMAN MCGOVERN.
SO, UH, APPRECIATE THE SUMMARY.
SO YOU SAVED SOME TIME ON MY END, UM, BUT JUST TO INTRODUCE STAFF, WANT TO INTRODUCE JEFF ROBERTS, DIRECTOR OF ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT.
EVAN PETRINI, OUR SENIOR MANAGER FOR ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT, DREW KAIN, OUR ACTING, UH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DESIGN, UH, PARTY SAFARI, OUR DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT, AND FRANZ LA BIANCA, OUR ASSISTANT SOLICITOR FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
UM, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO EVAN, WHO WILL WALK THROUGH, AGAIN, A REMINDER WHERE WE LANDED ON MASS AVE.
AND THEN THE THIRD OPTION IS COUNCILMAN GO DESCRIBED FOR CAMBRIDGE STREET FOR DISCUSSION.
I'M, I'M GONNA GO THROUGH A LOT OF THIS BACKGROUND PRETTY QUICKLY, JUST AS A, A REMINDER AND TO, TO SET THE, THE STAGE BEFORE WE GET INTO THE, THE SPECIFICS.
UM, BUT, UH, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE HERE TALKING ABOUT THIS POLICY ORDER THAT CAME OUT OF THE MASS AVENUE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING PETITION DISCUSSION TO, TO STRENGTHEN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON, ON BOTH CAMBRIDGE STREET AND PARTS OF MASS AVE.
THE WAY THAT THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS WORK NOW, UM, ON, ON BOTH CORRIDORS IS, UM, ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED FOR BUILDINGS ABOVE A CERTAIN HEIGHT.
SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, UM, IS PART OF MASS AVE, THE MASS 12 A DISTRICT, WHICH IS CURRENTLY MAPPED, UM, SOUTH OF PORTER SQUARE.
[00:05:01]
UM, SO HERE ALL, UH, UH, BUILDINGS ABOVE FOUR STORIES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE, UM, ACTIVE USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR.UM, SO THAT MEANS YOU CAN BUILD A FOUR STORY RESIDENTIAL ONLY BUILDING, BUT ANYTHING TALLER THAN THAT.
SO AT FIVE STORIES, UH, YOU, YOU NEED TO PROVIDE THAT ACTIVE GROUND, UM, ACTIVE GROUND STORY USE.
AND THEN THE OVERALL HEIGHT LIMIT IS, IS 12 STORIES.
SO, UH, WE, WE DO WANT THESE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS TO BE THE NORM.
WE, WE WANT THAT TO BE THE, UM, THE DOMINANT, YOU KNOW, PROJECT ALONG BOTH CORRIDORS.
UM, BUT WE DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE PATHWAY, UH, FOR CASES WHERE ACTIVE USES ARE NOT FEASIBLE OR, OR EVEN PREFERRED.
UM, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU COULD HAVE A, AN UNUSUAL SITE WHERE IF YOU WERE TO PROVIDE AN ACTIVE USE, IT WOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE AN, AN AWKWARD SHAPE OR SIZE OR, OR SOMETHING THAT, THAT WOULDN'T BE, UH, CONDUCIVE TO, TO FILLING THAT SPACE.
UM, YOU COULD ALSO HAVE A HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROJECT WHERE, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT REALLY A PRIORITY TO, TO PROVIDE ACTIVE USES.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH A, A, A DIFFERENT GOAL.
SO WE DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, TO HAVE THESE ALTERNATIVE PATHWAYS AND, AND WE THINK THIS IS A, A GOOD APPROACH TO DO THAT.
AND JUST A, A QUICK REMINDER, UM, ACTIVE USES COVER A, A WIDE RANGE OF USES, BUT, UM, ARE FUNDAMENTALLY THOSE THAT ENCOURAGE PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY LIKE RESTAURANTS, RETAIL, AND SOME PUBLIC FACING OFFICES, UH, WHERE ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED.
SO IN THE, IN THE EXAMPLE I JUST, UH, TALKED ABOUT ABOVE FOUR STORIES, UM, THOSE ACTIVE USES HAVE TO MEET, YOU CAN'T JUST PROVIDE AN ACTIVE USE.
IT NEEDS TO MEET, UH, A MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND, UM, AND LOCATION STANDARDS.
SO THE REQUIREMENT, UM, ON BOTH CORRIDORS IS, UH, 60% OF THE INTERIOR FLOOR AREA WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE STREET, UM, AND THE STREET BEING THE PRIMARY STREET MASS OR, OR CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, SO IT IS INTENDED TO BE FLEXIBLE IN HOW YOU APPROACH IT, BUT, UM, THE OVERALL OUTCOME, UH, SHOULD BE TO CONCENTRATE ACTIVE USES ALONG THE PRIMARY STREET AT A, AT A SCALE THAT'S, THAT'S MEANINGFUL AND, AND CREATES THAT ACTIVE STREET FRONT THAT WE WANT.
UH, AS WAS MENTIONED, LAST MEETING, UM, THE COUNCIL AGREED THAT THE, THE BEST APPROACH TO STRENGTHEN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON MASS AVE IS TO EXPAND THAT AREA IN WHICH ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
SO, UM, THAT EXAMPLE THAT I, THAT I SHARED EARLIER, EXPANDING THAT FROM JUST THAT SECTION SOUTH OF PORTER SQUARE TO ESSENTIALLY EVERYTHING FROM CAMBRIDGE COMMON UP TO, UH, LINEAR PARK.
SO, UH, SO UNDER THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THIS PROPOSAL, UH, ACTIVE USES WOULD BE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES, UM, FOR, FOR THAT PRETTY BIG CHUNK.
AND THEN THE, UM, THE REMAINING AREA WOULD BE ACTIVE USES, REQUIRED ABOVE EIGHT STORIES.
AND THAT WE, AGAIN, WE HAD GENERAL CONSENSUS ON LAST TIME, SO WE WANTED TO FOCUS TODAY'S DISCUSSION ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, THIS IS THE, THE EXISTING ZONING.
IT REQUIRES ACTIVE USES ABOVE SIX STORIES, BUT ONLY IN LEACH MIRROR AND IN THE WEBSTER WINDSOR AREA.
THE REST OF THE CORRIDOR HAS A SIX STORY HEIGHT LIMIT, UM, AND THERE'S NO ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT, UM, ANYWHERE OUTSIDE OF THOSE, THOSE SPECIFIC AREAS.
AS WAS, UH, MENTIONED, WE PRESENTED THESE TWO OPTIONS LAST TIME TO, TO STRENGTHEN THOSE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS.
THE FIRST OPTION IS, UM, UH, DOING THE, THE SAME APPROACH AS, AS WHAT WE'VE RECOMMENDED ON MASS AVE AND, AND, UH, THAT WOULD BE REQUIRING ACTIVE USES FOR, UH, BUILDINGS ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
UM, AND OPTION TWO, A LITTLE BIT STRONGER THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UM, ACTIVE USES FOR BUILDINGS ABOVE THREE STORIES.
AND WE REVIEWED KIND OF PROS AND CONS FOR, FOR BOTH OF THOSE OPTIONS, WHICH I'LL, I'LL GET BACK TO AT, AT THE END AFTER WE, WE REVIEW OPTION THREE.
SO, UM, THE COUNCIL ASKED US TO, TO CONSIDER A THIRD OPTION THAT WOULD, UM, SORT OF SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE, REQUIRE ACTIVE USES ABOVE FOUR STORIES IN SOME AREAS AND THREE IN OTHERS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT HERE.
[00:10:01]
SO SINCE THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING, WE, WE WORKED TO IDENTIFY THOSE, THOSE ACTIVE USE NODES, UH, WHERE WE THINK ENCOURAGING THOSE USES ARE, UH, PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT.LOOKING JUST AT EXISTING BUSINESS ACTIVITY ISN'T, UM, ENTIRELY HELPFUL, OR IT DOESN'T TELL THE WHOLE STORY.
UM, BUSINESS ACTIVITY IS FAIRLY CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR.
UM, MAYBE A, A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE SQUARES, BUT, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE STRETCH OF, OF CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO, SO WE TOOK THE, THE TRACK OF, OF REALLY FOCUSING ON, ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, UM, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, REALLY WHAT ZONING IS ALL ABOUT IS, IS SHAPING THE, UM, YOU KNOW, FUTURE CHANGES OF, OF AN AREA.
SO, UM, WE TRIED TO IDENTIFY AREAS WHERE WE THINK BUSINESS ACTIVITY IS, IS, YOU KNOW, REALLY IMPORTANT FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO THOSE AREAS THAT WE THINK WOULD BEST SUPPORT NEW BUSINESS.
SO A STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT WOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH OF A, A BURDEN ON THOSE DEVELOPMENTS.
UM, SO WE LOOKED AT, AT SQUARES, THE EXISTING SQUARES, UM, INMAN AND, AND LEACH MIRROR.
UM, WE THINK BUILDING OFF OF THE CONCENTRATION OF, OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN THOSE AREAS IS, IS, UM, A GOOD APPROACH.
UH, WE LOOKED AT THOSE TRANSFORMATIVE AREAS, UM, REALLY THE, THE WEBSTER WINDSOR AREA.
UM, AS A, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN AREA THAT HAS LARGER KIND OF REDEVELOPMENT SITES, UM, THAT COULD KIND OF FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORM WHERE THAT, UH, OR, OR HOW THAT AREA, UM, FEELS.
UH, AND IT'S ALSO ADJACENT TO, YOU KNOW, TRANSFORMATIVE AREAS IN SOMERVILLE, BOYNTON YARDS, UM, HAS BEEN UNDERGOING A A LOT OF CHANGE IN RECENT YEARS AND EXPECT, YOU KNOW, EVEN MORE CHANGE.
SO, SO THAT COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO BUILD A NEW, UH, CONCENTRATION OF, OF RETAIL ACTIVITY.
AND IT, WITH ALL THREE OF THESE, THESE AREAS IN MEN, WEBSTER, WINDSOR, AND, AND LECHMERE, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD TRANSPORTATION, UM, CONNECTION.
SO OF COURSE THEY'RE ALL ON MAJOR THOROUGHFARES, CAMBRIDGE STREET, UM, BUT THE CROSS STREETS AS WELL, UM, HAMPSHIRE IN, IN INMAN, YOU'VE GOT WEBSTER AND COLUMBIA GOING THROUGH THAT, THAT WEBSTER WINDSOR AREA.
UM, AND THEN FIRST STREET AND O'BRIEN HIGHWAY AND IN LEACH MIRROR.
UM, AND OF COURSE THE, THE GREEN LINE.
SO YOU HAVE A, A STOP RIGHT IN LEACH MIRROR.
AND, UM, THE UNION SQUARE STATION IS, IS PRETTY CLOSE TO THE WEBSTER, WINDSOR AREA AND, AND INMAN SQUARE.
SO ALL OF THOSE TOGETHER KIND OF HONED US IN ON, ON THESE AREAS FOR THOSE ACTIVE USE NODES.
AND SO WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AS THE, THE OPTION AND, AND FROM, YOU KNOW, DEFINING THOSE, THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS IS ACTIVE USES WOULD BE REQUIRED ABOVE THREE STORIES FROM INMAN SQUARE IN THE WEST, EAST TO WINDSOR STREET, AND THEN AGAIN FROM FIFTH STREET TO LECH MIRROR.
AND THAT AREA IN THE MIDDLE FROM WINDSOR TO FIFTH STREET, ACTIVE USES WOULD BE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
SO THE MIDDLE IS, IS OPTION ONE, AND THEN THE ENDS ARE, ARE OPTION TWO.
AND JUST AS A, A KIND OF TAG TO, TO ALL OF THAT, WE THINK FOR ANY OF THESE THREE OPTIONS, WE, WE RECOMMEND A COUPLE OTHER, UH, MAP CHANGES TO, TO REMOVE, UH, A COUPLE AREAS FROM THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING DISTRICTS WHERE WE THINK ACTIVE USES AREN'T AS MUCH OF A PRIORITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, AS WE ARE THINKING ABOUT STRENGTHENING THOSE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS, WE, WE KIND OF REASSESS THESE, THESE TWO AREAS TO, TO SEE IF THEY REALLY SHOULD BE, UM, PART OF THIS, UM, OR IF THEY SHOULD KIND OF BE TREATED A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.
SO THE FIRST ONE IS THIS, THIS WARREN STREET SPUR.
YOU CAN SEE IN THE, THE MIDDLE OF THE MAP THERE.
UM, THIS AREA USED TO HAVE SOME LOCAL BUSINESSES, BUT I THINK MOST, IF NOT ALL OF THEM ARE, ARE CLOSED.
AND, AND WE DON'T THINK, UM, PRIORITIZING, UM, NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IN THIS AREA MAKES THAT MUCH SENSE ANYMORE.
SO WE'RE PROPOSING TO, UH, REZONE THAT TO, UH, C ONE DISTRICT, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER SIDE OF, OF THE STREET ON WARREN STREET AND, AND A LOT OF THE, UM, KIND OF SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD THERE.
AND THEN THE OTHER PIECE IS THIS STRETCH OF O'BRIEN HIGHWAY, UM, TO THE, TO THE EAST HERE.
UM, AGAIN, THIS, THIS AREA WASN'T A BIG
[00:15:01]
FOCUS OF THE CAMBRIDGE STREET PLAN.UM, AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK SOME WE HEARD IN PUBLIC COMMENT LAST TIME AND, AND, UM, COUNSELORS MAY HAVE, UH, ALSO HEARD ABOUT THIS.
AND SO WE, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE, UM, THE DEVELOPER OF A PROJECT, UH, AT EIGHT WINTER STREET AND HAVE REVIEWED THAT PROJECT AND IN SOME DETAIL AND, AND HAVE KIND OF SEEN THERE ARE SOME ISSUES, UM, CHALLENGES IN, IN IMPLEMENTING THE SAME SORTS OF STANDARDS, UM, ON THAT STRETCH OF, OF O'BRIEN HIGHWAY, UM, AS, AS CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO WE THINK IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO REZONE THIS AREA BACK TO THE BUSINESS A DISTRICT, UM, WHICH IS WHAT THE ZONING WAS, UH, BEFORE.
SO THOSE ARE ARE TWO KIND OF ADDITIONAL MAP CHANGES THAT WE THINK MAKE SENSE TO MAKE AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS.
IF I JUST, IF I HAVE A TECHNICAL QUESTION, SHOULD I WAIT? OR, UH, IF IT'S QUICK, BUT, SO YEAH, THE ON THIS IS ON THE, UM, BA WHICH IS ON THE PAGE, THE PREVIOUS PAGE THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.
THAT SHAPE IS DIFFERENT FROM THE MAP ON EXISTING CAMBRIDGE STREET A COUPLE SLIDES BEFORE.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS, IS THAT THE EQUIVALENT OF A TYPO OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT? NO, THAT, THAT, THANK YOU.
THERE IS ACTUALLY, UH, A, UM, I THINK A, A PIZZA PLACE THAT'S RIGHT ON THAT CORNER, UM, OF, I THINK IT'S THIRD AND GORE STREET.
AND, UM, THAT PART IS, IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE ONLY, UH, PROPERTIES ON THAT BLOCK THAT HAS A, A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.
AND IT WAS ALMOST ENTIRELY WITHIN THE, THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
SO WE THOUGHT IT MADE SENSE AS A PART OF THIS TO, TO MAKE THAT SITE CONFORMING, AND THAT'S WHY WE PULLED THE, THE BUSINESS DISTRICT DOWN TO THAT INTERSECTION.
AND THEY HAVE GREAT STATE TIPS THERE.
BY THE WAY, SIDE NOTE, I USED TO WORK RIGHT THERE.
UM, OKAY, SO, SO THIS IS OUR, OUR LAST SLIDE.
UM, JUST AS A, A RECAP, WE HAVE, UM, OPTION ONE REQUIRING, UH, ACTIVE USES ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
THIS IS THE MOST FLEXIBLE APPROACH.
WE THINK IT, IT MAY ALLOW FOR, FOR MORE HOUSING, BUT COULD HAVE A LOSS, UM, OF SOME ACTIVE USES IN, IN SOME CASES, OPTION TWO IS, IS STRONGER, REQUIRES ACTIVE USES ABOVE THREE STORIES.
UM, WE THINK WITH A, WITH A STRICTER REQUIREMENT, REDEVELOPMENT IS, IS LESS LIKELY OVERALL.
UM, AND, AND I I SHOULD BACK UP AND SAY WE'RE REALLY JUST TALKING ABOUT PROJECTS ON THE MARGINS.
WE, WE DO THINK THAT MOST PROJECTS ARE, ARE GONNA TRY TO ACHIEVE THAT SIX STORY HEIGHT LIMIT AND, AND, UH, PROVIDE THOSE ACTIVE USES, UM, WITH, WITH ANY OF THESE OPTIONS.
UM, BUT, UH, YEAH, OPTION TWO REQUIRED ABOVE THREE STORIES.
UM, IT, IT COULD POTENTIALLY, UH, PREVENT THE DISPLACEMENT OF, OF EXISTING ACTIVE USE SPACE.
UM, AGAIN, ON FOR, FOR PROJECTS ON, ON THE MARGINS.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE OPTION THREE, WHICH IS, IS THE COMPROMISE APPROACH.
UM, YOU KNOW, FOCUSING STRICTER REQUIREMENTS IN THOSE CERTAIN AREAS, UH, COULD BE A, A GOOD WAY OF, OF SPLITTING THE DIFFERENCE.
UM, WE DO THINK THAT CREATING A MORE NUANCED APPROACH OR ADDING SOME MORE, UM, YOU KNOW, COMPLEXITY TO, TO THE APPROACH MAY, UH, JUST ADD SOME MORE CONFUSION.
UM, THE DIFFERENCE I THINK, BETWEEN THREE AND FOUR STORIES IS, UM, IS, IS REALLY, IT'S, IT'S GONNA MATTER ON, YOU KNOW, PARTICULAR PROJECTS, BUT ON THE WHOLE, IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA MAKE A, A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
UM, SO WE DO THINK, YOU KNOW, ANY ONE OF THESE OPTIONS IS, IS A, UM, IS A, A GOOD WAY TO, TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
UM, AND, UM, YEAH, SO, SO IT'S, IT'S, WE'LL, WE'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO, TO THE COUNCIL TO KIND OF THINK THROUGH, UM, YOU KNOW, THESE, THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
WE'RE HAPPY TO, TO ANSWER MORE, MORE QUESTIONS.
UM, WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MS. STEFFAN, COUNCILLOR SIMMONS.
SUZANNE, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
[00:20:03]
THANK YOU.HONORABLE CHAIR, MAYOR, AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
I WANNA SPEAK ON ENHANCING AND, UM, CURATING LOCAL BUSINESSES AS WE ARE MOVING FORWARD.
AND I SPEAK ON THIS IN PART BECAUSE OF THE RECENT UNANIMOUS DECISION BY CITY COUNCIL ON THE HARVARD SQUARE UP ZONING PETITION THAT WAS, UM, CO-JOINED THE HARVARD SQUARE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND THE HARVARD SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND IN THAT, UM, WE ENACTED, YOU ENACTED, UH, 1500 SQUARE FOOT, UM, MAXIMUM FOR INTERIOR SPACES SO AS TO PROMOTE LOCAL BUSINESSES WHO CAN'T AFFORD AND ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE LARGER, UM, SPACES.
AND THE REASON ONE COULD DO THIS IS BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE UPPER STORIES THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF THOSE BUILDINGS, YOU CAN INDEED AFFORD TO HAVE LOCAL BUSINESSES WHICH PAY HIGHER, UM, UH, SALARIES AND CONTRIBUTE MORE TO THE COMMUNITY.
IN ADDITION, IN THAT IS A 25 FOOT LINEAR FRONTAGE ON THE GROUND FLOOR FOR BANKS AND COMPARABLE INSTITUTIONS.
MOST OF US BANK ONLINE, AND WE WANT TRANSPARENCY IN THESE WINDOWS SO THAT THEY MAKE THEM INVITING.
AND, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT THEY ARE MAJOR PLAYERS, BUT WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT MORE AND MORE BANKS IN PLAY.
UM, I ALSO DON'T THINK THAT THIS SHOULD SIMPLY BE THREE STORIES OR FOUR STORIES AND ABOVE.
THEY'RE AN AWFUL LOT OF SINGLE STORY BUILDINGS, AND IN THOSE PEOPLE ARE OFTEN VERY INTERESTED IN SIMPLY REBUILDING A SINGLE STORY BUILDING.
AND IF WE COULD HARNESS THAT AND, AND HAVE THE CITY HELP EITHER WITH, UM, PROVIDING, UM, ELEMENTS TO ARCHITECTS AND PLANS, THAT COULD BE REALLY TERRIFIC.
ANOTHER PART OF THE HARVARD SQUARE, UM, PETITION WAS THE CREATION OR THE MODIFICATION OF THE HARVARD SQUARE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN CAMBRIDGE STREET AND INMAN SQUARE IN HARVARD.
IT'S THE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, HARVARD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND THEN PROFESSIONALS SUCH AS ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, FINANCIAL PEOPLE, HISTORIANS, AND IN THAT AS WELL AS A GOAL FOR 75% OF THE NEW BUSINESSES TO BE LOCAL.
AND SOMETHING LIKE THIS, I THINK WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL IN TERMS OF CURATING EXACTLY WHAT IS GONNA BE HAPPENING, OR AT LEAST HELPING TO CURATE.
WE ALSO HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER TAKING DOWN THE CURRENT LEASE PRICES.
WE KNOW FOR RE STREET A RESIDENT THERE IS PAYING $2,000 A MONTH RENT, AND SHE'S BEEN PUT ON A 30 DAY LEASE, WE'RE GONNA LOSE LOCAL BUSINESSES, WE'RE GONNA LOSE LOCAL TENANTS, AND WE NEED TO HAVE A MEANS OF ASSESSING WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL FINANCIAL IMPACTS OF THIS.
AND I WOULD HOPE IT'S TOO LATE, PROBABLY FOR NORTH CAMBRIDGE, BUT I THINK THIS IS VIABLE THERE.
SOME OTHER CITY CITIES IDENTIFY KEY PLACES.
I MEAN, WE LOST, UH, CURIOUS GEORGE THEN WENT STARBUCKS, AND NOW UNFORTUNATELY IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GONNA GET CHICK-FIL-A, A RIGHT WING ANTI L-G-B-T-T-Q COMPANY COMING IN THERE.
BUT WE COULD HIGHLIGHT KEY BUSINESSES LIKE SKIN DARS.
IT'S NOT MY PHARMACY, BUT TO OTHERS, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED TO PROMOTE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SUSAN MARKOWITZ, FOLLOWED BY JUSTIN SAFE.
SUSAN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
UH, I WANTED TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE, UH, USE THE CAMBRIDGE REGULATIONS LIMITING FORMULA BUSINESSES THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING USED IN HARVARD SQUARE AND CENTRAL SQUARE, AND USE THESE AT THE COMMERCIAL NODES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BY THE CDD IN OPTION NUMBER THREE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JUSTIN SAFE, FOLLOWED BY JASON S JUSTIN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR THREE MINUTES.
UH, I THINK THAT THE, I'LL TAKE THE LAST POINT FIRST.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO, UH, KEEP WARREN STREET AND, UH, GORE STREET.
AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO PRESERVE THE STRETCH FOR ONE PIZZERIA WHEN IT COULD STAY BA AND STILL BE CONFORMING.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO, UH, BLOCK ANY, UH, DEVELOPMENT ON THAT BLOCK BECAUSE, UH, THAT'S WHAT I THINK ALL THREE OF THESE OVERALL OPTIONS ARE LIKELY TO DO.
UM, WE'RE JUST GONNA HAVE, UH, BUILDINGS THAT KEEP THE EXACT SAME FOOTPRINT.
UM, SO WE GET THE WORST OF ALL WORLDS, WHICH IS NO ADDITIONAL HOUSING.
AND, YOU KNOW, AND BLOCKS THAT DON'T HAVE IT ALREADY WILL GET NO FIRST FLOOR RETAIL OR ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USE EITHER.
UM, WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE THE BUILDING OF HOUSING AND HAVING ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USE, BUT INSTEAD WE'RE PROVIDING AN UNFUNDED
[00:25:01]
MANDATE, WHICH IS GOING TO HAVE THE OPPOSITE IMPACT.UM, IT'S GONNA MAKE IT LESS LIKELY, AND IT, I DON'T THINK IT REALLY MATTERS THAT MUCH, WHICH HEIGHT, UH, B GETS PUT IN AT.
UM, YOU KNOW, AMAZON HAS ALREADY HAD A HUGE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON RETAIL.
UM, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SUPPORT CAMBRIDGE STREET FROM LECHMERE TO EDMOND SQUARE OR MASS AVE FROM CAMBRIDGE.
COMMON TO ARLINGTON HAVING, UH, FIRST FLOOR RETAIL IN EVERY STORE.
IT'S GONNA REQUIRE A HUGE AMOUNT OF SUBSIDY THAT'S NOT FORTHCOMING FROM, UH, THE PLAN THAT'S ON THE TABLE NOW.
UH, SO, YOU KNOW, WE WILL HAVE EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT JUST GET RENOVATED AND SOLD AS CONDOS WITH THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE AND NO ADDITIONAL HOUSING.
UM, THIS REPRESENTS, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST A LOSS OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND RETAIL OPPORTUNITIES ON A CORRIDOR, UH, TWO CORRIDORS WHERE WE STRONGLY SAY WE WANT BOTH.
IT ALSO REPRESENTS A MASSIVE LOSS OF POTENTIAL REVENUE.
UM, THESE ARE PLACES WHERE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY THEY COULD HAVE NOT JUST PROPERTY TAX REVENUE, BUT IF THEY BECOME THE RESTAURANTS OR CAFES, THEY'LL HAVE OTHER TAX REVENUE.
UM, AND THIS IS A TIME WHEN, YOU KNOW, THE SAME PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ON THESE UH, AVENUES, KEEP TALKING ABOUT WANTING TO WORRY ABOUT THE FINANCES AND THE BUDGET, THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE, AND ALSO GAIN TWO OTHER THINGS.
WE WANT HOUSING AND FIRST FLOOR ACTIVE USE IS TO INCENTIVIZE IT BY ALLOWING EXTRA HIKE, OTHER ZONING RELIEF IN THE FORM OF REMOVING SETBACKS OR SETBACKS AND, UM, ALLOWING, UH, OR INCENTIVIZING FINANCIALLY, WHETHER THROUGH TAX ABATEMENT, UH, OR FREE PERMITTING FEES, UH, ANY BUILDINGS WITH ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER, SPEAKER IS JASON ALS.
HI, UH, JASON ALS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EAST CAMBRIDGE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, 5 44 CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, SO I SENT AN EMAIL RIGHT BEFORE I LEFT MY HOUSE TO COME TO THIS MEETING WITH A COUPLE OF, UH, BULLET POINTS.
UM, STILL MAINTAINING THE POSITION THAT, UH, AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, I THINK OPTION TWO PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE MOVED FORWARD.
UM, IT'S THE MOST RESTRICTIVE.
IT GIVES THE COUNCIL THE MOST, UM, LEEWAY TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHERE THEY WANT THIS TO LAND.
UH, AND THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE, UM, UH, AN INSULT TO ANY OF THE WORK THAT THE FOLKS AT CDD HAD TO DO.
UM, I THINK IT COLLAPSES ON ITSELF WHEN YOU START TO REALIZE YOU ARE TAKING NOW ONE MILE AND THEN DIVVYING THAT UP INTO THREE DIFFERENT RULES, UM, BY THEIR OWN EXPLANATION OF TRYING TO DO THESE NEAR TRANSPORTATION NODES.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAP AND REALIZE THAT THE GRAND JUNCTION PATH HAS BEEN OMITTED AND YOU DRAW ANOTHER LITTLE BLURB AROUND THE GRAND JUNCTION PATH, YOU'RE RIGHT BACK TO APP OPTION TWO.
UM, I STRUGGLE TO BELIEVE THAT IT'S GOING TO IMPACT HOUSING.
I THINK THE NOTION OF AN UNFUNDED MANDATE FINDS ITS FUNDING WHEN YOU ARE REQUIRED TO BUILD THE FIRST FLOOR COMMERCIAL, AND THEN YOU NEED TO BUILD THE UNITS TO MAKE THAT PROJECT WORK.
WE CONTINUE TO RUN THE RISK OF THE MARKET SAYING YOU CAN BUILD A THREE STORY TOWNHOUSE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
AND WE SLOWLY OVER TIME, LOSE COMMERCIAL SPACE.
CAMBRIDGE STREET IS A BUSINESS DISTRICT.
THERE ARE ONLY SO MANY MILES WHERE YOU CAN BUILD SMALL SPACES FOR COMMERCIAL, THIS IS ONE OF 'EM.
UM, IT'S, NONE OF THIS IS GONNA HAPPEN OVERNIGHT, BUT OVER TIME WE COULD SEE A LOSS OF RETAIL SPACE, ACTIVE USE, ACTIVE USE, GROUND FLOOR SPACE.
WE'RE HERE BECAUSE THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING THAT WAS PASSED CHANGED THE DYNAMICS AND IS ENCOURAGED ASSEMBLE PARCEL ASSEMBLAGE.
THIS IS JUST TRYING TO PROTECT AGAINST THAT.
UM, I STILL THINK THAT OPTION TWO IS THE BEST WAY TO GO FORWARD.
AND, UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL THE POINTS THAT I'VE, I'VE MADE.
I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS THIS WITH ANYBODY ELSE GOING FORWARD, BUT WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT HOW CAMBRIDGE STREET WORKS, UM, THINGS THAT IT NEEDS, THINGS THAT, UH, AGAIN, HOW DO WE REACT AND MAKE IT STRONGER BASED ON POLICIES THAT HAPPEN IN THIS CHAMBER.
UM, THIS JUST SEEMS TO BE ONE THAT'S KIND OF SIMPLE.
UM, THIS IS WHERE WE SAID WE WERE GONNA BE WHEN WE SORT OF PASSED THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.
UM, THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE NEXT STEP.
IT'D BE NICE TO JUST SEE THIS KIND OF MOVE A LITTLE BIT MORE EASILY THAN
[00:30:01]
IT IS.OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PATRICK MCGEE.
PATRICK, THREE MINUTES, PLEASE.
I WASN'T PLANNING ON SPEAKING TODAY, BUT, UM, LOOKING AT THE WARREN STREET CARVE OUT AND THEN, UM, THE EXPLANATION EARLY ON IN THIS STAFF PRESENTATION THAT, UM, ZONING WAS TO HELP PLAN FOR THE FUTURE.
IT SEEMS AS IF, UM, THERE ISN'T ANY ATTENTION BEING PAID CURRENTLY TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOMERVILLE, WHICH IS AT THE VERY END OF WARREN STREET.
UM, 12 OR 15, 15 YEARS AGO, WE TRIED TO PUSH THE CITY TO LOOK AT THE ZONING AROUND THE WEBSTER, UM, CAMBRIDGE STREET INTERSECTION BECAUSE WE, SOMERVILLE HAD JUST PASSED THEIR UPZONING OF BOYTON YARDS.
AND IT SEEMED LIKE THAT WAS GOING TO BE A BIG AREA OF DEVELOPMENT IN SOMERVILLE.
THE MARKETS CHANGED THINGS, THINGS HAVE SLOWED DOWN A BIT.
BUT AT THE VERY END OF WARREN STREET, A CUBBY OIL GAS STATION, UM, A CUBBY OIL AND A GAS STATION JUST TURNED INTO A FAIRLY LARGE FOUR STORY BUILDING WITH FIRST WAR COMMERCIAL ON IT.
AS YOU HEAD UP CELL STREET TOWARDS THE TARGET, WHICH WILL UNDOUBTEDLY AT SOME POINT GET REDEVELOPED IN THE UNION SQUARE PLAN.
THERE ARE THREE AND FOUR STORY NEW BUILDINGS WITH ACTIVE USES ON IT.
UM, AND RIGHT BEHIND THAT IS THE UNION SQUARE OR T STATION.
UM, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULDN'T ENCOURAGE A VIABLE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY DOWN TO CAMBRIDGE STREET FROM BOYTON YARDS.
IF THE GOAL OF THIS IS TO MAKE THE CITY BETTER OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT 20, 30, 40 YEARS, WHY WOULD WE REMOVE THAT OPTION? AND ADDITIONALLY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GRAND JUNCTION PATHWAY AND ENCOURAGING NON-COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE GRAND JUNCTION PATHWAY, WHEN WE ARE DOING SO MUCH TO INCREASE NON VEHICLE TRIPS INTO OUR COMMUNITY, IT SEEMS ABSOLUTELY SHORTSIGHTED.
UM, AND FROM MY OWN PERSPECTIVE, WHEN WE OPENED ATWOOD, ONE OF THE LARGEST CHALLENGES WAS GETTING PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC UP CAMBRIDGE STREET PAST THE VIN VN BUILDING.
THAT BUILDING WAS BUILT UNDER ZONING THAT WAS PASSED WHEN YOUR SEATS WERE FILLED WITH PEOPLE THAT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT DIFFERENT THINGS.
THAT BUILDING'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR YEARS.
IT'S NEVER GONNA GET REDEVELOPED BECAUSE OF THE SIZE AND SCOPE OF IT.
AND THAT'S CREATING A NEGATIVE LASTING IMPACT IN THIS MOMENT.
IT WAS BUILT INTO ZONING THAT MADE THE MOST SENSE AT THE TIME.
THESE BUILDINGS OUTLAST ALL OF OUR SELVES AND ALL OF OUR CURRENT PROBLEMS. AND NOT THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE AS ZONING IS INTENDED TO DO.
THAT IS ALL THAT WE'RE SIGNED UP.
UH, ON A MOTION BY COUNCILOR NOLAN TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.
THAT'S ALL NINE MEMBERS VOTING? YES.
WE WILL NOW OPEN IT UP TO COUNCILOR QUESTIONS.
I HAVE COUNCILOR ZUM FIRST, FOLLOWED BY COUNCILOR FLA.
UM, I JUST HAD A QUESTION FOR CDD.
COULD WE TALK ABOUT EIGHT WINTER STREET? UM, WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THAT PROJECT? MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT CONSTRUCTION HAD BEGUN.
IF WE WERE REQUIRED FIRST FLOOR RETAIL ON A PROJECT THAT IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN FOR THEM THERE? MR. ROBERTS? THANKS, JEFF ROBERTS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF I WANNA GO TOO IN DEPTH 'CAUSE THIS, THIS IS A, A VERY COMPLICATED SCENARIO, THE VERY UNIQUE AND COMPLICATED SCENARIO.
UM, I, I WOULD JUST FIRST OF ALL NOTE THAT THERE, THERE WOULDN'T BE A PROPOSAL.
AND, AND PART OF WHAT EVAN WAS DESCRIBING WAS, UM, TO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE A SCENARIO WHERE ACTIVE USE WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S NOT CURRENTLY REQUIRED FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT.
UM, IT, IT'S IN, IT'S A PROJECT THAT IS IN A FAIRLY UNUSUAL STATUS.
IT ACTUALLY GOT ITS BUILDING PERMIT BEFORE THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING WAS EVEN ADOPTED.
IT WAS, UH, PERMITTED FROM A, BASED ON A VARIANCE AND THEN KIND OF PIVOTED BASED ON THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING.
UM, AND NOW IS SUBJECT TO THE, THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING, WHICH DOESN'T REQUIRE ACTIVE USE, BUT IT DOES APPLY, UM,
[00:35:01]
DESIGN STANDARDS, UH, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, THE, SOME OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST YEAR WITH, WITH THE CAMBRIDGE STREET TO MASS AB ZONING HAVING TO DO WITH GROUND FLOOR HEIGHTS AND ACCESS FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM PRIMARY STREETS ON THE SIDEWALK.SO, SO THERE'S A LIST OF THOSE STANDARDS, AND WE'VE BEEN MEETING WITH THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER TO GO OVER THOSE STANDARDS AND, AND TALK ABOUT COMPLIANCE.
SO THAT, THAT'S BASICALLY WHERE THAT, UM, I THINK WHAT, UH, EVAN WAS NOTING, AND WE ALL TALKED ABOUT THIS AS, AS WE WERE PREPARING FOR THIS HEARING, IS IF WE'RE GONNA GO A STEP FURTHER TO, UM, TRY TO PUSH FOR KIND OF STRONGER REQUIREMENTS FOR, FOR STRONGER ACTIVATION ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, WE REALLY SHOULD THINK MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT WHAT, UM, KIND OF ANCILLARY AREAS MIGHT GET PULLED INTO THAT AND WHAT THE IMPACT OF THAT WOULD BE.
SO I THINK FOR, FOR THE PURPOSE OF LOOKING AT, UM, IMPOSING STRONGER REQUIREMENTS, I THINK WE SHOULD, WE DECIDED WE SHOULD LOOK REALLY SERIOUSLY AT THOSE AREAS WHERE LOTS DON'T FRONT CAMBRIDGE STREET AND THINK ABOUT HOW TO SORT OF DISENTANGLE THOSE FROM ANY ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT BE UNDER, MIGHT BE UNDER CONSIDERATION.
SO FOR BOTH MONSIGNOR O'BRIEN HIGHWAY AND WARREN STREET, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT THAT, TALK ABOUT THIS MORE.
BUT SINCE THOSE HAVE LOTS THAT DON'T FRONT CAMBRIDGE STREET, WE THOUGHT THAT IT MADE MORE SENSE TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE DISCUSSION OF IMPOSING STRONGER REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY FOR CAMBRIDGE STREET COUNCILOR AZI OR VICE MAYOR.
UM, SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'RE HERE AND SOMETHING VERY TANGIBLE ABOUT THE DIFFICULTY OF THIS CONVERSATION.
I WANTED TO TAKE UP A POINT THAT WAS MADE UP IN PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH IS WHEN WE PASSED CAMBRIDGE STREET, THE EXPECTATION WAS THAT WE WOULD ALSO PAIR IT WITH REQUIRING FIRST FLOOR RETAIL.
I AGREED WITH THAT, EXCEPT THE POINT THAT I DISAGREE WITH IS THAT WE DIDN'T PASS CAMBRIDGE STREET FUNCTIONALLY.
AND IN REALITY, THE ZONING ON CAMBRIDGE STREET NOW IS THE SAME AS IT WAS LAST YEAR, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE HEIGHTS DID NOT CHANGE, NONE OF THE OTHER DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS CHANGED.
WE SLIGHTLY CHANGED HOW WE, UH, DEFINED OPEN SPACE AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, BUT BASICALLY IT'S THE SAME ZONING THAT IT WAS A YEAR AGO.
SO I DON'T THINK WE PASSED A REZONING OF CAMBRIDGE STREET.
AND I THINK THAT'S FUNDAMENTALLY WHAT'S CAUSING THE DIFFICULTY OF THE DISCUSSION TODAY.
IF WE REQUIRE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, THE STRICTEST ZONING IN THE CITY WILL BE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, WHICH IS IN SOME WAYS AN ABSURD OUTCOME.
UM, I THINK THAT THE THING THAT YOU'LL OFTEN HEAR IS LIKE, IT'S REALLY GREAT TO INCENTIVIZE AND TO PROTECT, UM, FIRST FLOOR RETAIL ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
AND I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT.
AND I WOULD SAY THAT CAMBRIDGE STREET RIGHT NOW HAS LOTS OF RETAIL WITHOUT HAVING THIS REQUIREMENT, AND IT HAS NOT HAD THIS REQUIREMENT EVER BEFORE.
AND YET CAMBRIDGE STREET STILL HAS LOTS OF ACTIVE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, RIGHT? UM, AND ALREADY THE ONE PROJECT THAT WAS UNDERWAY, YOU KNOW, EIGHT WINTER STREET BEFORE WE, UH, UH, CHANGED THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS IS NOW UNDER JEOPARDY BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND WE ALREADY, AS THE ONLY TANGIBLE PROJECT, ARE LIKE WE SHOULD DEFINITELY WHATEVER WE DO HERE, EXEMPT THAT FROM THE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, BECAUSE IT DEFINITELY DOES NOT WORK ON THAT SITE.
AND THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY OF REQUIRING FIRST FLOOR RETAIL ON EVERY SINGLE SITE, RIGHT? IS THAT THERE MIGHT BE IN A PARTICULARLY NARROW LOT WHERE THERE'S NO WAY TO HAVE A RETAIL ESTABLISHED ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, RIGHT? THERE MIGHT BE A SPOT WHERE LIKE THERE'S NO GOOD OPTIONS AND YET THEY'RE STILL REQUIRED TO DO SO.
AND HERE SPECIFICALLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT IF FIRST FLOOR RETAIL IS NOT PROFITABLE, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS BEFORE MAYBE THEY WOULD'VE JUST BUILT A SIX STORY RESIDENTIAL, BUT INSTEAD AFTER THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO JUST BUILD A THREE OR FOUR STORY RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO WE WILL BOTH END UP WITH LESS HOUSING AND STILL NOT GET THE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL IF IT IS NOT ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE TO DO SO.
WELL, WE ALSO KNOW THAT HOUSING IS ALSO NOT ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE AT THIS MOMENT.
AND SO WE'RE GOING TO GET UP WITH LESS OF BOTH THINGS RATHER THAN HAVING A SITUATION WHERE WE YES, AND, AND GET BOTH.
SO I THINK THAT THIS IS JUST GOING TO LIKE BACKEND END UP BEING A PLACE WHERE WE'RE JUST GOING TO GET UP THREE OR FOUR STORY BUILDINGS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, AND IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE REST OF THE CITY, WHICH IS, I THINK, A REALLY, REALLY STRANGE OUTCOME.
UM, AND SO I, I THINK IT'S JUST SOMETHING FOR US TO THINK ABOUT.
I FEEL LIKE WE DIDN'T END UP PASSING CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING, UM, AND THAT CHANGED ANYTHING.
SO WHAT'S THE POINT? A LITTLE BIT OF THIS CONVERSATION.
I WOULD SAY THAT IF PEOPLE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT DOING THIS, THEN MY PREFERENCES ARE CURRENTLY, YOU KNOW, THE LAST OPTION WITH CAD PREFERRED, THEN OPTION ONE, THEN OPTION TWO.
[00:40:01]
AND I WON'T NECESSARILY VOTE FOR OPTION TWO, BUT, UM, I, I JUST THINK THAT WE'VE ENDED UP IN A PLACE WHERE WE FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE THERE'S A PERCEPTION THAT SOMETHING CHANGED, BUT ACTUALLY NOTHING HAS CHANGED AND WE'RE IN THE SAME POSITION WE WERE IN A YEAR AGO OR TWO YEARS AGO.AND, UH, I I DON'T REALLY SEE THE IMPETUS ANYMORE FOR DOING ANYTHING HERE.
UM, UH, I'LL JUST LEAVE IT WITH THAT.
I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR CDD AND THAT'S, UM, WHAT IMPACT IN THE, UM, OPTION THREE, DID THE, UH, GRAND JUNCTION PLAY IN IDENTIFYING THE NODES? WAS THERE A, UH, A CONSIDERATION OF THE GRAND JUNCTION SYSTEM MANAGER? PETERS? YEAH.
UH, THANK YOU, UH, THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
SO, UH, WE, WE CERTAINLY TALKED ABOUT, UM, THE FUTURE GRAND JUNCTION CONNECTION.
UM, AND I THINK THE, THE REQUEST WAS FOR US TO FIND A BALANCE AND WHEN WE WERE PRIORITIZING WHICH OF THOSE NODES WE'D WANT TO ENSURE ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USE, WELL THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT MOST IMPORTANT.
UM, WE WANTED TO FIND THAT, THAT BALANCE.
UM, SO I THINK THERE WAS A, A POINT IN PUBLIC COMMENT THAT IF YOU ADD THAT IN, YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY BACK AT OPTION TWO.
AND SO IT REALLY WAS THAT WAY TO KIND OF SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE AND SAY OF THE THREE NODES, HERE'S WHERE WE'D WANNA ENCOURAGE IT BASED ON, UH, FUTURE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, AND THAT IF, UH, AND THEN THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT ONE THAT WE'D WANT TO PRIORITIZE.
BUT GIVEN THAT WE WERE TRYING TO FIND A, A MEDIUM GROUND THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED, IT JUST, IN MY MIND, IT THANK YOU FOR THAT.
IN MY MIND, I WAS WONDERING, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ZONING BEING FUTURE PLANNING, AND THAT'S SORT OF THE FUTURE OF TRANSPORTATION IN CAMBRIDGE, AND THAT'S A, UH, A PROJECT WE'VE IDENTIFIED, BUT IT HASN'T BEEN IDENTIFIED AS, UH, ONE OF THE PRIORITIES IN ZONING AND, UH, TO PUBLIC COMMENT'S POINT ABOUT WARREN STREET ELIMINATING, UH, OR CHANGING THAT TO C ONE FROM WHAT IT IS NOW.
IT JUST, IT SEEMS INCONSISTENT IN MY MIND WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORICAL USE OF CAMBRIDGE STREET AND, UH, THE ACTIVE USES THAT WE HAVE THERE WITH ALMANOR AND, UH, ALL OF THE, YOU KNOW, ROYAL BAKERY.
AND IN THAT STRETCH, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, IT JUST SEEMS, UH, AS IF WE'RE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING TO THE FULL, TO GIVING SOME FUTURE THOUGHT, UH, FORWARD THINKING, UH, AND LOOKING AT HOW WE HOPE, UH, CAMBRIDGE TO APPEAR IN THE FUTURE RATHER THAN RECOGNIZING HOW IT IS TODAY AND, AND, UH, THE TRADITIONAL IMPACT OF THOSE, UH, EXISTING RETAIL BUSINESSES.
SO, AND, AND TO, UM, COUNCIL EMS, VICE MAYOR EM'S POINT ABOUT THE INCENTIVIZATION OF BUILDING, UH, NON AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE, UH, WITHOUT ACTIVE USES, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I COULD SEE THAT HAPPENING IF WE DON'T, UM, GO WITH OPTION TWO.
AND MAYBE OPTION TWO IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE CD APPEARS TODAY AFTER THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE PASSED.
BUT I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THAT AREA.
UH, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS, AND I KNOW CD CDD PROBABLY ENVISIONS THIS, SO I WON'T ASK THE QUESTION, BUT, OR, OR CONTEMPLATES THIS AND CONSIDERS THIS.
IN MANY WAYS, THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE IS VASTLY DIFFERENT, UH, FROM ONE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NEXT.
I MEAN, THE USES ARE DIFFERENT, THE STREETSCAPE IS DIFFERENT, THE HOUSING IS DIFFERENT, THE DENSITY IS DIFFERENT, AND THEREFORE MAYBE THE ZONING SHOULD BE DIFFERENT, UM, AND THE NEEDS ARE DIFFERENT OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO, UM, THE, THE, THE ONE THING THAT I, THAT I DID THINK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET, AND I'M THINKING ABOUT THE VENT VAN BUILDING, UM, DOES, IS, DOES THAT APPEAR AS SORT OF A BLOCK, UH, IN ADDITIONAL ACTIVE USE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET? WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT, THAT, UH, CONSTRUCTION AND HOW IT SORT OF FITS IN TO ALL OF THE USES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET ASSISTANT MANAGER SURE.
UM, SO I THINK THAT SECTION, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IS ACROSS FROM THE GAS STATION.
I THINK THAT THAT AREA JUST DOESN'T FEEL LIKE A VERY WALKABLE AREA.
I THINK PART OF THAT IS DUE TO THE USES, BUT IT'S ALSO THE DESIGN OF THE GROUND FLOOR.
[00:45:01]
AND VIN FINN HAS THEIR WRAPPED PARKING GARAGE, WHICH DOESN'T, UM, CREATE KIND OF THE ACTIVE PUBLIC REALM THAT WE WOULD EXPECT IN THAT AREA.SO I THINK THAT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THAT BE ALL RESIDENTIAL OR ACTIVE GROUND FOR USE WITH RESIDENTIAL ABOVE, I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF DESIGN, UH, OUTCOMES THAT ARE LACKING.
WOULD WOULD OPTION THREE ENCOURAGE THE ELIMINATION OF THE BUSINESS DISTRICT AS IT PRESENTLY EXISTS OVER TIME ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AND ENCOURAGE THE, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE STORY TOWNHOUSES WITH NO AFFORDABILITY? IS, IS THAT A LIKELY OUTCOME? I, I THINK MOST LIKELY, AS EVAN DESCRIBED IN, IN EITHER SCENARIO, YOU'RE GOING, PEOPLE ARE GONNA WANNA MAXIMIZE THE ZONING, SO THEY'RE GONNA WANNA BUILD SIX STORIES.
UM, SO TO THAT POINT, OPTION ONE, TWO OR THREE IS SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, WHICH IS YOU COULD BUILD SIX IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO ACTIVATE THE GROUND FLOOR, WHICH WE ARE, AND WHICH WAS THE MANDATE OF THE COUNCIL, UM, WE'RE MOST LIKELY TO GET SIX STORIES WITH GROUND FLOOR RETAIL WITH EITHER ONE OR TWO.
I THINK WHAT WE'RE JUST, WHAT WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME FOCUSING ON IS THOSE PROJECTS ON THE MARGINS.
AND UM, ADMITTEDLY DEVELOPMENT IS MORE DIFFICULT NOW THAN HAS BEEN IN THE PAST AND THINGS MAY CHANGE, BUT THERE ARE PROBABLY MORE PROJECTS ON THE MARGINS.
I THINK IT DEPENDS, IT'S HARD TO PREDICT HOW ONE SITE MIGHT DEVELOP.
IT DEPENDS ON THEIR LAND BASES, FINANCING EXPECTATIONS, UM, WHAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THEY DO.
UM, BUT I THINK BEHOOVES THE COUNCIL TO THINK ABOUT WHAT IT IS WE WANNA SEE ON, UM, AS THOSE PLACES, UH, DEVELOP AND WHAT'S MOST LIKELY, UM, AND RECOGNIZING THAT THERE MIGHT ALWAYS BE EXCEPTIONS.
SO, AND AGAIN, AND I'LL YIELD UP TO THIS QUESTION, AND I KNOW SOME OF THIS IS HYPOTHETICAL AND HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT NONE OF US WANT TO DEAL WITH BECAUSE THE HYPOTHETICAL, BUT WOULD OPTION THREE ENCOURAGE FROM A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE STORY BUILDINGS, WHICH WOULD OBVIATE THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OBVIATE THE NEED DURING THAT STRETCH FROM WINDSOR TO, I GUESS ABOUT THE NEXT, UH, LEACH LECHMERE, UH, NODE, ANY ACTIVE RETAIL USE ON THE FIRST FLOOR? LIKE, SO, SO THAT STRETCH, I KNOW I'M NOT ASKING THIS QUESTION AWFULLY, BUT DURING THAT STRETCH THAT IS IN BETWEEN THE NODES, WOULD IT INCENTIVIZE THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE STORY LUXURY UNITS WITH NO ACTIVE RETAIL USE AND NO AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS? WOULDN'T THAT BE THE MOST ECONOMICAL, UM, UH, BENEFIT TO A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER LOOKING TO AMASS, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER PROPHECY COULD FOR HIS INVESTORS? SO UNDER OPTION THREE, THAT SECTION BETWEEN YEAH, WINDSOR AND FIFTH, UM, IF YOU BUILD OVER FOUR STORIES, SO THE FIVE BUILDINGS, FIVE STORY BUILDING YOU'RE, UM, PROPOSING THAT WOULD REQUIRE ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR SPACE.
I'M SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE SAID FOUR.
SO FOUR IS FOUR STORY IS AN OUTCOME.
I WILL SAY THE ONE DISTINCTION I WANNA MAKE IS UNLIKE, UM, THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING, UM, IF YOU, UH, WHERE IF YOU WANT TO GO ABOVE FOUR STORIES, YOU HAVE TO DO INCLUSIONARY ZONING REGARDLESS.
IF YOU MEET THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT THRESHOLD, THAT 10,000 SQUARE FOOT, UH, THRESHOLD APPLIES HERE.
SO YOU COULD, IF YOU'RE AT 10, 10,001 AND FOUR STORIES, THAT WOULD REQUIRE INCLUSIONARY ZONING.
BUT IF YOU'RE AT 9,999 IN FOUR STORIES, A DOESN'T.
SO IF I'M A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER LOOKING TO MAXIMIZE PROFITS, THAT'S WHAT I DO.
SO IN THAT SCENARIO, UM, OPTION ONE OR THIS SECTION IN OPTION THREE, YOU, YOU MIGHT RESULT IN FOUR STORY ALL RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.
UM, AND DEPENDING ON THE LOT SIZE, YOU MAY FALL UNDER THAT 10,000 SQUARE FOOT THRESHOLD.
AND THAT SECTION IS SORT OF THE EXISTING, UM, ACTIVE USE RETAIL DISTRICT IN EAST CAMBRIDGE RIGHT NOW WHERE ELMENDORF AND THERE ARE, THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT ROYAL BAKERY
[00:50:01]
AND ALL THAT CLUSTER OF ACTIVITY.PLEASURE OF THE COMMITTEE COUNCIL NOLAN.
I FIRST WANNA START OUT WITH ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION.
IF FOR INCLUSIONARY, IF YOU'RE 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPMENT, NO MATTER HOW YOU COULD HAVE A ONE STORY BUILDING, INCLUSIONARY APPLIES.
I I SAID THAT WRONG, BUT YEAH, THAT WAS THE INTENT.
SO WHETHER IT'S MULTIFAMILY NOW IF YOU GO ABOVE SIX, EVEN IF IT'S LESS THAN 10,000, YOU STILL HAVE TO, I THINK THAT'S THE CLARIFICATION THAT WAS BEING MADE.
UM, I AM, UH, APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT WENT INTO OPTION THREE.
I THINK MY CONCERN ABOUT IS IT FURTHER COMPLICATES OUR ZONING CODE THAT I THINK NEEDS MORE SIMPLIFICATION, NOT OVER COMPLICATION AT THE I AND I THINK THROUGH YOU, UH, CHAIRMAN MCGOVERN IS SOME OF THE RESTRICTIVE ZONING, WHICH WE HEARD IN PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE GOT AN EMAIL ABOUT IT FROM, UM, IN HARVARD SQUARE IS VERY RESTRICTIVE IN TERMS OF WHERE BANKS CAN GO, WHERE FORMULARY CAN GO, WHERE THERE'S A WHOLE RANGE OF OTHER THINGS.
IS THAT, HOW DOES THAT SCENARIO OF US CONSCIOUSLY TRYING TO SUPPORT LOCALLY OWNED BUSINESSES TRANSLATE INTO THIS STRETCH OF, OF CAMBRIDGE STREET? IS THERE ANY SIMILARITY OR ANY KIND OF, UM, UH, DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THAT ZONING, WHICH WAS WORKED ON QUITE EXTENSIVELY AND WHAT WE COULD POSSIBLY SEE IN CAMBRIDGE STREET? 'CAUSE I'M JUST NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH, WITH HOW THAT FEEDS IN, IN TERMS OF PREFERENCE FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES AND NOT FORMULARY.
UH, JUST TO RESPOND TO THAT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE WERE SOME, I'M NOT SURE IF THE, THE COMMENTS WERE MADE ENTIRELY CLEAR, BUT I, I WENT AND BRUSHED BACK UP ON HARVARD STREET, HARVARD SQUARE ZONING.
UM, THERE AREN'T THAT MANY RESTRICTIONS ON, UH, COMMERCIAL USE IN HARVARD SQUARE.
UM, AND THERE, IT, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY OF THE PROVISIONS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE YOU GET A, YOU KNOW, BONUS, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR HOUSING IN EXCHANGE FOR GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL USE.
THERE IS A LIMITATION ON THE FRONTAGE THAT BANKS CAN OCCUPY.
UM, AND IN, IN THE ZONING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE SORT OF ACTIVE USE PROVISIONS THAT, THAT EVAN DESCRIBED, BANKS WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN ACTIVE USE.
SO IF YOU WANTED TO MEET THAT, YOU KNOW, 60% MINIMUM AREA FOR ACTIVE USE, YOU COULD STILL HAVE A BANK, BUT IT WOULDN'T COUNT AS PART OF THAT, THAT 60%.
SO IT'S, IT'S A BIT OF A, YOU KNOW, IT, IT BASICALLY DOESN'T, DOESN'T APPLY THAT INCENTIVE TO BANKS.
SO THAT'S ONE DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF FORMULA BUSINESS IN HARVARD SQUARE, IT'S FAIRLY NARROW.
SO A, UM, FAST ORDER OR QUICK SERVICE FOOD ESTABLISHMENT IN HARVARD SQUARE STILL NEEDS TO GET A, UH, IF IT, IF IT IS A FORMULA BUSINESS STILL NEEDS TO GET A SPECIAL PERMIT FROM THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL.
UM, AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, AND I'M TRYING, I MIGHT NEED TO LOOK TO EVAN TO SAY IF, IF WOULD ANY, UH, FAST ORDER OR QUICK SERVICE FOOD ESTABLISHMENT, YOU NEED A SPECIAL PERMIT? UH, NO.
SO, SO IT, SO THAT WOULD BE AN, AN AS OF RIGHT USE, UM, ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, JUST GENERALLY AND IN A FORMULA BUSINESS TO, AGAIN, TO REMIND EVERYONE FROM THE LAST TIME, IT, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE TYPE OF SIGNAGE AND AESTHETIC QUALITIES OF THE BUSINESS.
THE ZONING DOESN'T PROHIBIT THOSE KINDS OF USES IN CENTRAL SQUARE.
THEY REQUIRE A SPECIAL PERMIT, HARVARD SQUARE IN, IN SOME CASES IT REQUIRES A SPECIAL PERMIT.
UM, BUT IT, IT'S REALLY JUST ABOUT THE, IT'S ABOUT THE AESTHETICS AND NOT HOW THE BUSINESS IS OWNED OR HOW IT'S FRANCHISED OR ANY, ANY OF THAT WHICH CAN'T BE REGULATED THROUGH ZONING.
I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND, I THINK WE HAVE ALL VERY DIFFERENT PLACES AROUND THE CITY.
SOME ARE, HAVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT OTHERS DON'T HAVE.
SO JUST THE POINT THAT THIS, WE'RE NOW ONLY TALKING ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET, BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY THAT HAVE SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND OTHERS, UM, DON'T, SO IT'S HARD TO COMPARE EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE WE'RE DOING HERE.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON WARREN STREET.
AS COUNCILLOR FLAHERTY SAID, THAT DOES SEEM TO BE, IT'S CURRENTLY MIXED USE.
I MEAN, WHEN YOU GO DOWN WARREN STREET, YOU SEE, YOU DO SEE A LOT OF HOUSING, BUT YOU ALSO DO SEE SEVERAL BUSINESSES ALONG THAT STREET.
YOU KNOW, SO HOW WOULD THIS, IF WE WERE TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE FOR WARREN STREET, HOW WOULD THAT CHANGE THOSE EXISTING BUSINESSES AND WOULD IT PREVENT THEN OTHER BUSINESSES FROM GOING FORWARD? FROM WHAT WE SEE, MR. ROBERT,
[00:55:02]
I'LL TAKE THAT AGAIN.SO, UM, EXISTING BUSINESSES WOULD, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING THAT'S PRE-EXISTING WOULD BE FINE.
AND EVEN IF A NEW BUSINESS TOOK OVER, IF IT WAS THE SAME USE, THEN IT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE.
IF A AND A NON-CONFORMING USE CAN CONTINUE IN OPERATION, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, IF, IF ONE OF THE BUSINESS THERE WERE, UM, WERE SOLD AND, AND OR WENT OUT OF BUSINESS AND A NEW BUSINESS WANTED TO COME IN, THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, A A STORE, A DIFFERENT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, RETAIL STORE OR A BANK OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD BE, UM, THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.
THE CHANGE OF USE WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED.
UH, WE DO HAVE A PROVISION IN OUR ZONING NOW THAT AN EXIST, A PREEXISTING COMMERCIAL SPACE COULD BE CHANGED TO A LIMITED NUMBER OF RETAIL.
SO LIKE A CONVENIENCE STORE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD, UH, AND A FEW OTHER TYPES OF USES COULD BE ALLOWED BY SPECIAL PERMIT FROM, FROM THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL.
BUT OTHERWISE YOU, YOU TYPICALLY CAN'T, CAN'T HAVE A USE THAT'S NOT ALLOWED.
I THINK THE IDEA HERE WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS PERMIT, UM, SIX STORY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
AND ALONG THIS STRETCH OF WARREN STREET, IF A SITE WERE, UM, IF A BUILDING WERE, WERE SOLD OR PUT ON THE MARKET, AND IF, IF SAY IT WAS VACANT OR THE, THE BUILDING WASN'T REALLY OF, OF GOOD USE ANYMORE, AND IF A DE DEVELOPER WERE LOOKING TO REDEVELOP IT, WOULD WE WANT THERE TO BE A SIMILAR KIND OF REQUIREMENT OR INCENTIVE? AGAIN, THIS WOULD JUST BE ON ONE SIDE OF WARREN STREET, SO YOU'D HAVE ONE SIDE OF WARREN STREET WHERE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, DOING SOMETHING WHERE THE HEIGHT, EITHER THE HEIGHT'S BEING LIMITED OR WE ARE REQUIRING SOME NEW COMMERCIAL SPACE ON, ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET, ON WARREN STREET.
I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT THINGS FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, DOESN'T ALWAYS MAKE SENSE TO HA TRY TO ENCOURAGE ONE SIDE OF A OTHERWISE RESIDENTIAL STREET TO, TO BE KIND OF CONTINUOUS COMMERCIAL USE.
UM, SO WE THOUGHT IT MADE MORE SENSE TO MAKE THAT RESIDENTIAL, UM, OVER TIME BUSINESSES, YOU KNOW, COULD STILL BE THERE, BUT, UM, IF THEY WERE PHASED OUT AND THE SITES WERE REDEVELOPED, IT WOULD BECOME RESIDENTIAL IF THERE WERE A DESIRE TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL USE JUST ON THAT SIDE OF WARREN STREET.
UM, AGAIN, IT, IT, FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT, IT, YOU KNOW, DESPITE SOME OF THE COMMENTS, I, I THINK THAT THERE ARE REASONS FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT WHY, UM, THAT MIGHT NOT MAKE THE MOST SENSE TO, TO ENCOURAGE THAT ONE SIDE OF THE STREET TO REMAIN COMMERCIAL.
BUT IF THERE WERE A DESIRE TO ALLOW IT, IT COULD BE ZONED TO, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT AS WELL.
AND THAT WOULD CONTINUE TO ALLOW EITHER RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL USE.
COUNCIL NOLAN, THANKS, I APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, HOWEVER, I STILL THINK, GIVEN THAT THERE'S ARE SOME BUSINESSES THERE AND I BELIEVE IN NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE THAT, IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO CONTINUE.
I MEAN, THERE'S A TAILOR SHOP THERE.
I WOULD WANT A CAFE TO MOVE IN IF THEY WERE ABLE TO, AND THAT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED.
IF WE MADE IT C ONE, IT WOULD'VE TO BE SPECIAL PERMIT OR WE'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH A WHOLE NOTHER ROUND OF ZONING.
SO ON THAT ONE, IT SEEMS TO ME NOT TO, NOT TO BE A POSITIVE, UH, MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK ON THE OTHER SIDE, ON THE WINTER STREET, IT COULD MAKE SENSE BECAUSE IN A BA ZONE YOU CAN STILL BUILD HOUSING.
HOUSING IS NOT A PROHIBITED USE, SO IT'S CLOSE TO AS PERMISSIVE.
IS THAT CORRECT MR. R? YEAH, SO A BUSINESS, UH, BUSINESS, A ZONING DISTRICT ALLOWS SIX STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL.
UM, THAT REALLY THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BUSINESS A AND, AND THE NEW CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING IS IT, IT WOULDN'T HAVE THE ADDITIONAL DESIGN BASED STANDARDS, UM, THAT APPLY TO ALL DEVELOPMENT.
IT WOULD, IT WOULD ONLY BE FOR BUILDINGS THAT ARE 25,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE THAT THEY WOULD THEN BE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS AND IT ALLOWS COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL, AND A, A WIDE RANGE OF COMMERCIAL USE.
SO THAT SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE TO ME.
SO I, I STILL PREFER OPTION TWO.
I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE MOSTLY 'CAUSE I JUST WANNA TRY TO GET MORE LOCAL RETAIL BUSINESSES.
I THINK A LOT MORE HOUSING WILL BE BUILT ALONG THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND INCLUDING ALONG THIS QUARTER, BUT ALSO ON THE LOTS, WE'RE ALREADY SEEING A LOT OF THE ELEMENTS BEHIND IT.
SO IT, DEPENDING ON HOW THE, HOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AND WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THIS, BUT, AND I, UM, CAN SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BA BUT I, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT TAKING THE WARREN STREET OUT BECAUSE IT, IT CURRENTLY HAS SEVERAL BUSINESSES AND WOULDN'T WANNA PREVENT THOSE.
AND I THINK IT ACTUALLY MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
I MEAN, I LIVE RIGHT NEAR CONCORD AVE WHERE THERE'S ONE HALF SOME ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET, THERE'S A BUNCH OF BUSINESSES AND ON THE OTHER SIDE IT'S RESIDENTIAL AND PEOPLE APPRECIATE THAT MIXTURE.
SAME THING WITH, WITH A FEW PARTS ALONG HERE ON AVE ALSO AND
[01:00:01]
DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY HAVE THAT MIXTURE.SO THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK CONTRIBUTES TO THE VIBRANCY OF FOR, FOR QUARTERS LIKE THIS.
MAYBE NOT ON STRICTLY RESIDENTIAL STREETS, BUT THIS IS ONE THAT'S ALREADY MIXED.
SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO CONTINUE TO KEEP IT MIXED.
I YIELD COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER.
UM, JUST TO, YOU KNOW, STEP BACK IN A LITTLE CONTEXT FOR THE GOALS OF THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING.
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THAT THERE ARE TWO GOALS.
YOU KNOW, HAVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, HAVE MORE DEVELOPMENTS WITH GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
UM, AND THE REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT IN, IN CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS, NEW DEVELOPMENTS WE'RE SEEING ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, WE'RE NOT REALLY SEEING EITHER OF THOSE.
THERE'S VERY FEW INCLUSIONARY UNITS.
AND IN THOSE NEW DEVELOPMENTS, THERE'S HASN'T BEEN VERY MUCH GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
THE ONLY PLACES THERE IS ACTUALLY GROUND FLOOR RETAIL ARE IN THE VERY OLD BUILDINGS.
AND AS THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE TURNED OVER THE GROUND FLOOR, RETAIL IS DISAPPEARING AND THAT'S JUST GONNA CONTINUE TO HAPPEN IN PERPETUITY.
SO IT'S NOT THAT, NOT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IMPOSING AND, UH, FROM MY SPECTRUM, POSING A NEW THING TO THAT'S CREATING PROBLEMS. IT'S, IT'S THE CURRENT SITUATION THAT'S CAUSING PROBLEMS. YOU KNOW, CURRENT DEVELOPMENT HAS NO AFFORDABLE UNITS.
CURRENT DEVELOPMENT HAS BASICALLY NO GROUND FLOOR RETAILS TRYING TO SOLVE THAT, THAT ISSUE.
UM, WITH THIS PIECE, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL THE OPTIONS HERE, THE THREE DIFFERENT ONES ARE, ARE ALL KIND OF SIMILAR AND THAT WE'RE ULTIMATELY STAYING AT SIX STORIES.
I THINK OPTION ONE OR THREE IS, IS THE BETTER OF THEM.
UM, AS OF THOSE THOUGH, I THINK UNFORTUNATELY NOT SURE WE'RE, WE'RE TOTALLY GONNA END UP ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN THE STATUS QUO IN TERMS OF GETTING MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS OR GROUND FLOOR RETAIL BECAUSE WITH SIX STORIES IT'S JUST NOT GONNA GET MUCH OF EITHER AND, AND UH, UH, I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IMPOSSIBLE.
WE'RE GONNA JUST, WE'LL CONTINUE TO GET MORE, WE, UH, BUILDINGS WITH MOSTLY LUXURY, UM, OR JUST THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE EXISTING 2, 3, 4 STORY BUILDINGS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
THERE'S NOTHING TO, TO FORCE PEOPLE TO DO ANY CHANGES.
YOU CAN KEEP THE BUILDING EXACTLY THE SAME AND JUST, YOU KNOW, JACK UP THE RENT, RENOVATE THE UNIT WITHOUT TEARING IT DOWN AND, AND INCREASE THE PRICES ON IT, INCLUDING FOR THE COMMERCIAL TENANTS, INCLUDING FOR FOLKS.
SO IT POSSIBLE THERE'LL BE NO, NO DEVELOPMENT WITH THIS NO CHANGE, BUT IT'LL STILL SEE FOLKS GET PRICED OUT, ALL THE SMALL BUSINESSES AND AND TENANTS.
AND THAT'S JUST ANOTHER EFFECT OF LIFE AND HOPE I'M WRONG ABOUT ALL, BOTH OF THOSE AND DO SEE MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS, DO SEE MORE BUILDINGS WITH THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW, WE GET THERE WITHOUT MORE INCENTIVES TO DO THAT.
UM, SO I THINK YOU PASS WHICHEVER OF THESE HAS THE VOTES TO PASS AND MOVE ON.
IF NONE OF 'EM HAS THE VOTES TO PASS, WE CAN ALSO TABLE THIS AND WHOLE THING AND PUT IT ASIDE AND, AND MOVE ON TO SOCIAL HOUSING, WHICH I THINK IS SOMETHING THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF AGREEMENT ON IN THE COUNCIL AND WILL, YOU KNOW, LEAD TO MORE, UH, AFFORDABLE OUTCOMES, UM, DOWN TO DO WHICHEVER THESE HAS VOTES, VOTES TO PASS AND, AND MOVE ON.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY BEST TO MORE HELPFUL TO DO THAT THAN SORT OF ENDLESSLY TINKER ON ON DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
SO, UM, I THINK WE COULD, CAN DO THAT AND, AND SEE WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING A FEW YEARS FROM NOW AND, AND GO BACK AND IF NOTHING IS HAPPENING, YOU KNOW, WE CAN DECIDE IF NOTHING IS A GOOD OPTION OR IF THINGS ARE CHANGING AND IN A DIRECTION WE DON'T CAN COME BACK.
I THINK SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO SEE A BIT WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS AND, UH, WHAT ENDS UP GETTING, UH, BUILT OR NOT BUILT IN REALITY.
UM, I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME WAYS TO, TO HAVE THIS AS A, UM, WHICHEVER OF THE THREE OPTIONS WE LAND ON HERE, UM, IS A, UH, THAT IT ALLY ENDS, ENDS UP LEADING IN MORE THINGS.
IF THERE ARE MORE INCENTIVES WE CAN PROVIDE FOR GROUND FLOOR RETAIL AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING EVEN.
IT'S JUST ONE MORE STORY OF HEIGHT OR, UM, ON SETBACK, SOME FLEXIBILITY OR IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER CREATIVE OPTIONS CDD CAN, CAN THINK ABOUT, UH, TO PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE INCENTIVE FOR RETAIL AND, AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS THEY'RE PUTTING THE ZONING TOGETHER.
UM, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF, IF THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF MODELING THAT COULD BE DONE AROUND RETAIL VERSUS HOUSING.
FROM EVERYTHING I'M HEARD, AND I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, UM, A, UH, YOU KNOW, EXPERT ON GROUND FLOOR RETAIL IN THE SENSE, BUT IT, THAT IT, IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE TO INCLUDE GROUND FLOORED RETAIL THEN TO INCLUDE FOR, FOR HOUSING.
AND THAT'S NOT A VALUE JUDGMENT.
THAT'S JUST LIKE WHAT, WHAT MAY END UP HAPPENING.
AND SO IF YOU'RE REQUIRING GROUND FLOOR RETAIL AND THAT'S MORE EXPENSIVE, WHAT ARE YOU PROVIDING AS AN INCENTIVE TO PROVIDE FOR, FOR THAT? AND, AND HOW MUCH OF AN INCENTIVE, RIGHT? IS, IS GROUND FLOOR RETAIL 50% MORE EXPENSIVE TO PROVIDE THAN HOUSING? IS IT 10%? HAVING SOME MODELING AROUND THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT THE TRADE OFF WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT IS HERE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I DON'T THINK WE, THEY NEED TO, TO ENDLESSLY END THIS ON, I'M OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, COUNSEL IN TERMS OF WHERE THE OPTIONS ARE, WHERE THEIR VOTES ARE FOR THESE THREE OPTIONS, AND HOPE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD ON IT.
UM, BEFORE I GO BACK TO THE VICE MAYOR, ANY CONS, COUNCILOR SUZI FOLLOWED BY THE MAYOR.
[01:05:01]
THANK YOU.I, UM, I GUESS A QUESTION ON THE, UM, THE WINTER STREET PROJECTS COME UP A FEW TIMES AND MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S PERMITTED UNDER THE OLD ZONING.
UM, SO WOULD THEY BE AFFECTED? I JUST WANNA CLARIFY.
IT, IT'S COMPLICATED WITH THAT CASE BECAUSE IT, IT RECEIVED A, A, IT FIRST RECEIVED A VARIANCE FROM THE BZA AND IT, IT PROCEEDED ON A BUILDING PERMIT THAT WAS BASED ON HAVING RECEIVED THAT VARIANCE.
SINCE THEN, THE ZONING HAS NOW CHANGED TWICE.
AND SO AS, AS THE BUILDING IS, UH, AND THE, THE DEVELOPERS SORT OF TRYING TO ADAPT TO THAT, THE PLANS HAVE CHANGED SOMEWHAT.
UM, AND THERE IS STILL A NEED TO CONFORM TO, TO THE ZONING IN ORDER TO FULLY COMPLY.
SO I, I REALLY, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE DETAILS OF, OF A PARTICULAR CASE, BUT IT IS STILL, AS WE UNDERSTAND IT'S SUBJECT TO THE CHANGES IN THE ZONING THAT ARE BEING CONTEMPLATED BECAUSE IT STILL NEEDS TO FULLY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF UPDATING TO THE NEW ZONING.
SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY AGAIN.
I KNOW YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT IT.
AND THEN I APPRECIATE WHAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN SAYING AND, UM, KIND OF HEAR THE, THE VARIOUS POINTS AND QUESTIONS.
I, TO ME, IT SEEMS IF WE'RE JUST LOOKING BETWEEN THOSE TWO OPTIONS, OPTIONS ONE AND TWO, THEY'RE BOTH BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY.
LETS JUST MANAGE FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, THAT IS CORRECT THAT YOU'RE MORE LIKELY TO GET ACTIVE GR FLOOR USE WITH EITHER ONE OR TWO THAN YOU ARE WITH WHAT THE CURRENT ZONING IS, RIGHT? YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK TO THAT POINT, I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF PUTTING THE ORIGINAL PO WAS TO SAY, AS A VALUE, RETAIL IS IMPORTANT TO US, WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
I UNDERSTAND THE REALITIES AND THERE'S A LOT, WE DON'T KNOW, A LOT OF THINGS CAN CHANGE.
UM, THERE'S MORE WORK THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO, MORE CHANGES WE COULD POTENTIALLY MAKE.
BUT I DO THINK, UM, IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME AT LEAST TO, FOR THE COUNCIL TO GET SOMEWHERE ON THIS AND HAVE SOME CONSENSUS.
UM, I THINK THERE IS MORE CONSENSUS ON OPTION TWO THAN ONE AT THE MOMENT.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK PROCEDURALLY, AFTER EVERYONE DOES SAY WHERE THEY ARE, I THINK WE SHOULD SEE WHERE THE VOTES ARE.
BUT MY HOPE IS THAT IF OPTION, IF OPTION TWO DOESN'T, IS NOT WHAT FOLKS WANT, THEN I AM WILLING TO VOTE FOR OPTION ONE.
UM, GIVEN WHERE WE ARE AROUND THIS BEING BETTER THAN THE STATUS QUO.
UM, NOT WITHSTANDING THAT THEY'RE SURE THERE COULD BE OTHER QUESTIONS AND CHANGES THAT COULD COME UP, BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW.
UM, COUNCIL SUZIE, AND THEN WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED, BEFORE I GO BACK TO THE VICE MAYOR, I'LL JUST KIND OF GIVE MY SENSE OF PROCEDURALLY WHAT, WHERE WE ARE AND KIND OF HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.
UH, SO I, MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ALL HAD SUCH, SUCH THOUGHTFUL THINGS TO SAY, AND I'M REALLY GLAD WE HAVE A PERRY MASON, THE PERRY, OUR PERRY MASON ISN'T HERE RIGHT NOW, BUT HE'S BEEN ASKING GREAT QUESTIONS.
TIM FLAHERTY, WHO'S USUALLY HERE.
UH, I I, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES THAT IT'S ESSENTIAL FOR US TO PROVIDE SOME PROTECTION FOR RETAIL TODAY.
I WILL BE HOPING THAT IT'S OPTION TOO WITH, UM, REQUIRING RETAIL IF IT'S THREE STORIES OR OVER.
UM, I THINK IT'S, I I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING AS SABRINA, UH, COUNSELOR SABRINA WHEELER HAS SAID THOUGH, IS THAT WE REALLY FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN INCENTIVIZE THAT GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
AND I KNOW PAR PICE HAS SPOKEN WITH US IN THE PAST ABOUT HOW, AND ACTUALLY, UM, UM, UM, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, MELISSA PETERS AS WELL, ABOUT HOW THIS WE CAN BE INCENTIVIZING GROUND FLOOR RETAIL WITH THINGS OUTSIDE OF ZONING.
THAT ZONING IS ONE TOOL, BUT I THINK WE'VE GOTTA COME UP WITH WAYS, WHETHER IT'S TAX ABATEMENTS THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE, UM, GROUND FLOOR RETAIL TO REMAIN
[01:10:01]
VIABLE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.I THINK THAT, UH, THAT HAS TO BE PRIMARY.
I WANTED TO ASK, UM, UM, JEFF HAD MENTIONED HOW AT HARVARD SQUARE AND AT CENTRAL SQUARE, THERE'S A SPECIAL PERMIT REQUIREMENT FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES THERE.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE ADDING TO THE ZONING? I'M WONDERING ABOUT THAT.
I GUESS I'M, I'M CONVINCED THAT WE SHOULD LEAVE WARREN STREET AS A MIXED RETAIL AREA, AND WE SHOULDN'T EXEMPT IT FROM THIS.
WHILE IT MAKES SENSE FOR, IT'S EITHER TO REMOVE, UM, O'BRIEN HIGHWAY FROM THIS ZONING OR ELSE TO EXEMPT IT, I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN INTERESTING IDEA THAT, UM, VICE MAYOR AZEEM HAD, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.
UM, AND THEN I JUST FINALLY, AND BEFORE, BEFORE YOU ANSWER ALL MY QUESTIONS, UH, OR RESPOND, I THOUGHT, UH, SUZANNE BLEA HAD AN INTERESTING COMMENT ABOUT CREATING AN ADVISORY GROUP.
I KNOW WE'RE VERY LUCKY, LUCKY TO HAVE THE, UM, CAMBRIDGE STREET BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, BUT IT, WOULD IT ALSO BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A, A BROADER GROUP THAT WOULD INCLUDE ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS AND FINANCIAL PEOPLE AS WELL AS BUSINESS PEOPLE TO BE THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE OF CAMBRIDGE STREET AND ADVOCATING FOR IT.
UM, I'VE BEEN HEARING FROM CAMBRIDGE STREET RESIDENTS IN EAST CAMBRIDGE RESIDENTS THAT THEY WANT RETAIL, BUT THEY ALSO REALLY, REALLY, REALLY WANT OPEN SPACE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO MAYBE A GROUP LIKE THAT COULD HELP TO ADVOCATE FOR THAT.
AND, UM, AGAIN, I HEARD FROM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, MELISSA PETER, SPEAK AT A DIFFERENT MEETING ABOUT HOW OFTEN OPEN SPACE IS OBTAINED, UM, THROUGH PURCHASE AND, UH, AND THROUGH MITIGATION IN WAYS OUTSIDE OF ZONING.
ZONING MAY NOT GET US THE OPEN SPACE THAT WE WANT, BUT IT'S CLEARLY A NEED FOR CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO, A AGAIN, I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT, BUT AGAIN, I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM, UM, OUR ZONINGS ARE JEFF, UM, AGAIN, ABOUT CAN WE, HOW, HOW CAN, SHOULD WE BE CONSIDERING ADDING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR, UH, TO, FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, AGAIN TO PROTECT LOCAL RETAIL? AND, UH, IS IT, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO GIVE EIGHT WINTER STREET AN EXEMPTION RATHER THAN HAVING TO REMOVE MIXED USE REQUIREMENTS FROM THAT LITTLE TRIANGLE, MR. ROBERTS? UM, SO A COUPLE, A COUPLE OF THINGS.
SO THE FORMULA BUSINESS, UM, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I, I DON'T JUST CANDIDLY, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE FORMULA BUSINESS PROVISIONS, I THINK A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE TALKED ABOUT AS A WAY WITH ZONING THAT WE CAN PROTECT LOCAL BUSINESS.
I, I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT THEY'RE TERRIBLY EFFECTIVE IN DOING THAT.
I'LL JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO.
SO IN, IN CENTRAL SQUARE, WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT ANYTHING THAT QUALIFIES AS A FORMULA BUSINESS NEEDS A SPECIAL PERMIT.
AND AGAIN, WHAT QUALIFIES AS A FORMULA BUSINESS IS HAVING STANDARDIZED LIKE SIGNAGE AND LOGOS AND, AND OTHER THINGS.
SO WE'VE SEEN A FEW CASES, UM, THAT HAVE HAD TO COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD.
USUALLY, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A, IF IT'S A FORMULA BUSINESS THAT IS, YOU KNOW, OFTEN A FRANCHISEE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S A, A, A LOCAL INDIVIDUAL OR OUTFIT, SOMETIMES IT'S NOT LOCAL.
UM, YOU KNOW, USUALLY IT'S NOT A, A BIG CO SOMETIMES IT'S A, YOU KNOW, A LARGE SORT OF NATIONAL COMPANY THAT THAT ACTUALLY OWNS IT.
UM, BUT IN, IN MOST CASES, THEY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TROUBLE.
UM, WITH THE SPECIAL PERMIT PROCESS.
THEY HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, HIRE ATTORNEYS.
SOMETIMES THEY HAVE A DESIGN TEAM TO KIND OF WORK ON THE SIGNAGE.
AND, UM, ON THE ONE HAND, I THINK IT'S, UH, IT CAN BE HELPFUL BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU SOMETIMES WITH FORMULA BUSINESSES, THEY, THEY HAVE VERY STANDARDIZED SIGNAGE.
THEY JUST WANNA SLAP ON A BUILDING AND THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING IT, AND THE URBAN DESIGN TEAM LOOKS AT IT, YOU KNOW, WE COME TO A, A DESIGN OUTCOME THAT'S A LITTLE BIT BETTER, YOU KNOW, MORE KIND OF CORRESPONDING TO THE REST OF CENTRAL SQUARE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I NECESSARILY SEE IT AS A, A DISINCENTIVE.
I, I DON'T KNOW THAT A A BUSINESS OR A PROPERTY OWNER, LANDLORD WOULD SORT OF SAY LIKE, OH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THIS FORMULA BUSINESS REQUIREMENT.
WE'RE JUST GONNA RUN AWAY FROM THIS AND, AND NOT WANT TO BE IN THIS LOCATION.
[01:15:01]
IT'S A FORMULA TYPE OF BUSINESS AND THEY WANT TO BE IN CENTRAL SQUARE, THEY'LL, THEY'LL WANT TO BE IN CENTRAL SQUARE.UM, THAT'S, THAT'S SORT OF THE NATURE OF, OF THAT TYPE OF BUSINESS.
UM, SO THAT'S ONE ASPECT OF IT.
I, I DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT IT'S NECESSARILY PUSHING CHAIN BUSINESSES OUT AND, YOU KNOW, BRINGING LOCAL BUSINESSES IN.
THE OTHER SIDE OF IT IS, IF IT, IF IT WERE SUCCEEDING IN TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF SCARE AWAY A WHOLE RANGE OF, OF BUSINESSES, UM, WHICH, YOU KNOW, MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO BE ON CENTRAL SQUARE, IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF ENVIRONMENT THAN, OR THEY MAY NOT WANT TO BE IN ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
IT'S A DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT FROM CENTRAL SQUARE.
UM, BUT IF THEY DID WANT TO BE THERE, AND WE WERE USING REGULATIONS TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, PUSH THEM AWAY, THAT HAS THE, HAS THE IMPACT THAT WE'RE SORT OF CONCERNED ABOUT, OF FURTHER ECONOMIC DISSENT, DISINCENTIVE TO HAVING COMMERCIAL USE ON THE GROUND FLOOR.
AND THAT MIGHT, THAT MIGHT PUSH A DEVELOPER TO LOOK HARDER AT SAYING, WELL, MAYBE, MAYBE I DON'T, MAYBE I, I DON'T WANT TO DO A DEVELOPMENT ON WITH A GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL USE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'M, I'M SORT OF DISINCENTIVIZING A BIG CHUNK OF THE POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, RETAIL MARKET THAT MIGHT WANT TO LEASE SPACE IN THIS BUILDING.
SO IT, IT, IT HAS, IT HAS THAT EFFECT OF, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE IS SOME BENEFIT FROM IT.
AGAIN, I THINK THE BENEFIT IS MAINLY THAT IF A FORMULA BUSINESS WANTS TO BE THERE, THEY, THEY CAN ADAPT THE IMAGE OF THAT BUSINESS TO FIT MORE IN THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
BUT THE, THE FLIP SIDE IS, IT, IT JUST COULD BE ANOTHER ECONOMIC BURDEN, UM, ON THE, THE DESIRE TO HAVE THE KIND OF CONTINUOUS, THE MORE CONTINUOUS COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE THAT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT AT THIS HEARING AS, AS BEING THE THING THAT, THAT WE WANNA TRY TO PRESERVE.
THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL.
I MEAN, IT DOES SEEM AS THOUGH IT WOULD, IF OUR, IF OUR GOAL IS THAT WE WANT LOCAL BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, WHICH I THINK IS OUR GOAL, IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE AN OBSTACLE, NOT AN INSURMOUNTABLE OBSTACLE, UH, THAT WOULD HELP TO INCENTIVIZE LOCAL BUSINESSES ALONG WITH OTHER, OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD BE DOING.
AND MAYBE IT, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HEAR FROM, UM, OUR HEAD OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PAREE ABOUT, AGAIN, WAYS THAT WE CAN REALLY IN DISINCENTIVIZE DISPLACEMENT AND INCENTIVIZE LOCAL BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, WHICH I THINK IS THE GOAL.
SO I WOULD, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR, UM, FROM OUR HEAD OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND, UM, BUT, UM, JEFF, CAN YOU ALSO JUST SPEAK TO, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO MAKE A WINTER STREET AN EXEMPTION TO THE ZONING RATHER THAN TAKING O'BRIEN THAT LITTLE TRIANGLE ON O'BRIEN HIGHWAY OUT OF, OUT OF THE RETHINKING OR, UM, THAT, THAT THROUGH THE CHAIR, THAT, THAT WAS ONE, I DIDN'T ENTIRELY UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS MEANT BY AN EXEMPTION, JUST IT, BUT AN EXEMPTION JUST FROM THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT OR, OR FROM, FROM EVERYTHING.
'CAUSE IF IT WERE BEING EXEMPT FROM ALL OF THE STANDARDS THAT APPLIED TO CAMBRIDGE STREET, THEN I THINK WHAT, WHAT WOULD MAKE SENSE WAS JUST TO MAKE IT A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT SO THAT THERE, THERE ISN'T THAT CONFUSION.
BUT SHORT OF THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD TRY TO SLICE THE ZONING IN DIFFERENT PIECES AND SAY, WELL, WHAT SHOULD APPLY ON MONSIGNOR O'BRIEN OHIO AND WHAT SHOULDN'T APPLY IN MONSIGNOR O'BRIEN HIGHWAY? THAT ADDS A LOT OF COMPLICATION.
AND I THINK WHAT WE'VE, WHAT WE'VE FOUND FROM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE EIGHT WINTER STREET CASE IS THAT THERE ARE SOME PROVISIONS IN THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING THAT IF WE FLIP IT AROUND AND, AND HAVE TRIED TO APPLY IT TO MONSIGNOR O'BRIEN HIGHWAY, WHICH WAS A VERY DIFFERENT KIND OF STREET, THE WAY IT GETS APPLIED CAN, CAN BE A LITTLE BIT WEIRD.
IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME, DOESN'T RE RESULT IN THE SAME TYPES OF OUTCOMES THAT WE, WE WOULD, UH, EXPECT TO GET ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S HELPFUL.
SO I, I WOULD BE OKAY FOR EXEMPTING THE O OBRIEN HIGHWAY FROM, FROM THE SOUTHERN ZONING THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED.
UM, SO JUST BEFORE YOU GO, UM, I, I DO WANT TO TRY TO, THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW WE CAN INCENTIVIZE THINGS THAT DON'T ACTUALLY FIT INTO ZONING.
SO BEFORE WE GO TOO FAR DOWN A RABBIT HOLE ABOUT, UM, JUST TO KEEP THAT IN, KEEP THAT IN MIND.
SO IF YOU KEEP IT TO THE, AS BEST YOU CAN, KEEP IT TO THE ZONING BECAUSE, UH, I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR ASTRAY 'CAUSE WE STILL HAVE A WAYS TO GO THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
UM, SO SPEAKING TO THE ZONING, JEFF'S RIGHT, UM, THE FORMULA BUSINESS, UM, ZONING THAT WE SEE IN SOME OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS LIKE HARVARD SQUARE AND CENTRAL SQUARE,
[01:20:01]
UM, REALLY IS JUST AN ADDED LAYER FOR FORMULA BUSINESS.AND, AND AGAIN, TO REITERATE JEFF'S COMMENTS, IT UM, PROVIDES US SOME ABILITY TO GET MORE CHARACTER SIGNAGE AND FACADES IN CENTRAL AND HARVARD SQUARES, ESPECIALLY HARVARD, YOU KNOW, HAVING MORE SIGNAGE THAT'S, UM, ADDED TO THE HISTORICAL AESTHETIC OF, UM, THE SQUARE.
SO THAT IS FROM THE ZONING PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAYBE ADD A LAYER TO FORMULA BUSINESSES.
UM, IN REGARDS TO NON ZONING, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER MEETING TO DISCUSS WHAT THE CITY DOES.
BUT AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, WE HAVE GRANTS.
THOSE GRANTS ARE FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES.
WE DO NOT GIVE THEM TO CHAINS.
UM, OCCASIONALLY SOME FRANCHISES, UM, HAVE BENEFITED, BUT MOSTLY THEY'RE ALL LOCAL OWNED.
THEY'RE GIVEN TO LOCALLY OWNED BUSINESSES AND LANDLORDS.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT THAT GRANTS ARE FOR, IS TO, FOR US TO HELP ECONOMICALLY SUPPORT OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES.
AND, AND IT SOUNDS TO ME AS THOUGH IT WOULD MAKE SENSE JUST TO ADD THIS OTHER LAYER TO REQUIRE SPECIAL BUSINESSES FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET OF, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE IF WE FOUND THIS TOO RESTRICTIVE, WE COULD ALWAYS CHANGE IT, BUT I THINK IT, UH, IT WOULD BE VERY S SAD IF A LOT OF, I I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE ANOTHER OBSTACLE.
OKAY, SO BEFORE I GO BACK TO THE VICE MAYOR AND BEFORE, I JUST KIND OF GROUND US IN KIND OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
UM, COUNSELOR ZUBIE HAS NOT SPOKEN AND HAS OUR HAND UP, SO I'LL GO TO CONSULAR ZUBI.
UH, COULD YOU QUICKLY CLARIFY WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE FOR A POSSIBLE REASSESSMENT IF WE WERE GO TO, IF WE WERE TO GO WITH OPTION TWO AND THE ASSESSMENT, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THE TIMELINE FOR THAT, IT, IT JUST ISN'T WORKING OUT.
WHAT WOULD THE PATHWAY BE, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
SO JUST TO, UM, BASICALLY TO, TO REEVALUATE.
SO RIGHT NOW WE, WE SORT OF A REAL, I DON'T, WELL, HERE, HERE, HERE'S THE THING, AND THIS SORT OF LEAKS OVER TO WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY A LITTLE BIT.
WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US NOW IS A PRESENTATION WITH VARIOUS OPTIONS.
WE DON'T HAVE ZONING LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF US YET.
SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS GOING TO BE VOTING TO DIRECT CDD TO DEVELOP THE ZONING LANGUAGE THAT WILL THEN COME BACK, RIGHT? AND SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS NOTHING HERE THAT SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT A REVIEW, ALTHOUGH THAT COULD BE PUT INTO THE ZONING LANGUAGE, WHICH WE, UM, WHICH WE OFTEN DO.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING OR THE A HO, WE HAVE YEARLY UPDATES WITH A MORE COMPREHENSIVE FIVE-YEAR REVIEW.
WE COULD PUT THAT, UM, INTO, UH, THE ZONING LANGUAGE IN, IN THIS AS WELL.
UM, YOU KNOW, ANY OF THESE THINGS, YOU KNOW, UM, CONS, SUZI BROUGHT UP THE, THE FORMULA BUSINESS.
UM, CONS, NOLAN, YOU BROUGHT UP, EXCLUDING WARRANTY.
I'M GONNA NEED MOTIONS ON THESE THINGS AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO VOTE SO THAT WE CAN DIRECT CDD, UH, TO WHAT TO DO.
SO, COUNSELOR ZUBIE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, UM, HAVE, YOU KNOW, FOLLOW THAT SORT OF SAME REVIEW PROCESS THAT WE'RE DOING WITH OTHER ORDINANCES, ONE YEAR UPDATES, FIVE YEAR MORE COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW, UM, YOU COULD PROPOSE THAT AND THEN WE COULD VOTE TH THAT AND GIVE CDD THAT DIRECTION, UH, TO PUT THAT INTO THEIR ZONING.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH, I, I THINK IT'D BE GREAT TO JUST MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOME SORT OF ASSESSMENT OR REEVALUATION IN THE ZONING.
I DO HEAR FROM WHAT MY COLLEAGUES ARE SAYING FOR THE MOST PART, THAT THERE'S CONSENSUS AROUND OPTION TWO.
AND I WOULD BE ALSO ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT SUPPORT THE OPTION TWO PATHWAY.
AND I JUST ALSO WANNA NOTE AN APPRECIATION FOR THE WORK THAT CDD STAFF PUT INTO OPTION THREE.
UM, BUT RECOGNIZE THAT IT, IT MIGHT BE MAKING THINGS A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED CONSIDERING THE STRETCH OF THE STREET.
UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, JUST GETTING THIS TO GO SOMEWHERE.
I KNOW WE'VE KIND OF BEEN IN CONVERSATION ON IT FOR, UH, QUITE A BIT.
SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT FOR THE RECORD, I'LL YIELD.
UM, BEFORE I GO BACK AROUND AND I HAVE THE VICE MAYOR FOLLOWED BY COUNCILOR NOLAN.
SO AGAIN, JUST, I KIND OF JUST SAID A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY BEFORE.
SO WE ARE DIRECTING CDD TO COME BACK WITH ORDINANCE LANGUAGE.
THIS REQUIRES, THIS ORDINANCE IS GONNA REQUIRE SIX VOTES.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I HAVE HEARD FROM THE PEOPLE I HAVE HEARD FROM, I, I,
[01:25:01]
I HEAR SOME FOLKS TALKING ABOUT, UM, OPTION TWO, BUT I'VE ALSO HEARD COUNCILOR, THE VICE MAYOR, UH, AZI AND COUNCILLOR, SABRINA WHEELER, TALK ABOUT OPTION ONE.UM, I, I VOTED FOR OPTION ONE PREVIOUSLY.
I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE A CONSENSUS.
I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE SIX VOTES EITHER ON EITHER ONE.
UM, BUT TO SORT OF, THE WAY I'M SORT OF LOOKING AT THIS IN TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD WITH VOTES, I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE MASS AVE.
I DON'T, WE'RE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT MASS AVE.
I THINK EVERYBODY'S KIND OF SEEMS TO BE OKAY WITH MASS AVE.
WE SHOULD CLEAN THAT UP AND GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY.
UM, AND THEN WE WOULD, I WOULD LOOK FOR SOMEONE TO MAKE A MOTION ON OPTION THREE, OPTION TWO, OPTION ONE, HOWEVER YOU WANNA DO THAT.
UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, C COUNCILOR NOLAN, I WOULD LOOK, YOU BROUGHT UP THE CONCERN ABOUT WARREN STREET, YOU WOULD HAVE TO BRING THAT FORWARD, UM, COUNSELOR ZUBIE AROUND THE REVIEW.
IF YOU WANTED TO ADD THAT INTO THE ORDINANCE, YOU WOULD BRING THAT FORWARD.
UM, AND THEN, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF COUNCILOR SUZI WANTS TO BRING SOMETHING FORWARD ABOUT FORMULA BUSINESSES, BUT ALL OF THAT IS GONNA, ALL OF THOSE WILL REQUIRE VOTES, UM, TO DIRECT CDD, UH, IF YOU GIVE THEM SOME DIRECTION TO WORK ON ORDINANCE LANGUAGE, THAT WILL THEN COME BACK TO US.
AND THEN THAT JUST HAD, THAT GOES THROUGH THE SAME OLD ORDINANCE PROCESS, WE WOULD HAVE ANOTHER ORDINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING WITH THE LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF US.
WE WOULD, WE WOULD EITHER KEEP THAT IN COMMITTEE OR WE WOULD MOVE IT FORWARD FAVORABLY UNFAVORABLY OR WITH NO RECOMMENDATION.
IT WOULD THEN GO TO THE COUNCIL.
YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW, WE ALL KNOW THAT PROCESS, UH, VERY WELL.
UM, AND LOTS OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR THINGS TO KIND OF SHIFT.
UM, BUT I, YOU KNOW, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I'M SORT OF IN AGREEMENT THAT I, I DO THINK WE NEED TO KEEP THIS MOVING, UM, TO TOWARDS CONCLUSION.
THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS ON CD'S PLATE.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I DO, I DO THINK THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, AT AT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THREE STORIES, FOUR STORIES I THINK WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ON THE MARGINS.
UM, IN GENERAL, I SORT OF FEEL THAT THE MORE RESTRICTIVE YOU MAKE THINGS, THE MORE DIFFICULT YOU MAKE THINGS.
UM, AND, AND I'M NOT SURE I WANNA MAKE BUILDING MORE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT ALREADY IS.
UM, AND SO THAT CAN, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD PUSH ME TOWARDS OPTION ONE, WHICH IS WHERE I WAS BEFORE.
UM, I DON'T HEAR A LOT OF LOVE FOR OPTION THREE, BUT AGAIN, SOMEONE COULD, IF NO ONE PUTS THAT FORWARD, THEN IT, IT GOES AWAY.
IF WE, IF WE SOMEONE WANTS TO MOVE THAT FORWARD AND VOTE IT DOWN, THEN THAT'S MORE, UM, THAT COULD BE MORE CLEAR.
UM, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, AND THEN, THEN THE OTHER OPTION IS WE COME BACK AND DO THIS ALL OVER AGAIN, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER TIME.
UM, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE, WHERE I'M SEEING THIS AS, AS THE CHAIR.
UM, FRONT, DID YOU HAVE, AM I MISSTATING SOMETHING WHENEVER THE ATTORNEY GETS UP AND WALKS TO THE TABLE, I GET NERVOUS.
WHAT, WHAT, UH, UH, THROUGH YOU, UH, CHAIR, NO NEED TO BE NERVOUS.
I JUST, I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY SIX VOTES AND I BELIEVE IT ONLY HAS TO BE FIVE VOTES TODAY.
WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY VOTING ON AN ORDINANCE, BUT FOR THE STEPS LEADING UP IN THE PROCESS, IF THE DIRECTION IS THE CDD TO DRAFT, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN LANGUAGE, THEN IT WOULD JUST BE A, UH, FIVE VOTES.
UM, ASSISTANT MANAGER, CAN I ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION? BUT ONCE IT GETS TO ORDINANCE, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE SIX TO PASS IT.
SO THE UNDERSTANDING BEING THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE SIX NOW, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE SIX THEN.
AND JUST A RECOGNITION OF DO WE WANNA, WHAT DO WE WANNA SPEND OUR TIME ON IF WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES TO PASS? IF, IF I COULD ADD ONE MORE THING, UM, CHAIR, JUST TO KIND OF PUT IN CONTEXT, THE THREE OPTIONS.
UM, IF, IF FOLKS ARE LEANING TOWARDS OPTION TWO AND THERE AREN'T THE VOTES TO PASS THAT OPTION THREE IS MORE LIKE OPTION TWO THAN OPTION ONE.
JUST, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS MADE CLEAR, BUT OPTION THREE IS CLOSER TO OPTION TWO THAN OPTION ONE BECAUSE IT HAS ELEMENTS OF OPTION TWO IN THREE NODES, AND THEN OPTION ONE IN THAT MIDDLE NODE.
UM, SO THAT WAS LIKE THE COMPROMISE VOTE.
UM, IF THAT, PUTTING THIS OUT THERE, BECAUSE IF THERE'S NOT SIX VOTES, SIX VOTES, WHICH ULTIMATELY WOULD BE REQUIRED NOT FOR TODAY, BUT FOR THE ORDINANCE TO PASS, IF WE DON'T HAVE SIX VOTES FOR EITHER OPTION ONE OR OPTION TWO NOT MOVING FORWARD, I THINK WE'VE ALL MADE CLEAR THAT WHAT CURRENT ZONING IS A WORSE OUTCOME THAN ANY OF THESE THREE OPTIONS.
SO IF, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE VOTES FOR EITHER OPTION ONE OR OPTION TWO, AND YOU DO FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE
[01:30:01]
WITH OPTION THREE, WHILE NOT PERFECT, THAT IS BETTER THAN THE CURRENT ZONING.SO JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
SO IT SOUNDS, I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE OPINION IS ANYTHING THAT'S ON THE TABLE NOW IS BETTER THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
AND IT'S ALL JUST DIFFERENT DEGREES.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
SO IN TERMS OF DIRECTING CDD ON WHAT LANGUAGE TO WRITE, IT'S FIVE VOTES.
BUT TO YOUR POINT, ASSISTANT MANAGER THAT, DO WE WANT TO DIRECT THEM TO DO THE WORK TO CREATE LANGUAGE FOR SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE SIX VOTES TO GET PASSED? THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER, NOW IT MAY AT THE, BY THE TIME WE PASS IT, RIGHT.
SO, UM, I WILL GO WHERE THE, I GO WHERE THE VOTES, WHERE THE VOTES LEAD.
UM, SO I DO WANT TO, COUNSELORS, IS IT A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE PROCEDURAL PIECE? 'CAUSE I I DO HAVE CON UH, VICE MAYOR AND COUNCILOR NOLAN.
UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION IN A SECOND.
UM, THIS IS VERY TECHNICAL, BUT LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, PANDA BILINGUAL CHILDCARE, I KNOW IT'S VERY POPULAR ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, WOULD THEY GET COUNTED UNDER FIRST FLOOR RETAIL OR IF THERE WAS A SIX STORY REDEVELOPMENT, WOULD THEY NOT BE ALLOWED TO STAY UNDER OUR FIRST FLOOR RETAIL REQUIREMENT? SORRY, JEFF
EVERYONE'S DOING DIFFERENT THINGS.
YOU SEEM TO DRAW THE SHORT, SHORT STRAW ON A YEAH, SO, SO UNDER THE, UNDER THIS, UH, PROPOSAL, THE ACTIVE USE CATEGORY WOULD INCLUDE CHILDCARE.
UM, SO THAT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW.
I WAS JUST PARTICULARLY WORRIED ABOUT THEM, SO THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW.
UM, I WOULD JUST SAY, I THINK THAT WE ALL KIND OF SEE WHERE THE VOTES ARE.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT I'M NOT SURE THAT THERE'S SIX VOTES FOR OPTION TWO.
I THINK MY COLLEAGUES ARE WELCOME TO VOTE FOR IT AND THEN FIGURE IT OUT LATER.
I THINK IF WE VOTE FOR OPTION ONE, I'LL PROMISE JUST TO VOTE FOR IT, AND THEN WE CAN AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, GET THIS OVER WITH AND EXPECT AN EASY PER PROCESS FROM HERE TO ORDINANCE TO FINAL PASSAGE.
UM, SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, RECOMMEND THAT CDD WRITE OPTION ONE.
UM, I'M, I'M SORRY, VICE MAYOR.
I WAS CONFERRING WITH THE CLERK.
CAN YOU REPEAT THAT LAST PART AGAIN? I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY COUNCIL ASKED THE CITY MANAGER TO, UH, RECOMMENDED CDD, UH, PROCEED WITH RIGHT.
UM, SO WE HAVE, WE ALSO HAVE A MOTION BY, UM, CONST NOLAN, WHO EMAILED, UH, EMAILED THIS TO US.
UM, DO YOU WANNA PUT THAT UP? I CAN'T.
OH, THERE, IT'S, UM, SO THIS IS A MOTION BY COUNCILOR NOLAN, UH, THAT CDD AND RELEVANT STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE A DRAFT OF A ZONING PETITION TO STRENGTHEN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND OPTION TWO ON CAMBRIDGE STREET WHILE KEEPING WARREN STREET IN THE CM SIX DISTRICT.
SO, UM, JUST A COUPLE QUICK THINGS.
UM, SHOULD WE BE CLARIFYING MASS AVE ISS A LONG STREET AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MASS AVE IN DIFFERENT SECTIONS.
SHOULD WE BE, SHOULD ANY OF THIS, SHOULD WE BE TALKING ABOUT NORTHERN MASS AVE JUST FOR CLARITY OR FOR THE, I KNOW IT'S AS PER THE RECOMMENDATION, BUT IF SOMEONE DOESN'T, HASN'T READ THE RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I JUST, WE'RE TALKING A LOT ABOUT CENTRAL SQUARE AND MASS AVE AND THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION,
SO THAT'S, THAT IS, UH, SO TECHNICALLY, SO TECHNICALLY, COUNCILOR NOLAN SENT, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GO BACKWARDS, RIGHT? WE VOTE THE MOST, RE WE VOTE THE MOST RECENT.
SO COUNCILOR NOLAN EMAILED THAT TO US, BUT DID NOT ACTUALLY MAKE THAT MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
SO THAT WHERE COUNCILOR ZE MADE HIS MOTION VERBALLY.
SO I WOULD, AS I WILL, I WILL RULE THAT VICE MAYOR ZES MOTION IS THE FIRST MOTION THAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
YOU HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
THE MOTION WASN'T MADE, IT WAS WRITTEN.
SO, AND THEN COUNCILOR NOLAN WOULD BE THE SECOND ONE.
AND THEN WE HAVE THIS OTHER BY COUNCILLOR ZUZI, WHICH IS PROPOSED COUNCILOR ZZI, UM, PROPOSES
[01:35:01]
A MOTION TO REQUIRE SPECIAL PERMIT PERMITS FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE RETREAT.SO IT WOULD, I THINK THE WAY YOU WOULD WANT TO SAY THAT IS THAT CDD AND RELEVANT CITY STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE, UH, UH, A DRAFT ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE SPECIAL PERMITS FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO, VICE MAYOR, UM, JUST ONE BRIEF QUESTION.
UM, UH, I'M FINE WITH COUNCILOR NOLAN'S MOTION.
UH, IS COUNCILOR ZEUS'S MOTION EVEN POSSIBLE? LIKE, I, I THOUGHT THAT WAS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING OF SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO WITHIN THE CURRENT SCOPE.
UH, SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT.
UM, I WILL LEAVE THAT TO WHO WANTS IT? ASSISTANT MANAGERS WHO? FRANZ? UH, WELL, I'LL, I'LL SAY IS PART OF A FUTURE ZONING PETITION.
I THINK PERHAPS VICE MAYOR'S QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE SCOPE OF THIS COMMITTEE'S DISCUSSION.
UM, WHICH I WOULD DEFER TO THE CHAIR, BUT I DON'T KNOW, UH, FRANZ, IF YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF THE QUESTION THROUGH YOU CHAIR, I MEAN, I, I READ THIS AS, THIS IS THE DIRECT, CAN YOU SPEAK MORE TO THE MIC? THE DIRECTION TO CDD IS TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AND IF PART OF THAT ORDINANCE ADDRESSES SPECIAL PERMITS FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES, THAT CAN BE ROLLED INTO THAT ORDINANCE.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT NEEDS TO BE A SEPARATE, UH, RIGHT.
I, I I WOULD JUST, I WOULD THINK THAT BECAUSE IT'S, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FORMULA BUSINESSES, WHICH IS RELATED TO GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATION, THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE FINE.
UM, LET ME CLARIFY THE QUESTION THEN.
WOULD THE REQUEST HERE BE JUST TO ADD A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES? LIKE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU COULD ONLY DO THAT A SPECIAL PERMIT IS ALREADY REQUIRED.
AND SO WOULD THAT JUST BE AT THE 75,000 FEET THRESHOLD? LIKE, I'M NOT JUST, JUST NOT SURE HOW THIS WOULD WORK, BUT HAPPY TO VOTE FOR IT REGARDLESS.
SO I THINK THAT WE CAN LEAVE THAT AS A QUESTION FOR CDD IN THE FUTURE IF WE WANT TO.
SO, SO VICE MAYOR, UM, YOU, WHEN YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE FINE WITH COUNCILOR NOLAN'S MOTION, THAT IS CALLING FOR OPTION TWO, YOUR MOTION IS CALLING FOR OPTION ONE.
ARE YOU KEEPING YOUR MOTION? OH, YES.
I JUST MEANT I'M FINE WITH HER MAKING HER MOTION.
OH, I JUST WAS CONFUSED HOW COUNCILOR IES FIT INTO THE ORDERING.
UM, MADAM MAYOR, THANK YOU CHAIR.
ONE POINT I WANTED TO CLARIFY WITH OPTION WITH VICE SMEAR EM'S MOTION, SAY THAT PASSES, UM, AND THEN ZONING LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN BASED ON PRIOR CONVERSATIONS, IT'S MUCH HARDER TO, THEN YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT AT ALL.
BUT WITH OPTION TWO, ONCE ZONING LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN, YOU COULD THEN, UH, AMEND IT TO GO, UH, YOU CAN, YEAH, YEAH.
YOU GET WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH.
SO, UM, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE, UH, NO ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT AT SIX STORIES.
SO IF, IF THE ZONING PETITION WERE TO BE FILED AT THREE, YOU, AND I'LL DEFER TO FRANZ TO SHAKE HIS HEAD AND CONFER WITH ME, THAT YOU COULD GO ANYWHERE BETWEEN THREE TO SIX AND THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE PETITION.
UM, CONVERSELY, IF YOU WENT WITH OPTION ONE AT FOUR, YOU COULD NOT GO BACK DOWN TO THREE OR UP TO SIX.
UM, YOU'D HAVE TO STAY WITHIN THE PARAMETERS, OTHERWISE IT'S A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
ALRIGHT, CAN YOU PULL THE, CAN YOU PLEASE PUT THE, UM, UH, CHAIR MOTIONS BACK UP? ONE THING TOO IS, UH, THE MOTIONS WILL NEED TO BE SECONDED.
I SECOND, UH, COUNCIL NOLAN'S MOTION.
SO I'M GONNA GO THROUGH, WE'LL, WE'LL DO 'EM, WE'LL TAKE THE SECONDS AS EACH ONE COMES UP.
SO BASED ON, DO WE HAVE TO TAKE THEM THE LAST ONE FIRST, I'M GONNA TAKE COUNCILOR SUZI'S FIRST, UM, WHICH IS DIRECTING CDD AND RELEVANT STAFF TO, UH, PROPO.
UM, HOW DO YOU WANNA SAY THIS? UM, DIRECT CDD AND RELEVANT STAFF TO, TO DRAFT,
[01:40:01]
I'M SORRY.WELL, YOU'RE NOT DRAFTING A ZONING PETITION SPECIFICALLY ON THIS.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE ADDING THIS INTO THE ZONING PETITION, UM, DIRECT CDD AND RELEVANT STAFF TO INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIAL PERMITS FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO THAT NEEDS TO COUNCILLOR ZI.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP WITH THAT.
UH, CHAIRMAN MCGOVERN, I JUST, I ALSO WANTED TO, I ALSO JUST RELATED TO THIS, UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE 1500 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM SIZE FOR RETAIL L REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN VERY, VERY IMPORTANT AT HARVARD SQUARE.
AND AGAIN, I WONDERED IF, UM, OUR HEAD OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTIES COULD SPEAK TO THAT, BECAUSE I WONDER IF WE MIGHT WANT TO EVEN AMEND MY MOTION TO REQUIRE 1500 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM TO, AGAIN, WE WANT TO INCENTIVIZE LOCAL BUSINESSES.
SO, BUT I WOULD, BEFORE I ADD ANYTHING, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM PARTIES THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
I, UM, WHETHER IT'S LOCAL OR CHAIN BUSINESSES, UM, EVERYONE IS ADAPTING ON SIZE.
SO JUST BECAUSE WE PUT A MAXIMUM LIMIT ON SIZE DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE GUARANTEED TO GET A LOCAL BUSINESS.
UM, SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT WHAT TYPES OF BUSINESSES PEOPLE WANT IN CAMBRIDGE, WHETHER THAT'S CAMBRIDGE STREET OR OTHERWISE.
UM, AND OFTEN, FOR EXAMPLE, I HEAR A GROCERY STORE AND 1500 WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO TRY TO BRING A GROCERY STORE TO, UH, CAMBRIDGE STREET OR OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.
SO, UM, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE, WE'VE SEEN LIMITS ON SIZE DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN YOU'RE GONNA GET A LOCAL BUSINESS.
SO WE WERE REALLY MORE THINKING ABOUT WHAT TYPES OF BUSINESSES PEOPLE WANT, NOT NECESSARILY SIZE.
THANK, THANK, THANK YOU THROUGH YOU CHAIR MCGOVERN.
SO I WILL NOT RECOMMEND THAT AMENDMENT.
SO, BUT I WILL, I, BUT I WILL RECOMMEND THIS AMENDMENT, WHICH I THINK MIGHT, UM, ENCOURAGE, IT'LL, IT'LL, IT JUST CREATES A LITTLE OBSTACLE THAT MIGHT INCENTIVIZE LOCAL BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO, COUNCILOR SUZI'S MOTION SECONDED BY COUNCILOR NOLAN, THAT THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY MANAGER DIRECT CDD AND RELEVANT STAFF TO INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIAL PERMITS FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
WE NOW WILL GO TO COUNCILLOR NOLAN'S MOTION, UH, THAT IS SECONDED BY SECOND COUNCILOR FLAHERTY ON A MOTION BY COUNCILLOR NOLAN.
SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR FLAHERTY.
THAT THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY MANAGER DIRECT CDD AND RELEVANT STAFF TO PREPARE A DRAFT OF ZONING OF A ZONING PETITION TO STRENGTHEN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON MASS AVE PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND OPTION TWO ON CAMBRIDGE STREET WHILE KEEPING WARREN STREET IN THE CAM DASH SIX DISTRICT ROLL CALL.
THAT'S SIX MEMBERS VOTING YES.
WE NOW WILL GO TO COUNCILOR, UH, VICE MAYOR ZES.
UM, VICE MAYOR, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.
UH, VICE MAYOR ASKS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO WITHDRAW HIS MOTION.
UM, ALL RIGHT, LET ME, SHE TOOK CARE OF MASS AVE.
UM, COUNCILOR ZUBIE, DO YOU WANT TO PUT IN A REQUEST TO ADD LANGUAGE REGARDING A REVIEW? UH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION TO
[01:45:01]
CDD.WILL, WILL THERE ALREADY BE A PROCESS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GO THROUGH IN TERMS OF PUTTING IN A REVIEW? OR SHOULD I GO AHEAD AND DO THE MOTION? I I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THERE IS, WOULD BE ALREADY SOME SORT OF PLAN SYSTEM MANAGER.
SO, AS YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE AN ANNUAL AND, UM, REVIEW OF HOUSING PRODUCTION AND ALSO A FIVE YEAR REVIEW.
UM, AS PART OF THAT WE LOOK CITYWIDE AND CAN CERTAINLY ADD IN ARE THESE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USE OR OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS IN IMPEDING HOUSING PRODUCTION IN CERTAIN CORRIDORS.
SO THAT COULD BE, UH, INCORPORATED INTO, UH, THAT ANNUAL HOUSING REVIEW.
I THINK IN THAT CASE, I WILL HOLD OFF ON THE MOTION.
UH, THANK YOU CHAIRMAN MCGOVERN.
BUT DON'T WE, BUT THE HOUSING REVIEW WON'T GIVE A REPORT ON WHETHER RETAIL IS, UH, THRIVING OR DYING ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
THE WHOLE FOCUS OF IT WILL BE ON HOUSING, NOT ON RETAIL.
SO WOULDN'T IT BE ACTUALLY HELPFUL FOR COUNCILOR ZUBIE TO INTRODUCE THE MOTION? JUST A MANAGER? UH, SO MY UNDERSTANDING WAS, SO IN TERMS OF THE ZONING REVIEW, IT'S WHETHER OR NOT IT IMPEDES, UM, OR PROMOTES DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK THE QUESTION OF A LARGER QUESTION OF THE ECONOMIC VITALITY OF OUR BI DISTRICTS, DISTRICTS, AS WE'VE DESCRIBED, IS BEYOND ZONING AND CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN REPORT BACK OUT IN COMMITTEE.
UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT NECESSARILY NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN INTO ZONING PER SE.
UH, THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, WE HAVE DIRECTED CDD TO WORK ON AN ORDINANCE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD PASS THE MASS AVE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, THE OPTION TWO RECOMMENDATION.
UM, WARREN STREET AND FORMULA BUSINESS ASSISTANT MANAGER.
THE ONE ADDITIONAL AREA WE WOULD LIKE TO GET FEEDBACK ON IS, UH, THE PROPOSAL TO, UH, REVERT THAT SECTION OF O'BRIEN HIGHWAY TO THE BA ZONING DISTRICT.
SO ON A MOTION, ARE YOU ASKED, ARE YOU RAISING YOUR HAND TO MAKE THE MOTION OR YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, THE MOTION'S FINE.
I THOUGHT IT WOULD'VE BEEN INCLUDED IN, IN MY MOTION.
I JUST TOOK OUT THE, THE WARREN STREET, BUT THE OTHER I ASSUMED WOULD GO FORWARD.
BUT IF WE NEED CLARIFICATION, TOTALLY FINE.
SO ON A MOTION BY COUNSELOR NOLAN TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO, UH, DIRECT CDD TO INCLUDE, UH, TO, TO WITH REMOVE O'BRIEN HIGHWAY.
IT WAS NOT REMOVING 'CAUSE YOU HAVEN'T WRITTEN IT YET.
WHAT'S THE LANGUAGE YOU WANT ASSISTANT MANAGER, UM, TO, UM, PROPOSE CHANGING THE SECTION OF O'BRIEN HIGHWAY FROM THE CAME TO, TO BA ZONING DISTRICT.
AND THAT'S A MOTION BY COUNCILOR NOLAN.
ABSENT COUNCILLOR REINA WHEELER.
ANYTHING ELSE? WHAT MR. ROBERTS, IF I COULD ASK YOU THE CHAIR, JUST UM, ONE, JUST A CLARIFICATION ON WARREN STREET.
I GUESS I'LL JUST SAY THIS, JUST SO THAT I KNOW THAT WE, WE HAVE THE RIGHT INTENT.
SO THE, SO THE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO SEE WARREN STREET INCLUDED IN THE CAMBRIDGE STREET DISTRICT.
IF WE WERE TO DO THAT AS, AS WARREN STREET IS NOT IDENTIFIED AS A PRIMARY STREET, IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY MANDATE OR INCENTIVIZE ACTIVE USE ALONG WARREN STREET.
AND WE'D HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLARIFYING HOW THAT WORKS IN, IN THE ZONING.
BUT I, I WANNA UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THE INTENT AND NOT TO MAKE THE ADDITIONAL STEP OF CLASSIFYING WARREN STREET AS A PRIMARY STREET WHERE IT WOULD BE TREATED LIKE CAMBRIDGE STREET AND WOULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE, THE ACTIVE USE MANDATES THAT WE ARE, WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, UM, OR, OR LIMIT HEIGHTS TO THREE STORIES.
IF THERE IS NO ACTIVE USE COUNCIL NOLAN, I
[01:50:01]
THINK THE MOTION IS TO KEEP, RIGHT NOW IT'S PROPOSED TO BE PART OF, OR IT IS PART OF CAM SIX.RIGHT? IT IS CURRENTLY THAT WOULDN'T CHANGE.
WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT YOU DON'T NEED A SPECIAL PERMIT OR OTHER THINGS FOR A RETAIL.
THAT YOU COULD CONTINUE THAT 'CAUSE THAT'S ALLOWED IN CAM SIX, WHEREAS IN A C ONE IT WOULD NEED A VARIANCE.
THE REASON I ASK, AND WE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT.
WHEN, WHEN YOU SEE THE PETITION, IT, IT BECOMES IMPORTANT TO, YOU KNOW, IT USING THIS KIND OF MECHANISM OF SAYING THE HEIGHT IS SIX STORIES, WHICH IT IS KIND OF EVERYWHERE FOR HOUSING.
BUT ON CAMBRIDGE STREET YOU CAN'T DO SIX STORIES UNLESS YOU HAVE ACTIVE USE.
DO WE WANT THAT PROVISION TO KIND OF TURN THE CORNER ONTO WARREN STREET? OR DO WE JUST WANT IT TO BE THAT, THAT WARREN STREET HAS ALL THE SAME REQUIREMENTS OF CAMBRIDGE STREET, BUT STILL ALLOWS, I GUESS THE, THE MAIN QUESTION IS WOULD IT ALLOW SIX STORIES OF, UM, RESIDENTIAL WITHOUT ACTIVE USE, OR WOULD IT ONLY ALLOW THREE STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL WITHOUT ACTIVE USE?
IS THAT LIKE ANY OTHER CAM SIX, BUT NOT THE, THE RE I THINK THE, THE REASON WHY THIS IS COMPLICATED IS BECAUSE THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING IS ALL SORT OF TAILORED TOWARDS LOTS.
THAT FRONT CAMBRIDGE STREET, WHERE IT GETS COMPLICATED IS WHEN YOU HAVE PARTS OF THE DISTRICT THAT STRETCH OUT ONTO A DIFFERENT STREET THAT ISN'T CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO YOU MIGHT HAVE REDEVELOPMENT OF A SITE DOWN WARREN STREET THAT HAS NO FRONTAGE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
AND THE QUESTION WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE ZONING HAS A CLEAR ANSWER TO IS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF A DEVELOPER BUYS A A SITE WAY DOWN ON WARREN STREET, CAN THEY BUILD SIX STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL? WOULD THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE GROUND FLOOR ACTIVE USE IF THEY DO THAT? AND WOULD THEY BE LIMITED TO THREE STORIES IF THEY DON'T HAVE ACTIVE USE? THAT'S, THAT'S THE TRICK.
DO WE WANT TO TREAT IT? THE QUESTION REALLY IS DO WE WANT TO TREAT IT JUST LIKE CAMBRIDGE STREET OR DO WE WANT TO TREAT IT AS PART OF THE SAME DISTRICT, BUT NOT A, BUT A DIFFERENT PART OF THE DISTRICT THAT ISN'T SUBJECT TO THE RULES THAT ARE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET
SO THE INTENT IS THIS, IF WE DECIDE THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAT WE WANNA AMPLIFY IT BY DOING THIS WAY, WE CAN ALWAYS MAKE IT LESS RESTRICTIVE IF WE WANT IN THE FUTURE.
SO I, I THINK THE INTENT IS LET'S GO FORWARD WITH, KEEP IT AS CAM SIX, WHICH IS IN THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS YOU PRESENTED.
UM, VICE MAYOR HAS HIS HAND UP.
UM, SO I GUESS THAT'S FINE IF WE WANNA REQUIRE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL ON, UM, WARREN STREET.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO BRIEFLY MAKE THIS POINT SINCE WE'RE ON THE TOPIC OF FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, WHICH IS THAT HAMPSHIRE STREET, A LOT OF IT IS STILL C ONE, WHICH MEANS THAT AS BUILDINGS DARE REDEVELOP, WE WILL LOSE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL.
AND SO, UM, THIS IS NOT FOR TODAY'S CONVERSATION, BUT SINCE IT'S RELATED, I WOULD SAY AT SOME POINT I THINK WE SHOULD REVISIT HAMPSHIRE STREET SLASH C ONE IN GENERAL JUST TO ALLOW FOR FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, UM, JUST SO WE DON'T LOSE THAT AS HAMPSHIRE STREET REDEVELOPS.
SO I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT.
NOT A FORMAL MOTION TO INCLUDE HAMPSHIRE STREET.
SO WITH THAT, UH, ON A MOTION BY THE MAYOR TO ADJOURN, ROLL CALL.