[ROLL CALL]
[00:00:03]
UH, A QUORUM OF TODAY'S ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BEING PRESENT.
I CALL TODAY'S MEETING TO ORDER.
THE CALL OF TODAY'S MEETING IS ON TWO CITY COUNCIL ZONING PETITIONS TO AMEND ARTICLE 17.000 OF THE CAMBRIDGE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP REGARDING ACT ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON NORTH MASS AVE AND CAMBRIDGE STREET, INCLUDING A SPECIAL PERMIT REQUIREMENT FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS A ROLL CALL.
MEMBERS PRESENT, MADAM CLERK, COUNSELOR ZUBIE.
PRESENT, PRESENT, COUNSELOR NOLAN.
ABSENT, COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER.
PRESENT, PRESENT, COUNCILOR ZUI.
PRESENT, PRESENT, MAYOR SIDIKI.
ABSENT, YOU HAVE SIX MEMBERS RECORDED AS PRESENT, AND THREE RECORDED AS ABSENT.
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER TWO OF THE ACTS OF 2025, ADOPTED BY THE MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL COURT AND APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR, THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO USE REMOTE PARTICIPATION AT 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.
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, AND SIGN UP IS AVAILABLE UNTIL THREE 30.
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 ARE POSTED THERE.
ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED SIGNUP, UH, THE SIGNUP PROCEDURE, YOU'LL RECEIVE A LINK TO THE ZOOM MEETING.
YOU CAN ALSO EMAIL WRITTEN COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD TO THE CITY CLERK AT CITY CLERK@CAMBRIDGEMA.GOV.
TO WATCH THE MEETING, PLEASE TUNE INTO CHANNEL 22 OR VISIT THE OPEN MEETING PORTAL ON THE CITY WEBSITE.
WITH THAT, ALL OF TODAY'S VOTES, IF ANY, WILL BE BY ROLL CALL.
UM, SO AGAIN, WELCOME EVERYONE.
[COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER CITY OFFICERS]
JUST TO SORT OF PLAN OUT WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO TODAY, UM, IN DISCUSSION WITH CDD, UH, CDD IS GONNA GO THROUGH THEIR ENTIRE PRESENTATION OF BOTH, UH, NORTH MASS AVE AND CAMBRIDGE STREET.WE WILL THEN GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND PEOPLE CAN COMMENT ON BOTH, OR EITHER.
WE'RE THEN GONNA SPLIT IT UP SO THAT WE'LL ONLY TAKE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ON MASS AVE FIRST AND DISCUSS WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH MASS AVE AND THEN CAMBRIDGE STREET SECOND, UM, SO THAT WE'RE NOT FLIPPING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE TWO BECAUSE THEY ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
SO INITIALLY WE'LL COMBINE THEM FOR THE PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO, UH, TO COMMITTEE DISCUSSION, WE'LL BREAK THEM INTO TWO PARTS.
IS THAT, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? NO.
WELL, WITH THAT, UM, I'M GONNA TURN THIS OVER TO ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.
UH, COUNCILOR MCGOVERN, EXCITED TO BE HERE TODAY.
I'M JOINED BY EVAN SPIT, TRINI, SENIOR MANAGER FOR ZONING, AND JEFF ROBERTS, DIRECTOR OF ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT.
UM, WE ALSO WILL SHORTLY BE JOINED BY PARTY SAFARI, OUR DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UM, AND IF NEEDED, MEGAN BAY, OUR CITY SOLICITOR IS, IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY, UH, LEGAL QUESTIONS.
BUT I'M EXCITED TO BE BACK HERE TODAY WITH THE Z TWO SEPARATE ZONING PETITIONS, ONE ON MASS AVE AND ONE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, AS COUNCILOR MEMBER GOVERN SAID, WE THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO TREAT THESE AS TWO SEPARATE PETITIONS AS THEY ARE AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION FOLLOW AS SUCH SINCE, UM, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT, UH, UH, CHARACTER, UH, SMALL BUSINESS NEEDS, UH, PARCEL SIZES, UH, RIGHT OF WAY WIDTHS.
UM, AND SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, ARE LIKELY NOT GOING TO BE THE SAME FOR, FOR BOTH OF THOSE CORRIDORS.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THE PLANNING BOARD HEARING ON THIS ON JUNE 2ND.
SO YOU SHOULD HAVE THE PLANNING BOARD REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU FOR REVIEW.
AND DURING THE PRESENTATION, WE'LL ALSO SUMMARIZE THE PLANNING BOARD'S COMMENTS.
SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, I WILL PASS IT OFF TO EVAN.
UM, JUST GONNA TAKE A SECOND TO, TO SET EVERYTHING UP.
I'M THE ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER.
UM, WE'RE, WE'RE BACK, UH, TALKING ABOUT MASS AVE AND, AND CAMBRIDGE STREET ACTIVE USES.
UM, SO JUST A, A QUICK, UM, APOLOGIES
[00:05:02]
FIXING ONE OTHER THING.UM, SO THE NEW MASS AVE ZONING WAS ADOPTED BACK IN DECEMBER.
UM, IT MADE, UM, A FEW CHANGES, UM, ALL INTENDED TO IMPLEMENT THE, UH, THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MASS A PLANNING STUDY.
THERE'S TWO MAIN FEATURES OF THE NEW ZONING THAT ARE RELATED TO TODAY'S CONVERSATION.
ONE IS THAT THE NEW ZONING ALLOWS 12 STORIES OF HOUSING THROUGHOUT MASS AVE.
UM, AND THE OTHER IS THAT IT INCENTIVIZES ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USES BY ALLOWING ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT IN THE MASS 12 DISTRICT, UH, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY DISTRICT ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE EIGHT STORIES IN THE MASS 12, A DISTRICT ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES, AND WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT, UH, QUITE A, A FEW TIMES IN THE PRESENTATION.
SO, SO DURING THE, THE HEARING PROCESS FOR THAT, UM, ORIGINAL MASS AVE ZONING, UH, COUNCIL WANTED TO CONSIDER, UH, IMPLEMENTING STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON BOTH MASS AND CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, BUT WE WERE LIMITED BY, UH, THE LEGAL CONSTRAINTS ON HOW, UM, ON, ON HOW UH, BROAD CHANGES CAN BE MADE TO A ZONING PETITION.
ONCE, UM, THAT HEARING PROCESS HAS STARTED.
SO WE WERE ABLE TO, UH, CREATE THAT MASS 12 A DISTRICT AND MAP THAT SOUTH OF PORTER SQUARE, UM, BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS MASS, A ZONING ALREADY HAD AN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT, SO WE WERE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT, UM, UH, ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT ABOVE FOUR STORIES INSTEAD OF EIGHT STORIES IN THAT AREA.
UM, BUT DURING THAT PROCESS, THE COUNCIL PASSED, UH, POLICY ORDER 2025, NUMBER 1 64, WHICH DIRECTED US, UH, CITY STAFF TO DEVELOP SUBSEQUENT ZONING PETITIONS TO STRENGTHEN THOSE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS IN THE AREAS WHERE, UH, WE COULDN'T IMPLEMENT THAT BEFORE.
SO, AS, UM, THIS COMMITTEE ALREADY KNOWS, UH, THIS PETITION HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH SOME PUBLIC PROCESS WITH COUNCIL.
UH, INSTEAD OF JUMPING RIGHT INTO A NEW PETITION, WE WANTED TO HAVE A MORE DETAILED DISCUSSION, UH, TO WEIGH THE PROS AND CONS OF SOME ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES.
UH, AT A HIGH LEVEL, THE CONVERSATION ABOUT ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS IS ABOUT TRADE-OFFS.
STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS WILL MAKE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT MORE DIFFICULT, UM, ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE PROJECTS THAT CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE TALLEST HEIGHTS ALLOWED.
UM, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT LOSING, UH, ACTIVE USES ON, ON BOTH CORRIDORS.
SO, SO THE COUNCIL HAS TO, UM, WEIGH THOSE TWO PRIORITIES TO, TO STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCE, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS CONVERSATION IS ABOUT.
SO THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, UH, HELD TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON MARCH 11TH AND APRIL 6TH TO DISCUSS THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
UH, AND AFTER THE, UM, THAT DISCUSSION WAS CONCLUDED, COUNSEL PASSED A SERIES OF POLICY ORDERS DIRECTING CDD TO DRAFT THESE ZONING PETITIONS.
THE PLANNING BOARD HEARING WAS HELD ON JUNE 2ND, AND I'LL END THIS PRESENTATION WITH A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND TODAY IS OUR ORDINANCE COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE ZONING PETITION ITSELF.
THERE ARE THREE MAIN COMPONENTS.
THE FIRST IS TO REQUIRE GROUND STORY ACTIVE USES ABOVE FOUR STORIES FROM CAMBRIDGE COMMON TO LINEAR PARK.
THE SECOND IS TO ESTABLISH A PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS.
AND THE THIRD, EXCUSE ME, IS TO CLARIFY THAT REQUIREMENTS ONLY APPLY TO LOTS ABUTTING A PRIMARY STREET.
BEFORE JUMPING INTO ANY MORE DETAIL, JUST RECAPPING EXISTING STANDARDS IN THE NEW MASS AVE ZONING, ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED TO ENABLE THE TALLEST RESIDENTIAL HEIGHTS ALLOWED.
SO SOUTH OF PORTER SQUARE, UM, WE, WE, UH, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, THE MASS 12 A DISTRICT ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
SO THE DIAGRAMS HERE ILLUSTRATE THE MASS 12 A STANDARDS.
SO YOU CAN BUILD UP TO FOUR STORIES OF JUST RESIDENTIAL, BUT ANYTHING TALLER THAN THAT.
SO FROM FIVE STORIES TO 12 STORIES, YOU NEED, UH, AN ACTIVE USE ON THE GROUND FLOOR EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE MASS AVE DISTRICTS, ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE EIGHT STORIES, AND WE DO THINK THAT THIS IS, UM, A GOOD APPROACH GENERALLY REQUIRING ACTIVE USES FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS, UH, WHICH USED TO BE USED TO BE THE CASE ON MASS AVE, UNDER THE, THE OLD ZONING, UM, HASN'T WORKED OUT WELL
[00:10:01]
IN, IN A LOT OF PROJECTS.SO, UM, WE THINK THIS MAKES SENSE REQUIRING ACTIVE USES ABOVE A CERTAIN HEIGHT.
UH, WE BELIEVE THAT MOST DEVELOPMENTS WILL PROVIDE ACTIVE USES TO UNLOCK THOSE TALLER HEIGHTS, BUT THIS ALLOWS FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR UNIQUE SITES AND PROJECTS WHERE HEIGHT REALLY ISN'T THE PRIORITY.
UM, ONE EXAMPLE COULD BE A HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROJECT, UM, OR A, A SMALL, UH, REHAB OR ENLARGEMENT PROJECT.
THIS APPROACH ALSO PREVENTS, UH, CREATING NEW NONCONFORMITIES FOR EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS, WHICH COULD CREATE ISSUES IF PROPERTY OWNERS WANNA MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THOSE PROJECTS, TO THOSE PROPERTIES.
AND GENERALLY, WE THINK THAT FORCING COMMERCIAL SPACE IN PROJECTS WHERE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE WILL LIKELY RESULT IN SUBSTANDARD SPACE THAT REMAINS VACANT, OR, UH, WORST CASE SCENARIO KILLS THE PROJECT ALTOGETHER.
SO THE FIRST COMPONENT OF THE PETITION REQUIRING ACTIVE USES IN BUILDINGS GREATER THAN FOUR STORIES FROM CAMBRIDGE COMMON TO LINEAR PARK.
AND THE PETITION DOES THIS IN TWO WAYS.
THE FIRST IS IT EXPANDS THE MASS 12 A DISTRICT WHERE ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
SO THE AREAS OUTLINED IN RED, UH, ON THE MAP HERE ARE AREAS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY MASS 12, AND THE ZONING PETITION WOULD REZONE THOSE AREAS TO MASS 12 A.
SO THOSE BECOME, UM, UH, PREVIOUSLY ACTIVE USES WERE REQUIRED ABOVE EIGHT STORIES.
THE ZONING PETITION WOULD MAKE THEM REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR.
UM, AND THEN THE SECOND WAY IS AMENDING THE MASS 18 DISTRICT, WHICH IS JUST IN PORTER SQUARE.
SO THAT ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED ABOVE FOUR STORIES INSTEAD OF EIGHT.
SO THAT WOULD ENSURE EVERY PART OF, OF MASS AVE FROM CAMBRIDGE COMMON TO LINEAR PARK HAS THIS REQUIREMENT OF ACTIVE USES ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
BEFORE I, I JUMP INTO THE SECOND COMPONENT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO QUICKLY GO OVER SOME, SOME OTHER DETAILS OF THE EXISTING ZONING.
UH, ACTIVE USES COVER A, A WIDE RANGE, BUT ARE FUNDAMENTALLY THOSE THAT ENCOURAGE PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY LIKE RESTAURANTS, RETAIL, AND SOME PUBLIC FACING OFFICES WHERE ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED.
UM, THEY ALSO MUST MEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND LOCATION STANDARDS.
SO SPECIFICALLY 60% OF THE INTERIOR FLOOR AREA WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE STREET MUST BE ACTIVE USES.
UM, SO THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A, A FLEXIBLE STANDARD, BUT, UM, BUT IT CONCENTRATES ACTIVE USES ALONG THE PRIMARY STREET.
UM, THE DIAGRAM ON THE RIGHT HERE, THIS IS, UH, A PROJECT THAT THE, THE PLANNING BOARD RECENTLY REVIEWED AT 1740 MASS AVE.
AND, UH, THEY, THEY PROVIDED A, A REALLY HELPFUL ILLUSTRATION OF THIS CONCEPT.
SO THAT RED OUTLINE IS ALL OF THE INTERIOR FLOOR AREA WITHIN 50 FEET OF MASS AVE.
AND THEN THE BLUE SHADED AREA CONSISTS OF 60%, ROUGHLY 60% A LITTLE BIT OVER, UM, THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED TO ACTIVE USES.
SO CURRENTLY THE PLANNING BOARD CAN APPROVE MODIFICATIONS TO THE ACTIVE USE STANDARD IF THE INTENT OF THE REQUIREMENT IS BEING MET.
SO THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, CAN CONSIDER OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ACTIVE IF THEY FIND THAT IT MEETS THE INTENT.
THE PETITION INCLUDES A NEW SPECIAL PERMIT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE AMOUNT OR LOCATION OF THE ACTIVE USES.
AND SO TH THIS IS THE SECOND COMPONENT OF THAT PETITION.
UM, AND THE INTENT OF THESE SPECIAL PERMITS IS NOT TO ALLOW PROJECTS TO AVOID THIS REQUIREMENT ALTOGETHER, BUT TO GIVE THE PLANNING BOARD THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO CONSIDER OTHER WAYS OF ACHIEVING THOSE GOALS.
UM, WE DO BELIEVE THAT SPECIAL PERMITS SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE NORM.
SO THE PETITION INCLUDES SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR THIS NEW SPECIAL PERMIT, UM, WHICH ARE, ARE LISTED HERE.
MODIFICATIONS MEET THE INTENT OF THE REQUIREMENT.
FLOOR AREA CANNOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED FROM WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED, AND MODIFICATIONS MUST DIRECTLY RESPOND TO SOME UNIQUE CONDITION, EXCUSE ME, CONDITION OF THE SITE.
SO AN APPLICANT SEEKING THIS SPECIAL PERMIT WOULD HAVE TO, UM, PROVE TO THE PLANNING BOARD THAT THEIR PROJECT MEETS THOSE CRITERIA.
AND FINALLY, THE, THE THIRD COMPONENT
[00:15:01]
OF THIS PETITION, UM, CLARIFIES THAT ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ONLY APPLY TO LOTS ABUTTING PRIMARY STREETS.UM, THE, THE PLANNING GOALS BEHIND THIS WERE TO, UH, REINFORCE THE MIXED USE CHARACTER OF THE MAIN STREETS, NOT THE SIDE STREETS.
THIS WAS ALWAYS THE INTENT, UM, BUT WE FELT, UH, IT'S ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO, UM, TO CLARIFY THIS IN THIS NEW PETITION.
SO, SO THIS PETITION HAS SOME LANGUAGE THAT I THINK IS A LITTLE BIT CLEARER.
UM, YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP HERE THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL LOTS THAT FALL ENTIRELY OR, OR PARTIALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAT HAVE NO FRONTAGE ON MASS AVE.
UM, WE DON'T THINK, UH, THAT THESE PARCELS MAY DEVELOP TO THE, THE FULL 12 STORY HEIGHT.
UM, BUT WE DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO LIMIT THOSE PARCELS, THOSE PROJECTS ON THOSE LOTS, UM, TO FOUR STORIES WHERE THE HEIGHT LIMIT JUST OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT IS, IS SIX STORIES, AND WE DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO, UM, INCENTIVIZE ACTIVE USES ON THOSE SITES AS WELL.
CHAIR COUNCILOR NOLAN? YEAH, JUST AS A, LIKE, WHAT OF THOSE LOTS DO NOT FRONT ON MASS AVE THE, SORRY, THE, THE LOTS THAT ARE SHADED IN THE LIGHT BLUE.
IT'S, IT IS KIND OF HARD TO SEE HERE, THE DARK BLUE ALL FRONTS MASS AVE.
BUT THERE ARE SOME IN A, IN A LIGHTER BLUE THAT HAVE NO FRONTAGE ON MASS, BUT THEY ARE WITHIN, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S THE, THE BLACK LINES KIND OF RUNNING PARALLEL TO THE STREET.
THOSE ARE THE EDGE OF THE, THE ZONING DISTRICT.
I APOLOGIZE, THE COLOR'S NOT COMING THROUGH SUPER WELL HERE.
I LOOKED AT IT AND DIDN'T SEE ANY THAT DIDN'T FRONT ON MASS APP.
SO THOSE WERE THE THREE COMPONENTS, BUT WE DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT, UM, ONE OTHER THING FOR THE, THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
UM, THE CAMBRIDGE REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS PROPOSING A SIX STORY 16 UNIT ALL RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON NORTH MASS AVE.
THIS PROPOSED MASS AVE PETITION WOULD IMPOSE A, A NEW ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT ON THIS PROJECT.
UM, THIS SORT OF CAME UP AS THE, THE COUNCIL WAS REFERRING THE PETITION FOR FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.
UH, DURING THAT, THAT MEETING, UM, COUNSELORS ASKED CDD STAFF TO, TO MEET WITH THE CRA AND DISCUSS THE CASE.
UM, SO TH THIS REALLY IS A, A, A REAL LIFE EXAMPLE OF, OF THE TENSIONS BETWEEN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS AND, AND COULD ILLUSTRATE THE TRADE OFFS THAT THAT OTHER PROJECTS OF, OF THIS SCALE AND IN THIS AREA MIGHT FACE.
SO WE, WE DID MEET WITH THE CRAA FEW TIMES SINCE THE PETITION WAS FILED.
UH, WE DISCUSSED THE CHALLENGES THEY'RE FACING TRYING TO MEET THE PROPOSED STANDARDS FOR THIS PROJECTS FOR THIS PROJECT.
UM, FROM THOSE CONVERSATIONS, WE DEVELOPED A FEW POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE CURRENT ZONING PETITION THAT WOULD RESPOND TO CHALLENGES, UM, THAT THIS PROJECT IS FACING.
AND PROJECTS LIKE THIS, UH, MIGHT FACE.
SO THE, THE FIRST APPROACH IS TO KEEP NORTH MASS AVE WITHIN THE MASS 12 DISTRICT, UH, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE ACTIVE USES ABOVE EIGHT STORIES INSTEAD OF FOUR.
THE SECOND IS TO ALLOW SMALLER PROJECTS, UH, UNDER A CERTAIN SQUARE FOOTAGE TO EXCEED FOUR STORIES, UM, BUT NO GREATER THAN SIX STORIES, UH, OR YOU COULD DELAY THE EFFECTIVE DATES.
SO PROJECTS ALREADY IN THE WORKS COULD PROCEED AS THEY'RE CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
SOME, SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT AT, UH, REGARDING THESE, THESE THREE OPTIONS.
THE FIRST OPTION IS, IS THE SIMPLEST OPTION, JUST MAKE NO CHANGE.
NORTH OF PORTER WOULD REMAIN IN MASS 12 ACTIVE USES WOULD BE REQUIRED ABOVE EIGHT STORIES.
UM, ACTIVE USES WOULD BE MORE HEAVILY PRIORITIZED IN PORTER SQUARE AND SOUTH, WHILE PROVIDING MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR HOUSING NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE.
THE SECOND OPTION WOULD CREATE AN EXEMPTION FOR SMALLER PROJECTS THAT DON'T HIT A CERTAIN GFA THRESHOLD FROM THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, CONCEPTUALLY THIS WORKS THE SAME WAY AS REQUIRING ACTIVE USES FOR BUILDINGS ONLY ABOVE A CERTAIN HEIGHT, PROVIDING SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR PROJECTS WHERE ACTIVE USES MIGHT NOT BE SUPPORTABLE.
UH, AND THE THIRD OPTION WOULD JUST DELAY THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ZONING CHANGE.
[00:20:01]
SO THIS WOULD ALLOW PROJECTS CURRENTLY IN THE PIPELINE TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE TO CONFORM TO THE STRONGER STANDARDS.AND FINALLY, JUST A QUICK SUMMARY OF, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, DISCUSSION.
OVERALL, THE PLANNING BOARD WAS SUPPORTIVE OF THE GOAL TO ENCOURAGE ACTIVE USES, UM, BUT TOOK A A BIT OF A NUANCED VIEW ON, ON SOME OF THE SPECIFICS OF THE ZONING PETITION.
SO THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE OF, UH, UH, REQUIREMENTS IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS A, A SIGNIFICANT EXISTING DENSITY OF ACTIVE USES.
SO THE PLANNING BOARD SUPPORTED THE STRONGER ACTIVE USE MANDATES IN PORTER SQUARE AND AREAS SOUTH REQUIRING ACTIVE USES ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
UM, HOWEVER, THEY FELT THAT NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE, UM, HOUSING SHOULD BE THE PRIORITY, UM, AND, AND BELIEVE THAT PRIORITIZING HOUSING IS THE BEST WAY TO, TO SUPPORT, UM, ACTIVE USES IN THAT AREA AS WELL BY, UM, CREATING MORE ECONOMIC SUPPORT FOR THOSE USES.
UM, SO PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED MAINTAINING THE EXISTING MASS 12 ZONING NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE.
THEY DID STRESS THAT IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STRONGER REQUIREMENTS IN THAT AREA, UM, THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME EXCEPTIONS FOR, FOR SMALLER PROJECTS.
AND THEN AS FOR THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE PETITION, THE PLANNING BOARD WAS, WAS IN FAVOR OF A, UH, ALLOWING CHANGES BY PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL PERMIT TO THE AMOUNT AND LOCATION OF ACTIVE USES, UM, AND, UH, APPLYING ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ONLY TO LOTS ABUTTING A PRIMARY STREET.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE END OF THIS PRESENTATION.
SO ARE YOU GONNA DO, UM, CAMBRIDGE STREET AS WELL? YEP.
JUST, UH, LET'S GO INTO, LET'S DO 'EM BOTH, THEN WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE'LL BREAK IT UP IN OUR DISCUSSION, BECAUSE I WANT THE PEOPLE IN PUBLIC COMMENT TO, UM, SEE BOTH PRESENTATIONS.
UM, JUST GIVE ME A COUPLE MINUTES TO SET THAT UP.
UM, SO A LOT OF, UH, THE, THE MATERIAL IN HERE IS THE SAME AS THE MASS A PETITION, SO I'LL, I'LL SKIP THROUGH THOSE AND, AND FOCUS ON THE, THE CAMBRIDGE STREET SPECIFIC ITEMS. UH, ANOTHER QUICK BACKGROUND.
THE NEW CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING WAS ADOPTED BACK IN JANUARY, IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE R CAMBRIDGE STREET STUDY.
UH, IT ALLOWS FOR SIX STORIES OF HOUSING THROUGHOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET, UH, AND 10 STORIES IN LECHMERE, AND 12 STORIES IN THE WEBSTER WINDSOR AREA.
UH, CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING ALSO INCENTIVIZES ACTIVE GROUND FLOORS BY ALLOWING ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT ABOVE SIX STORIES, BUT ONLY IN LECHMERE AND THE WEBSTER WINDSOR AREA.
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, COUNCIL WANTED TO IMPLEMENT STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET DURING THE INITIAL PETITION PROCESS.
UM, BUT WE COULDN'T, UM, THIS POLICY ORDER WAS PASSED TO, TO DIRECT CITY STAFF TO DEVELOP THAT SUBSEQUENT ZONING PETITION.
WE TALKED ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET, ALONG WITH MASS AVE IN THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, UM, ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
THERE WAS ONE CENTRAL QUESTION, SHOULD ACTIVE USES BE REQUIRED ABOVE, UH, THREE STORIES OR FOUR STORIES.
UM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT TRADE-OFFS BETWEEN, UM, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS, UM, MAY MAKE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT MORE DIFFICULT.
AND, UM, BUT OF COURSE THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE LOSS OF, OF ACTIVE USE SPACE.
SO AFTER THAT DISCUSSION, ORDINANCE COMMITTEE VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, A PETITION THAT WOULD REQUIRE ACTIVE USES ABOVE THREE STORIES IN ALL CAMBRIDGE STREET DISTRICTS.
[00:25:02]
SO THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ACTIVE USE PETITION HAS FIVE MAIN COMPONENTS.UM, AS I JUST MENTIONED, IT REQUIRES GROUND STORY, ACTIVE USES, AND DEVELOPMENTS ABOVE THREE STORIES IN ALL CAMBRIDGE STREET DISTRICTS.
IT ESTABLISHES A PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS, UM, THE SAME AS MASS AVE, UH, ALSO THE SAME AS MASS AVE CLARIFIES REQUIREMENTS ONLY APPLY TO LOTS OF BUDDING OF PRIMARY STREET.
UH, AND THEN IT MAKES, UH, ONE MAP CHANGE REZONING, UM, A STRETCH OF MONSIGNOR O'BRIEN HIGHWAY FROM THE CAMBRIDGE STREET DISTRICTS TO BUSINESS A AND IT ALSO REQUIRES A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES.
UH, BEFORE YOU GO, LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT COUNCILOR SIMMONS HAS JOINED COUNCILOR SIMMONS.
UM, SO THE, THE CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING, AS I MENTIONED, WORKS THE SAME AS MASS AVE.
ACTIVE USES ARE REQUIRED TO ENABLE THE TALLEST RESIDENTIAL HEIGHTS ALLOWED.
UM, BUT THIS IS ONLY CURRENTLY APPLICABLE IN LEACH MIRROR AND WEBSTER WINDSOR, UM, WHERE HEIGHT LIMITS ARE EXCEED SIX STORIES, AND THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT CURRENTLY ON THE REST OF CAMBRIDGE STREET.
I WON'T GO INTO ALL OF THIS AGAIN, BUT BASICALLY, UH, WE WANT MIXED USE TO BE THE NORM.
WE THINK THAT'S, UH, THAT'S THE, THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE, WE WANT TO SEE ALONG THE QUARTER.
UH, BUT WE ALSO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE PATHWAY FOR CASES WHERE ACTIVE USES ARE NOT FEASIBLE OR PREFERRED.
SO THE FIRST COMPONENT OF THE PETITION REQUIRING ACTIVE USES ABOVE THREE STORIES IN ALL CAMBRIDGE STREET DISTRICTS.
THE ZONING PETITION WOULD CHANGE, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS.
SO ANY NEW BUILDING ABOVE THREE STORIES THROUGHOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET, INCLUDING LEACH MIRROR AND WEBSTER WINDSOR, UH, WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE AN ACTIVE USE IN THE GROUND STORY.
AND THIS REQUIREMENT WORKS THE SAME AS IT DOES ON ON MASS AVE.
UM, THERE IS A, A LOCATION AND FLOOR AREA STANDARD FOR THOSE REQUIRED ACTIVE USES.
UM, 60% OF THE INTERIOR FLOOR AREA WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE STREET, UM, MUST BE ACTIVE USES.
AND SO THIS PETITION WOULD ALSO, UH, INTRODUCE THAT SPECIAL PERMIT TO MODIFY THE FLOOR AREA AND LOCATION STANDARDS.
UM, THE PETITION INCLUDES THE SAME LANGUAGE AS AS MASS AVE.
WE THINK THE SPECIAL PERMIT SHOULDN'T BE THE NORM, BUT IT GIVES THE PLANNING BOARD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER OTHER WAYS OF ACHIEVING THE PLANNING GOALS GIVEN THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF A CIDER PROJECT.
THE THIRD COMPONENT, UM, ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ONLY APPLYING TO LOTS ABUTTING PRIMARY STREETS.
AGAIN, UM, THE SAME PRINCIPLE AS AS MASS AVE.
UM, WE REALLY WANT THIS REQUIREMENT TO FOCUS ON THE, UM, ON THE PRIMARY STREETS HERE.
SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, NUANCED IN IN THIS DISTRICT BECAUSE IT, IT COVERS, THERE ARE MORE PRIMARY STREETS HERE.
YOU HAVE CAMBRIDGE STREET, UM, BUT HAMPSHIRE PROSPECT ARE ALSO, UM, PRIMARY STREETS.
UM, SO ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS WOULD, WOULD APPLY TO THOSE LOTS, BUT NOT, UM, SOME OF THE SMALLER LOTS THAT FALL WITHIN THE DISTRICT, BUT DON'T, UM, ACTUALLY FRONT, UH, CAMBRIDGE STREET OR, OR ONE OF THOSE OTHER PRIMARY STREETS.
THE FOURTH PIECE OF THIS, UH, ZONING PETITION IS THE MAP CHANGE.
SO WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, UM, IN, IN OUR PREVIOUS MEETINGS.
WHEN WE ARE THINKING ABOUT THESE STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS, WE WANTED TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT SOME OF THE OUTLYING AREAS OF THE DISTRICT TO SEE IF THOSE STRONGER REQUIREMENTS WOULD STILL MAKE SENSE IN THOSE AREAS.
UM, AND SO ONE OF THOSE AREAS WAS THIS, UH, STRETCH OF O'BRIEN HIGHWAY.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE, THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE MAP, UH, LABELED THERE.
IT, THIS AREA WASN'T REALLY A BIG FOCUS IN THE ARC CAMBRIDGE STREET PLAN.
UM, IT WAS PRIMARILY INCLUDED IN THE INITIAL REZONING TO ALLOW FOR MORE HEIGHT FOR HOUSING, UM, WHICH AFTER REVISIONS TO THAT INITIAL PETITION, IT, THE HEIGHT LIMIT ENDED UP
[00:30:01]
STAYING THE SAME AT SIX STORIES.UM, WE BELIEVE THIS AREA, THE O'BRIEN HIGHWAY, IS A VERY DIFFERENT STREET THAN CAMBRIDGE STREET AND, AND COULD DESERVE ITS OWN PLANNING STUDY.
UM, WE DON'T THINK ACTIVE USES ARE A HIGH PRIORITY IN THIS AREA, UM, BUT WE STILL WANT TO ALLOW FOR A MIX OF USES.
UM, SO THE PETITION REZONES THIS AREA BACK, UM, TO THE PREVIOUS ZONING, WHICH WAS A, A BUSINESS, A DISTRICT.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE ORDINANCE, UM, THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
UM, IT ALSO INCORPORATES THE CORNER OF GORE STREET AND THIRD STREET TO MAKE, UM, EXISTING RETAIL USE THERE.
UM, CONFORMING, WE TALKED ABOUT WARREN STREET AS WELL, UM, IN THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, UH, WE CONSIDERED REZONING THIS IDEA, UH, THIS, THIS AREA AS WELL.
UM, THROUGH THOSE DISCUSSIONS, WE, WE HAD WITH ORDINANCE, UM, UH, THE COUNCIL, UH, WANTED TO KEEP THIS IN THE CAM SIX DISTRICT.
UM, SO THIS ZONING PETITION DOES NOT MAKE, UH, ANY MAP CHANGES TO WARREN STREET.
UM, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE WARREN STREET IS NOT A PRIMARY STREET.
SO THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS DON'T APPLY ON WARREN STREET.
SO THE FULL RANGE OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ARE ALLOWED ON WARREN STREET, BUT THOSE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS WOULDN'T APPLY EXCEPT FOR THOSE AREAS, UM, SORT OF AT THE CORNER OF CAMBRIDGE STREET AND, AND WARREN STREET.
AND THE, THE LAST COMPONENT OF THE PETITION WAS TO, UH, REQUIRE A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES, UH, IN THE CAMBRIDGE STREET DISTRICT.
UH, THIS CAME OUT OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE.
UM, I THINK FROM A, A DESIRE TO, TO LIMIT CHAINS AND, AND SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESSES, UM, THE SAME RULES, UH, APPLY IN CENTRAL SQUARE CURRENTLY.
SO THE PICTURES YOU SEE HERE ARE, UM, PICTURES OF, OF SOME EXAMPLES IN, IN CENTRAL SQUARE.
UM, AS WE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, ZONING CANNOT DIRECTLY REGULATE OWNERSHIP STRUCTURES OR BUSINESS PRACTICES.
UM, SO FORMULA BUSINESS, UH, DEFINITIONS, CENTER ON EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURE, DESIGN, AND SIGNAGE.
THE SPECIAL PERMIT IS REALLY ABOUT HOW DOES THE DESIGN OF, OF THE SPACE, OF THE, THE ARCHITECTURE, THE FACADE FIT WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
UH, FROM WE, WHAT WE'VE SEEN, FORMULA BUSINESS SPECIAL PERMITS ARE NOT, UH, AN EFFECTIVE WAY TO LIMIT CHAINS OR, OR SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESSES.
UM, CHAINS ARE, ARE USUALLY WILLING TO GO THROUGH THE ADDED, UM, UH, PLANNING BOARD PROCESS AND, AND EAT THOSE ADDED COSTS.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE SEEN SOME POSITIVE CHANGES TO FACADES AND, AND SIGNAGE IN CENTRAL SQUARE.
SO THAT, UM, IS ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS PETITION.
AND, UH, LASTLY, SO THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, AGAIN, HAD THEIR, THEIR PUBLIC HEARING ON JUNE 2ND, UM, AND OVERALL SUPPORTIVE OF, OF THE GOAL TO, UH, ENCOURAGE ACTIVE USES, UM, GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF, UM, REQUIRING ACTIVE USES, UM, BUT WARY OF GOING TOO FAR AND, UH, OVERBURDENING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, FELT MORE COMFORTABLE WITH AN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT, UM, KICKING IN ABOVE FOUR STORIES INSTEAD OF THREE.
UH, AND THE, THE PLANNING BOARD ALSO SUPPORTED SOME OTHER ASPECTS OF THE PETITION, INCLUDING, UM, THE, UH, SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR CHANGES TO THE AMOUNT OF LOCATION OF ACTIVE USES, UH, APPLYING ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ONLY TO LOTS OF BUDDING A PRIMARY STREET.
THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, ALSO SUPPORTED REZONING, UH, MONSIGNOR O'BRIEN HIGHWAY BACK TO BUSINESS A AND FOR, UH, REQUIRING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FORMULA BUSINESSES.
UH, WE WILL NOW GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, AND WE'LL TURN THIS OVER TO MS. STEFAN.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS KEVIN MCGUIRE, FOLLOWED BY TOM EVANS.
KEVIN IS NOT ON, WE WILL GO TO TOM EVANS.
TOM, IF YOU CAN TURN ON THE MIC, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD
[00:35:01]
AND TOM SPEAK RIGHT INTO THE MIC.'CAUSE IT DOESN'T, IS THIS GOOD ENOUGH? YOU GOT IT.
UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MCGOVERN, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
I'M TOM EVANS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CAMBRIDGE REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
OUR OFFICE IS AT 2 55 MAIN STREET IN KENDALL SQUARE.
UM, LET ME START OFF BY AGREEING WITH, UM, THE CHAIR AND, UH, UH, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER PETERS THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT NORTH MASS AND CAMBRIDGE STREET ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS AND DESERVE, UM, SOME CUSTOMIZED TREATMENT IN THEIR, UH, ZONING APPLICATION.
I'M HERE SPECIFICALLY TO FOCUS ON THE ACTIVE USE, UH, REQUIREMENTS SUGGESTED FOR, UH, NORTH MASS AVE, UH, NORTH OF, UH, PORTER SQUARE.
AND ITS IMPACTS ON ONE OF TWO PROJECTS THAT THE CRA ARE WORKING ON.
UM, OUR FOCUS, UH, OF CONCERN IS THE PROJECT AT 2326 MASS AVE.
UM, ABOUT, WHICH I BELIEVE, UM, KEVIN WILL SPEAK TO, UM, AT, IN THE FUTURE.
UM, I ALSO WANNA LEAD OFF BY ACKNOWLEDGING AND APPRECIATING THE, UH, COLLABORATION WITH CDD STAFF.
AFTER, UM, THE HEARING ON THE 27TH OF APRIL, UM, COUNCIL, UH, INSTRUCTED STAFF TO MEET WITH CRA, WE HAD SOME VERY PRODUCTIVE MEETINGS.
UM, AND WE FURTHER, UH, UH, APPRECIATE AND AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING BOARD REGARDING NORTH MASS AVE ACTIVE USE ZONING.
UM, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACTS THAT ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS WOULD HAVE ON VITALLY NEEDED, UM, HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.
AND, UM, WE UNDERSTAND THERE IS AN INTEREST IN ACTIVATING THE RETAIL CORRIDOR.
AND IF COUNCIL DOES MOVE AHEAD WITH AN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE, THE CRO WOULD SUGGEST HAVING THIS REQUIREMENT APPLY ONLY TO PROJECTS OVER A CERTAIN THRESHOLD, SUCH AS PARCELS LARGER THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET, OR PROJECTS LARGER THAN 25,000 GFA.
UM, I DO WANNA NOTE THAT THE CRA, UH, IS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF ACTIVE USE AND RETAIL WORK ON OUR CORRIDORS, A FEW BLOCKS NORTH OF 2326, WE ARE WORKING ON A SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT AT, UH, 2,400 MASS AVE, WHICH WE EXPECT AND PLAN FOR A VERY ROBUST GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, UM, COMPOSITION AS PART OF A MIXED USE, UH, PROJECT THERE.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, WE ARE ACTIVELY WORKING, UH, TO RETROFIT THE GROUND FLOOR OF A HOUSING PROJECT ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AT 1175.
WE'RE ACTIVELY UNDER CONSTRUCTION TO CREATE, UH, FOUR SMALL RETAIL BAYS, UM, AND LEASING THEM OUT TO, UH, SMALL STARTUP RETAIL VENTURES.
SO WE SUPPORT THE OBJECTIVES OF HAVING ACTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD CORRIDORS, BUT WE ARE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON SMALLER SCALE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, UH, PARTICULARLY ON SMALL LOTS AND ALSO VERY PART, PARTICULARLY AROUND HOME OWNERSHIP PROJECTS, WHICH HAVE DIFFERENT MANAGERIAL CHALLENGES WITH ACTIVE COMMERCIAL SPACES.
WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO KEVIN MCGUIRE, FOLLOWED BY HELEN WALKER.
KEVIN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME OKAY? YES, WE CAN.
I, I APPLAUD, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, ORDINANCE COMMITTEE STAFF, AND, UM, MY NAME IS KEVIN MCGUIRE.
I AM AFFILIATED WITH THE 2326 MASS AVENUE DEVELOPMENT.
I'M A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM, UH, ASCENT DEV, LLC.
AND I JUST WANNA PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE COLOR ON, I GUESS, THE TRADE OFFS AND THE CHOICES.
YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE AN IMAGE OF 20, UH, 23, 26, AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY A, A PARCEL.
IT'S LESS THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET.
UH, WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO BUILD A SIX STORY BUILDING, WHICH WOULD HAVE 16, UH, UH, FOUR SALE UNITS, 20% OF WHICH WOULD BE, WOULD MEET THE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT.
AND OUR REAL TARGET IS TO TRY AND SELL TWO BEDROOMS FOR LESS THAN, UH, 900,000.
UM, SO OUR BUSINESS IS REALLY, WE REALLY TEND, WE REALLY DO FOCUS ON, UH, THIS TYPE OF AFFORDABLE AND, AND MODERATE MIDDLE INCOME OWNERSHIP HOUSING.
AND TRYING TO DO IT IN A MIXED INCOME, OR I'M SORRY, IN A, UH, MULTI-USE BUILDING IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE IMPORTANT AND THERE AREN'T THAT MANY OPPORTUNITIES, AND THAT'S WHAT'S SO EXCI SO EXCITING ABOUT THE CAMBRIDGE ZONING.
BUT I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT OWNERSHIP ASSOCIATIONS FUNCTION, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S ULTIMATELY THE LONG-TERM SUCCESS OF THE BUILDING AND THEN THE LONG-TERM SUCCESS IN SOME WAYS OF THE STREETSCAPE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
[00:40:01]
BUILDING, BUT BEING MANAGED BY, IN OUR CASE, 16 FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS ARE 16 HOME BUYERS THAT NEED TO FUNCTION TOGETHER AS, UH, AS AN ASSOCIATION.WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU ADD A RETAIL COMPONENT, UH, TO THAT THEY ESSENTIALLY YOU'RE ADDING ANOTHER, UH, UNIT TO THE CONDOMINIUM WITH VERY, VERY DIFFERENT USES, UM, VERY DIFFERENT NEEDS AND, AND CERTAINLY SETTING UP COMPETITION FOR SPACE, WHETHER IT'S TRASH, UM, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, ADJUSTMENT OF DUES, UM, THE ASSOCIATION'S RESPONSIBILITY IF, UM, IF, IF FOR WORKING WITH OR NEW TENANTS THAT ARE POTENTIALLY BEING INTERVIEWED, IF, IF ONE TENANT SHOULD LEAVE.
SO, SO I JUST WANNA SAY THAT, UM, THERE'S A REAL OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOME, TO CREATE SOME REALLY IMPORTANT HOUSING, UM, IN, IN, IN MANY FORMS, BUT CERTAINLY IN THE FORM OF OWNERSHIP.
AND I JUST WANT THE, THE COMMITTEE TO BE AWARE THAT IF, IF THERE'S A HOPE FOR OWNERSHIP, UM, THE ACTIVE USE DOES, DOES ADD COMPLICATION.
AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST REALLY STRONGLY SUPPORT THE GUIDANCE THAT CAME FROM THE PLANNING BOARD.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS HELEN WALKER.
HELEN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
HELEN WALKER, 43 LINEAN STREET.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE CHANCE TO SPEAK.
THERE'S SOME HOUSEKEEPING WE NEED TO ATTEND TO, AND THIS MAY BE THE LAST CHANCE.
IT APPLIES TO ALL LOTS ALONG CAMBRIDGE STREET AND MASS AVE, WITH OR WITHOUT ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR USES AT NEIGHBORHOOD LONG-TERM PLANNING.
ON JUNE 2ND, JEFF ROBERTS WAS ASKED ABOUT REAR SETBACKS FOR THESE LOTS.
HE SAID FIVE FEET TO RESPECT THE SETBACK OF THE ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
WE SAW EVIDENCE BETWEEN THESE MAPS OF BOTH DISTRICTS AND HOW CLOSE THESE LOT LINES ARE TO THE SMALL RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
THERE ARE SO MANY ZONING INITIATIVES, IT'S HARD TO KEEP THEM STRAIGHT, BUT THE CURRENT NUMBER FOR BOTH ZONING ORDINANCES IS ZERO.
NO MATTER HOW MUCH GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, YOU WILL HAVE HOUSING ABOVE AND HOUSING NEEDS WINDOWS ON AT LEAST TWO EXPOSURES.
FRONT AND REAR WINDOWS MUST BE 10 FEET AWAY FROM ANY WINDOWS ACROSS THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO PLEASE USE THIS CHANCE TO DO WHAT YOUR EXPERT SAYS IS THE RIGHT THING AND CORRECT THAT ZERO REAR SETBACK TO FIVE FEET.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE LAW DEPARTMENT MUST RULE ON WHETHER THIS IS WITHIN THE SCOPE, BUT I HOPE YOU CAN ARRANGE TO MAKE THIS CHANGE SOON.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SUSAN MARKOWITZ.
SUSAN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
UH, SUSAN MARKOWITZ 20 OAK STREET.
I WANTED TO ADDRESS, UH, TWO ISSUES.
THE FIRST ONE THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD MENTIONED ABOUT TODAY WAS TREES.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CURRENT ZONING INCLUDES GUIDELINES RECOMMENDING AN ADDITIONAL FOUR FEET ADDED TO THE CAMBRIDGE STREET SIDEWALK, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR TREES, AND IT RECOMMENDS TREES IN FRONT OF LARGER BUILDINGS.
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THESE NON-BINDING GUIDELINES BE MADE INTO STA INTO BINDING STANDARDS.
THE TREE STANDARDS SHOULD APPLY TO ALL RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ON THE STREET, NOT JUST TALL BUILDINGS.
THEY'RE COOLEST DOWN ON DAYS LIKE THIS PAST WEEKEND FILTER, DANGEROUS AIR POLLUTION, REDUCE FLOOD RISKS, AND JUST PLAIN MAKE US ALL FEEL BETTER.
TO ME, IT'S A TWO FOR WHY WOULD WE NOT DO THIS.
UH, THE SECOND ONE, THE SECOND CONCERN I HAVE IS WET LABS.
I RE I'M RECOMMENDING NO WET LABS BECAUSE OF THE DENSITY ALONG CAMBRIDGE STREET.
THERE'S POTENTIAL NOISE LIGHTING DURING THE DAY AND AT NIGHT, PROBLEMS WITH VENTILATION BECAUSE OF SHARED WALLS WITH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS, UH, MATERIAL SPILLS.
AND I THINK IF PEOPLE DON'T THINK THAT WET LABS AROUND THE CITY ARE OKAY, I, OR IF THEY THINK THAT IT IS OKAY, I REALLY DISAGREE, I THINK IT'S WRONG.
AT THE VERY LEAST, RESIDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE NOTIFIED IN ADVANCE IF ONE'S GONNA BE BUILT AND ALLOWED TO SPEAK UP AT A PUBLIC HEARING.
I APOLOGIZE IF THAT IS NOT HOW TO PRONOUNCE YOUR NAME.
YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, UH, I'M A RESIDENT OF CAMBRIDGE.
I LIVE IN MID CAMBRIDGE WITH MY WIFE AND CHILD.
I'VE LIVED HERE FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS.
[00:45:01]
A DEVELOPER AND BUILDER BASED IN CAMBRIDGE.OUR OFFICE IS ON MASS AVE, JUST NORTH OF HARVARD SQUARE.
UH, WE ARE VERY ACTIVE IN CAMBRIDGE IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, BUT OUR, OUR KIND OF DEVELOPMENT BASE REMAINS TO BE IN CAMBRIDGE.
WE'RE CURRENTLY BUILDING SEVERAL PROJECTS IN CAMBRIDGE, SOME OF WHICH ARE WITHIN THE NEW ZONING, UH, CONFINES OR WITHIN, WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE NEW ZONING ORDINANCE.
I'M CURRENTLY PURSUING A PROJECT ON CAMBRIDGE STREET THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BUILD INTO ABOUT 25,000 SQUARE FEET, UH, IN BETWEEN 20 AND 30, UH, RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
THE PROBLEM THAT I SEE WITH THIS NEW, WITH THIS NEW, UH, ORDINANCE, UH, IN REQUIRING 60% OF THE GROUND FLOOR TO BE ACTIVE USE IS NOT THAT I, I DON'T WANT ACTIVE USE.
I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR THE, THE BUILDING AS A WHOLE, AND I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT, IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A LOT OF THE PRACTICAL CHALLENGES OF DOING SO, AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE 60% FIGURE CAME FROM.
UM, NAMELY ALONG CAMBRIDGE STREET, THERE ARE SEVERAL STRETCHES, ACTUALLY MANY STRETCHES ALONG CAMBRIDGE STREET THAT ARE IN 1% LTFE FLOOD ZONES, WHICH MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO HAVE ACT GRADE, UH, RETAIL IN AND OF ITSELF.
UH, SO ALTHOUGH I WANT TO PUT THE RETAIL COMPONENT IN OUR BUILDING, HAVING A 60% REQUIREMENT MIGHT MAKE IT SO THAT IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO, TO MEET THAT STANDARD.
SECONDARILY, THE FOREFOOT SETBACK THAT WAS ENACTED, UH, IN IN JANUARY IS, IN MY OPINION, ASININE BECAUSE THIS IS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
THERE IS NO EV EVER, IF YOU WALK UP AND DOWN CAMBRIDGE STREET, THERE'S, THERE'S NO SETBACK ON ANY SINGLE STOREFRONT THAT YOU SEE.
SO HAVING A PRIME TO PLANT TREES AND A FOREFOOT SETBACK AND REQUIRE 60% OF YOUR GROUND FLOOR TO BE RETAIL IS, IS A VERY CHALLENGING THING TO DO WHILE ALSO TRYING TO PROVIDE HOUSING TO THE CITY.
UM, I THINK THOSE ARE THE, THE, THE TWO MAIN COMPONENTS THAT ARE GONNA BE CHALLENGING WITH THIS, THIS ZONING ORDINANCE PROPOSAL.
UM, THAT DOESN'T EVEN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BUILD A BASEMENT, WHICH IS GENERALLY THE OUT THE OUTCOME THAT YOU ARRIVE TO, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IN A 1% LTFE, UH, FLOOD ZONE, THEN YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR, IF YOU'RE BUILDING A 20 THOU, 25,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, THAT EQUATES TO 20 OR 25 APARTMENT UNITS TO HAVE 20 OR 25 BIKE STORAGE SPACES.
AND IF YOU CAN'T PUT THOSE STORAGE SPACES IN THE, THE BASEMENT, THEY HAVE TO BE AT AT GRADE EFFECTIVELY.
SO YOU'RE BUTTING INTO THIS, YOU'RE TRYING TO FIT ALL OF YOUR BIKE STORAGE IN 40% OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND THAT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR A QUARTER SPACE, STAIRS, ELEVATOR, JUST GENERAL CIRCULATION.
SO IT'S JUST THE, THE PERCENTAGES DON'T MAKE SENSE.
THEY DON'T ADD UP AND THEY DON'T ALLOW FOR, UH, A BUILDING TO BE BUILT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS HEATHER HOFFMAN.
HEATHER, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
HELLO, HEATHER HOFFMAN, TWO 13 HURLEY STREET.
I, I AGREE WITH WHAT MY NEIGHBORS HAVE SAID ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET, AND I JUST WANNA SAY HOW REALLY, REALLY TIRED I AM.
AND GIVEN HOW MANY MEETINGS I GO TO VOLUNTARILY AND EVERYTHING, UM, I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW MUCH MORE TIRED PEOPLE WHO WHO HAVE LIVES ARE AT THE REPEATED REZONING BECAUSE YOU DO A ZONING AND THEN YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.
OH MY GOD, WE MUST HAVE A WIN.
KNOWING THAT THERE ARE CHANGES YOU WANNA MAKE AND THERE ARE CHANGES THAT YOU CAN'T MAKE WITHOUT LETTING THIS LAPSE AND STARTING OVER, WHY CAN'T WE DO IT RIGHT? WHAT IS THE INTENSE NEED TO PASS THIS STUFF AND THEN IMMEDIATELY MOVE TO CHANGE IT? IT JUST, IT BOGGLES THE MIND.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU THINK THAT THE RESIDENTS DON'T DESERVE A LITTLE PEACE.
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO LIVE THEIR LIVES, INCLUDING PEOPLE TRYING TO BUILD STUFF, SHOULDN'T GET A LITTLE PEACE.
WHY CAN'T WE FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WANT? WHY CAN'T WE SIT DOWN AND DECIDE WHAT THINGS WE REALLY WANNA HAVE? I DON'T KNOW, MAY MAYBE SOMETHING LIKE AN OUR CAMBRIDGE STREET STUDY, WHICH WAS IMMEDIATELY CHUCKED IN THE TRASH UNTIL THERE WAS IMMENSE PUBLIC OUTCRY SAYING, NO, WE MEANT THAT.
[00:50:01]
TO SEE YOU THINK ABOUT THINGS LIKE WHAT THE BUILDING CODE ALLOWS.WHAT IS SAFE? I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT ZONING DOESN'T CARE ABOUT SAFETY ANYMORE.
AND IF WHAT YOUR ZONING SETS FORTH HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT CAN OR WOULD BE BUILT, GIVEN ALL OF THE OTHER CONSTRAINTS, THEN WHAT GOOD IS YOUR ZONING AND YOUR CROWING ABOUT HOW WONDERFUL YOU ARE FOR PASSING YET ANOTHER ZONING PETITION.
SO CAN WE SIT DOWN AND THINK ABOUT WHAT REALLY MAKES SENSE? DO WE WANT RETAIL? WELL, YOU SAY WE NEED ALL OF THE HUMANS FOR THE RETAIL AND THEN YOU DON'T WANNA MAKE RETAIL PART OF, OF PUTTING IN ALL THE HUMANS.
SO WHERE'S THE RETAIL SUPPOSED TO GO? YOU AREN'T THINKING ABOUT ANYTHING HOLISTICALLY AND YOU OUGHT TO.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PATRICK MCGEE, FOLLOWED BY JASON S. PATRICK.
UM, PATRICK MCGEE, 8 77 CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UH, THANKS FOR TAKING THIS UP AGAIN.
UM, I GUESS, UH, FIRST QUESTION TO STAFF IF I COULD.
UM, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE PRIMARY STREETS VERSUS NON-PRIMARY STREETS SPECIFIC TO WARREN STREET, UM, AND HOW PRIMARY STREETS GET DETERMINED.
UH, 'CAUSE I THINK MAINTAINING AN ACTIVE USE ON WARREN STREET AND ACTUALLY ENCOURAGING AN ACTIVE STREET ON WARREN STREET WILL GO A LONG WAY IN TERMS OF THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTED ABILITY DOWN TO UNION SQUARE AND ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT'S HAPPENING ON SOUTH AND GORE CURRENTLY.
AND IF WE DON'T ENSURE THAT, I THINK WE'RE, UM, UH, UNNECESSARILY STEMMING OUR TOE FOR THE FUTURE REALITIES OF HOW RESIDENTS USE THAT AREA.
UM, I THINK, UH, THE THREE STORIES AS IT IS NOW, I DON'T THINK I HAVE TWO, THREE STORY BUILDINGS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET, BOTH WITH ACTIVE USE.
I DON'T THINK I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO TAKE THOSE AND TURN THEM INTO THREE STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL WITHOUT A PROBLEM.
UM, I DON'T THINK I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
THIS CURRENT ZONING WOULD ALLOW ME TO DO THAT.
I DON'T HAVE A REASON TO DO THAT BECAUSE I MAKE EXPONENTIALLY MORE MONEY ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF MY TWO UNITS THAT ARE ACTIVE USE COMMERCIAL LEASES THAN I DO IN MY RESIDENTIAL LEASES.
SO THERE'S TALKING POINTS TO FIRST FLOOR COMMERCIAL ISN'T ECONOMICALLY VIABLE.
AS SOMEONE WHO'S HAD A BUILDING FOR 20 YEARS AND ANOTHER ONE FOR FIVE.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT LOGIC.
UM, I DO THINK IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO BUILD SMALLER BUILDINGS IN CAMBRIDGE NOW WITH ACTIVE USES, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S A RESULT OF ZONING.
THAT'S A RESULT OF ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY HAS PUT INTO PLACE, UM, TO FURTHER OTHER GOALS.
AND I THINK AT TIMES WE OFTEN PICK UP ONE ISSUE AND CHARGE FORWARD TRYING TO FIX THAT.
CURRENTLY WE'RE TRYING TO FIX THE HOUSING PROCESS AND THE MENTALITY SEEMS TO BE IF IT'S GOING TO HURT HOUSING AT ALL, WE SHOULDN'T DO IT.
AND NONE OF THIS IS, UM, EASY.
IT'S ALL NUANCED AND EVERYTHING FOLDS TOGETHER.
UM, BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, MAINTAINING THE COMMERCIAL VIABILITY AND VITALITY OF CAMBRIDGE STREET SHOULD BE A COMMUNITY GOAL BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE BENEFITS THAT WE HEAR ABOUT THROUGH ALL OF OUR COMMUNITY SURVEYS SAYING PEOPLE WANT WHAT WE PROVIDE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AND AS WRITTEN, I THINK WE THROUGH OUR ZONING ARE ENCOURAGING THE REMOVAL OF THAT.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S, UH, NOT GREAT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JASON S JASON, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HI, UH, IT'S JASON S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF EAST CAMBRIDGE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, 5 44 CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UH, THANKS AGAIN FOR TAKING UP THIS ISSUE.
I DO THINK IT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE VITALITY OF OUR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, UM, THAT SOME SORT OF GROUND FLOOR REQUIREMENT BE PUT IN PLACE.
UM, THE RULES HAVE CHANGED AND IT IS, UH, IS SEEMINGLY INCENTIVIZED TO TAKE BUILDINGS DOWN AND POTENTIALLY NOT REPLACE THEM WITH, NOT, NOT NEW RETAIL, BUT CURRENTLY VIABLE RETAIL.
SO THIS IS, THIS IN MY VIEW, IS HOW DO WE MAINTAIN VIABLE RETAIL THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE IN JEOPARDY.
UM, YOU KNOW, CAMBRIDGE STREET, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE SEEING SOMETHING BETWEEN EIGHT AND 15 BUILD OUTS, NEW BUSINESSES COMING IN.
[00:55:01]
UH, THAT HOPEFULLY YOU HAD A CHANCE TO READ THAT JUST HIGHLIGHTS LIKE, WHAT IF WE LOSE A BUILDING LIKE THE POST OFFICE IN INMAN SQUARE THAT WIPES OUT SEVEN SMALL BUSINESSES.THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING, THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF A BACKSTOP SO THAT WE'RE NOT COMING FORWARD AND FIGHTING FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THAT RETAIL SPACE.
UM, AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE WE LOST SOME COMMERCIAL, UH, ACTIVITY IS, AND, AND THIS IS NOTHING AGAINST THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE IN THE BUILDING, BUT THE VINFEN BUILDING AT NINE 50 C STREET IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE THE GROUND FLOOR ACTIVE USES AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE'RE DISRUPTED IN RESPONSE TO THE NEEDS IN THAT MOMENT.
UM, AND OVER TIME RETAIL AROUND THAT, THOSE ARE WHERE OUR VACANCIES ARE.
THAT'S WHERE IT GETS A LITTLE BIT WEAKER.
UM, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING CAN CONTINUE AS WE TRY TO STRENGTHEN THE DISTRICT, BRING IN NEW PEOPLE, WHICH BY THE WAY, I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE SAW HOW MANY BEST OF BOSTON AWARDS THAT OUR RETAILERS GOING ON CHEMISTRY.
I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING LIKE SIX TO 10 FOLKS ON C STREET THAT HAVE BEEN IN HIGHLIGHTED FOR THAT AND, AND NEW PEOPLE THAT ARE MOVING IN THAT HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED IN OTHER CITIES AND TOWNS.
UM, SO THIS IS ABOUT PROTECTING A CURRENTLY VIABLE AND EXCITING RETAIL JURISDICTION THAT'S GROWING THAT WE CAN ENHANCE.
UM, SO HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS.
UM, I DO WANNA CALL OUT SOMETHING A PREVIOUS SPEAKER MENTIONED ABOUT THE, THE CONFLICTING FIRST FLOOR USES.
AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE PAST, NOT BEING ABLE TO PUT THINGS LIKE BIKE PARKING IN THE BASEMENT START TO COMPETE WITH THESE NEEDS ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD DEFINITELY, DEFINITELY BE ADDRESSED.
'CAUSE THAT IS NOT THE ONLY THING.
UM, THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING THIS.
UH, I HOPE THAT YOU FOLKS CAN, CAN PASS SOMETHING POSITIVE HERE AS, UH, AS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE PREVIOUS UPSO.
THAT IS ALL THAT WERE SIGNED UP.
[CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA]
WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO DISCUSSION OF NORTH MASS AVE FIRST, UH, COUNCIL QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS.UH, AND THEN WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO CAMBRIDGE STREET.
I HAD COUNCILOR ZIM AND THEN COUNCILOR FLAHERTY.
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE GOING FOR THE MIC TOO.
COUNCILOR ZE FIRST AND THEN COUNCILOR FLAHERTY.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT'S ACTUALLY HELPING TO ILLUSTRATE THE SPECIFIC PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE AND IT'S REALLY HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE TANGIBLE CONCERN HERE.
AND I THINK THAT THAT MAY, UM, HELP FIGURE OUT A PATH FORWARD HERE, WHICH IS THAT ACTUALLY, LIKE I ALSO THINK THAT FIRST FLOOR RETAIL IS GENERALLY A GOOD THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET IN MASS AVE.
UM, AND I THINK THAT IT IS REALLY DIFFICULT ON SMALLER LOTS IN PARTICULAR.
AND I THINK THAT THAT IS REALLY HELPFUL FOR US TO DIG INTO.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT, UM, THE NEW, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT TODAY IS NOW THE THIRD EXAMPLE IT FEELS LIKE AT EVERY MEETING IS MORE AND MORE PEOPLE HEAR ABOUT THIS.
THEY'RE LIKE, IT DOESN'T WORK ON MY LOT.
AND, AND I THINK THAT THAT IS A CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE THIRD MEETING IN A ROW AND IT'S THE THIRD TIME THAT THERE'S BEEN A NEW CONCERN BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE ZONING AMENDMENT.
SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK LIKE, UM, PERHAPS CDD THERE'S A CONCERN THAT, HEY, IF YOU'RE IN A FLOOD ZONE, YOU DON'T WANNA BUILD IN THE BASEMENT AND CAN YOU FIT FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, YOU KNOW, MAILBOXES, ALL THE OTHER THINGS YOU NEED FOR RESIDENTIAL AND BIKE PARKING, OF WHICH WE HAVE LIKE QUITE STRONG REQUIREMENTS ON THE FIRST FLOOR BUILD OUT, ESPECIALLY OF A SMALLER LOT.
UH, I WAS WONDERING IF YOU GUYS HAD ANY SUGGESTIONS OR ANSWERS TO THAT? WHO WANTS IT? MR. ROBERTS.
IT, IT IS COMPLICATED AND IT, IT IS TRUE THAT, UM, THERE IS A LOT OF PROGRAM THAT TENDS TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.
A LOT OF THAT PROGRAM LIKES TO BE AT THE GROUND FLOOR THERE.
YOU KNOW, THERE ARE ALSO CHOICES TO BE MADE A LOT OF THE TIME, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ZONING INTENDED TO PROMOTE FLOOD RESILIENCE.
YOU KNOW, PART OF THE, UM, PART OF THE RATIONALE OF HAVING A SETBACK IN SOME CASES ON, ON CAMBRIDGE STREET IS TO HAVE SPACE TO MANAGE THE TRANSITION WHERE YOU HAVE A, UM, A CHANGE IN GRADE THAT NEEDS TO BE ACCOMMODATED.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE THINK ABOUT.
IT WAS LOOKED AT AS PART OF THE CAMBRIDGE STREET STUDY.
UM, BICYCLE PARKING IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE, WE'RE CURRENTLY ACTIVELY LOOKING AT.
UM, BICYCLE PARKING CAN BE LOCATED IN THE BASEMENT, UM, BUT IT REQUIRES AN ELEVATOR IN MANY CASES TO, TO GET DOWN TO THE BASEMENT.
SO I, I THINK THERE WAS A, A CASE THAT'S BEEN CITED WHERE IT WAS A SMALLER BUILDING TO BEGIN WITH WHERE THEY WERE NOT INTENDING TO PUT IT IN AN ELEVATOR AND IN THAT CASE IT, IT BECAME MORE OF A CHALLENGE.
BUT I THINK FOR BUILDINGS OF THE HEIGHT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, IT'S, IT'S LIKELY THERE WOULD BE AN, AN ELEVATOR, UM, THAT COULD ACCOMMODATE IT.
BUT CERTAINLY WHEN YOU HAVE A SMALLER, UM, I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, THE POINT THAT, UH, THAT THE VICE MAYOR IS MAKING IS, IS A GOOD POINT, WHICH IS, IS AS THE BUILDING SITE GETS SMALLER AND THE FOOTPRINT GETS SMALLER, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR SOME OF THESE,
[01:00:01]
UM, REQUIREMENTS, EVEN THOUGH THEY SCALE SOMEWHAT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE LE IF IT'S A SMALLER BUILDING, THERE'S LESS BICYCLE PARKING.YOU KNOW, SOME THINGS DON'T SCALE THAT WELL.
LIKE YOUR, YOUR ELEVATOR CORE.
AND SO TRYING TO FIT ALL OF THAT PROGRAM INTO, INTO ONE SPACE AT THE FOOTPRINT CAN BE CHALLENGING.
UM, I THINK THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALSO TRADE-OFFS.
YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY THE, I THINK AS EVAN WAS DESCRIBING, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE QUESTION COMES DOWN TO, UM, YOU KNOW, DO YOU WANT TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT THE GROUND FLOOR? YOU KNOW, IN SOME CASES HAVING RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT THE GROUND FLOOR CAN BE GOOD BECAUSE YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU PROVIDE MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR HOUSING.
UM, AND MAYBE YOU CAN'T DO THAT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO FIT OTHER PROGRAM AND AN ACTIVE USE AT THE GROUND FLOOR.
UM, BUT THERE ARE ALSO CASES WHERE, UM, IN, IN TERMS OF FLOOD RESILIENCE, WHICH, WHICH HAS COME UP A COUPLE TIMES, THERE'S UM, THERE'S SOME ADVANTAGES TO NOT TRYING TO PUT THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT THE GROUND FLOOR.
'CAUSE OUR STANDARDS TRY TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE A, A HIGHER DEGREE OF PROTECTION FOR, UM, FOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS GIVEN THE, UH, THE MORE, UM, THE MORE CHALLENGING RISK IN INVOLVED IN, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE POTENTIAL FOR A, A RESIDENTIAL UNIT TO FLOOD AS OPPOSED TO A, A COMMERCIAL SPACE OR A, A MAIL ROOM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH COULD BE BE MORE RECOVERABLE.
SO IT'S A BIT OF A RAMBLING ANSWER, BUT I THINK THAT'S THE, I THINK THAT'S THE REALITY WHEN WE, WHEN WE LOOK AT CASES WE SEE, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK AT, WHEN WE REALLY GET INTO THE DETAIL OF A LOT OF THESE CASES, EACH SITE IS FAIRLY UNIQUE.
THERE'S A LOT THAT DEPENDS ON THE, THE PROGRAM THAT THE DEVELOPER IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE, UM, AND THE TRADE OFFS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE.
AND THEN, AND THEN THERE'S A LOT THAT HAS TO DO WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REQUIREMENTS DO, UH, DO BECOME A FACTOR, BUT WE TRY TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENTS, UM, STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT THERE'S, THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY AND SOME CHOICE INVOLVED.
UM, AND AGAIN, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING, THIS, THIS IS SORT OF A NARROWLY FOCUSED SCOPE THAT WE WERE GIVEN, GIVEN BY THE COUNCIL TO LOOK AT ACTIVE USE, BUT THERE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED ARE, ARE ISSUES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT MORE BROADLY AS WELL.
UM, AND I HAD ONE, UH, TECHNICAL QUESTION AS WELL.
UM, SO LET'S TALK ABOUT CHANGE OF VIEWS, RIGHT? SO I THINK AN EXAMPLE WAS BROUGHT UP OF CHANGING COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL.
UM, WHAT HAPPENS ABOUT ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS, RIGHT? LET, LET'S SPECIFICALLY MAYBE TALK ABOUT LIKE BIKE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, RIGHT? SO IF YOU'RE CHANGING A COMMERCIAL TO A RESIDENTIAL HYPOTHETICALLY, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS SOME OF THOSE OLDER BUILDINGS DON'T HAVE BIKE PARKING ALREADY, WOULD YOU HAVE TO ADD THAT BIKE PARKING, DIG OUT A BASEMENT, DO OTHER SORTS OF THINGS ADD AN, YOU KNOW, UM, ELEVATOR IF IT'S IN THE BASEMENT? HOW, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? MR. ROBERTS? UH, THANKS.
ALTHOUGH AGAIN, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT PART OF FOR THIS PROPOSAL, BUT, BUT FOR CONTEXT IT MAY BE HELPFUL.
UM, THERE ARE EXPLICIT TRIGGERS IN THE ZONING FOR WHEN BICYCLE PARKING IS REQUIRED.
SO IF YOU HAVE A LARGE BUILDING WITH A SMALL COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT'S BEING TURNED INTO A UNIT, THAT MIGHT NOT TRIGGER THE THRESHOLD FOR, FOR REQUIRING NEW BICYCLE PARKING.
UM, THE THRESHOLD, IF YOU, IF YOU'RE ADDING RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UM, THROUGH A CHANGE OF USE, IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY A, A 15%, UM, TRIGGER.
SO IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE ADDING A, IF YOU'RE INCREASING THE, SAY THE INTENSITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL USE BY BY 15%, THAT'S WHERE YOU MAY BE REQUIRED TO, TO PUT IN BICYCLE PARKING.
THERE ARE SOME, THERE ARE ALSO SOME EXEMPTIONS, YOU KNOW, FOR, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S, IF IT'S SORT OF A SMALLER CHANGE WHERE THE IMPACT IS MORE MINIMAL, THERE MIGHT BE SOME WAIVERS THAT APPLY.
LOOK, YOU KNOW, WE, WE TRY TO, YOU KNOW, I I WAS PART OF RIDING THE BICYCLE PARKING ZONING, YOU KNOW, OVER A DECADE AGO.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING, WE'RE, WE'RE REVISITING IT RIGHT NOW, BUT IT WAS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING WRITTEN WITH THE, THE VIEW TOWARDS HAVING FLEXIBILITY BUILT INTO IT SO THAT, UM, YOU CAN, UH, SO THAT YOU CAN, IF, IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT TO MEET GIVEN THE CONDITIONS OF A SITE OR, OR, OR A PROJECT, THERE ARE WAYS TO, UM, MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IN A MORE FLEXIBLE, A WAY, A FLEXIBLE WAY OR IN SOME CASES THAT CAN BE WAIVED.
SO, UM, I THINK I'M INTERESTED TO SEE WHERE THIS CONVERSATION GOES.
I THINK THAT I'M NOT QUITE READY TO, UM, SUPPORT THE ZONING TONIGHT, BUT MY SUGGESTIONS ARE PERHAPS LIKE A, LIKE I THINK MY INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCES, LIKE I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, CAMBRIDGE STREET AND NORTHERN MASS IN GENERAL ARE DOING FINE WITHOUT THIS REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? LIKE THEY HAVE ALL THIS RETAIL BECAUSE IT'S ALLOWED, NOT BECAUSE WE REQUIRE IT, UM, BUT IF WE DID WANT TO DO SOMETHING, I THINK THAT, UH, PERHAPS ADDING LIKE A MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS, INSTEAD IT HAPPENS ON BIGGER LOTS WHERE YOU CAN ACTUALLY FIT ALL THESE USES.
I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS REALLY ON A SMALL LOT WHERE YOU CAN'T REALLY FIT THE HOUSING AND THE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL JUST BECAUSE THERE'S ALL THESE REQUIREMENTS THAT DON'T FIT TOGETHER WELL IN A SMALL LOT.
AND MAYBE A COMPROMISE OF SOME SORT WOULD BE TO, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST SET A REASONABLE MINIMUM LOT SIZE WHERE WE FEEL LIKE YOU
[01:05:01]
CAN REASONABLY FIT ALL THIS TOGETHER.UM, SO, UM, I WOULD LEAVE IT THERE FOR CONVERSATIONS, BUT, UH, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE NOT TO MOVE THIS OUTTA THE COMMITTEE AND TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT NUMBER IS AND SEE IF WE CAN COME UP IN A GOOD PLACE.
AND ALSO I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF, UH, MODIFYING THE BIKE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
UM, I THINK THEY CAN BOTH BE PRODUCED BUT ALSO ALLOW SOME VERTICAL STACKING AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD PERHAPS, UM, MAKE IT EASIER TO ACCOMMODATE.
SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, SO I UNDERSTAND NORTH MASS AVE DO, DO I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, ANYTHING NORTH OF LINEAR PARK, UM, UNDER THE, UH, EXISTING MASS AVE DISTRICT, YOU CAN GO, YOU CAN BUILD SEVEN STORIES RESIDENTIAL WITHOUT ANY ACTIVE USE, AS OF RIGHT.
IS THAT RIGHT? UM, NORTH OF LINEAR PARK YOU CAN BUILD UP TO EIGHT STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL WITH NO ACTIVE USE.
SO ANYTHING ABOVE EIGHT STORIES REQUIRES AN ACTIVE USE.
AND THE PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING, UM, THE 12, A DISTRICT THEN RUNS FROM LINEAR, UH, BACK TO PORTER SQUARE, RIGHT.
AND IF THAT PASSES, THEN YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO TO FOUR STORIES, UM, RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, ALL ALONG THAT STRETCH OF MASS AVE WITH NO ACTIVE USE, RIGHT? UH, YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THE MASS 12 EIGHT, EXCUSE ME, THE MASS 12 EIGHT DISTRICT WOULD BE MAPPED FROM CAMBRIDGE COMMON ALL THE WAY THROUGH PORTER SQUARE TO LINEAR PARK.
AND THAT REQUIRES ACTIVE USES ONLY ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO PICTURE TO MY HEAD, IF THERE WERE NO ACTIVE USES ANYWHERE ALONG NORTH MASS AVE, WE POTENTIALLY AND HYPOTHETICALLY COULD HAVE EIGHT STORY BUILDINGS FOLLOWED BY FOUR STORY BUILDINGS ALL ALONG THE CORRIDOR OF MASS AVE TO CAMBRIDGE COMMON.
IF, IF THERE WERE NO ACTIVE USES, YES.
ANYTHING ABOVE THAT WOULD REQUIRE ACTIVE USES? ASSISTANT MANAGER.
UH, I I THINK IF THERE WAS, THERE, IF NO ACTIVE USES WERE ALLOWED.
I THINK BECAUSE IT'S ALLOWED, BUT, BUT THERE'S STILL THE INCENTIVE.
I THINK THE MARKET WOULD STILL RESULT IN ACTIVE USES REGARDLESS.
BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT IS SORT OF PUTTING IT THE OTHER WAY RATHER THAN IT BEING ALLOWED THE, THE, THE MARKET WOULD CAP EVERYTHING AT EIGHT STORIES OF FOUR STORIES UNLESS THERE WAS ACTIVE USE.
IF THERE WAS ACTIVE USE, THEN THE MARKET WOULD ALLOW YOU TO GO HIGHER.
I GUESS MY KIND OF SAYING IT IN THE REVERSE, YEAH.
I GUESS I'M SAYING IF IT IS POSSIBLE THAT A FOUR STORY BUILDING DECIDES TO HAVE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT, EVEN IF NOT REQUIRED BY THE ZONING, IF IT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE ZONING.
IF THEY DETERMINE THAT THE ECONOMICS WORK OUT AND IT'S MORE FINANCIALLY VIABLE IN THAT CASE GIVEN THE RENTS.
SO I THINK PART OF THE CONVERSATION IS WHERE ARE WE? UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CORRIDOR THAT ARE GREAT LOCATIONS FOR ACTIVE USE IN RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS, AND THOSE ARE VIABLE ECONOMIC USES AND DEVELOPERS WANT TO INCLUDE THAT INTO THEIR DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES BECAUSE IT'S, THERE'S A PROFIT.
UM, I THINK WHEN YOU GET TO AREAS THAT GO BEYOND CERTAIN CORE CLUSTERS THAT ECONOMICS CHANGE AND THEN CERTAINLY DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY ARE DIFFERENT.
BUT I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CONVERSATION IS WHEN DO YOU NEED TO REQUIRE IT? UM, AND NONE OF THESE ARE REQUIREMENTS.
IT'S, YOU CAN STILL DO SOMETHING WITHOUT DOING ACTIVE USE.
IT'S JUST AT WHAT HEIGHT DO YOU, ARE YOU REQUIRED TO DO IT? UM, AND SO I THINK THE QUESTION IS WHERE ALONG THESE CORRIDORS DO WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THAT VIBRANCY ON THE GROUND FLOOR? RIGHT? AND WHERE IS IT OKAY IF WE DON'T GET IT AND WE WANNA LET THE MARKET DECIDE? AND IT WOULD BE OKAY IF THERE'S A, A MORE MODEST MIX THAT AGAIN IS GONNA TAKE YEARS AND DECADES TO TRANSFORM, UM, AND CAN BE REEVALUATED OVER TIME.
SO EVERYTHING NORTH OF LINEAR PARK IS THAT AREA WHERE MODEST ACTIVE USE HAS BEEN DESIGNATED, BUT FOR INSTANCE, FRANK STEAKHOUSE AT MASS AVE, WHICH I PRESUME IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE AN ACT OF USE THAT IS, UH, SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, DESIRABLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
[01:10:01]
COULD GO TO EIGHT STORIES THERE.IS THAT CORRECT? DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT OR AM I WRONG? IF YOU, IF IT REMAINED THERE, YOU COULD GO TO EIGHT AT IN THE, SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? SO AT, IN THE, UH, 2300 BLOCK WHERE FRANK'S STEAKHOUSES IS ON MASS AVE, I THINK IT'S A 20 FEET, RIGHT AROUND THE 2300, 2000 BLOCK.
THE EXISTING ZONING ALLOWS FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, UH, TO BE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE, UM, THAT ACTIVE RETAIL USE OF FRANK'S STEAKHOUSE TO, UM, IS IT AGE STORIES? DO I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? SO THE, THE CURRENT ZONING THERE IS THE MASS 12 DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS UP TO 12 STORIES WITH AN ACTIVE USE.
SO IF, IF SOMEONE WERE TO PRESERVE THAT OR, OR EVEN, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE A NEW ACTIVE USE THERE, UM, THEY COULD BUILD UP TO 12 STORIES WITHOUT THE ACTIVE USE UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING, YOU CAN ONLY BUILD UP TO EIGHT STORIES.
AND UNDER THE MASS 12, IT WOULD REQUIRE AN ACT OF USE ON ANYTHING ABOVE FOUR STORIES.
SO IF, FOR INSTANCE, THE, UM, THE STRIP OF STORES ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF MASS AVE FROM FRANK'S STEAKHOUSE, IF SOMEONE WANTED TO COME IN AND BUY THE ENTIRE STRIP AND PUT HOUSING THERE, THEY COULD IMMEDIATE PUT, IMMEDIATELY PUT HOUSING THERE TO FOUR STORIES IN THE MASS AVE 12 A DISTRICT.
BUT IF THEY REMAINED AN ACTIVE USE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, THEY COULD GO TO 12.
CHAIR, CAN I JUST ASK A LITTLE POINT OF INFORMATION FROM WHAT COUNCILOR FLAHERTY JUST SAID? YOU ARE NEXT ON THE LIST AS SOON AS COUNCILOR FLAHERTY YIELDS.
LAST, THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU.
THE PROPOSAL THAT THE CAMBRIDGE REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS TALKING ABOUT A 2326 MASS AVE THAT MAY NOT BE VIABLE IF THERE'S ACTIVE, UM, ACTIVE USE ON THE GROUND FLOOR.
THAT ACTIVE USE COULD BE, UH, MODIFIED BY SPECIAL PERMIT.
IS THAT RIGHT? SO THE, THE EXISTING ZONING HAS A SPECIAL PERMIT ALREADY THAT WOULD ALLOW THE PLANNING BOARD TO CONSIDER OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, ACTIVE USES.
UM, SO, SO THAT PROVIDES SOME, SOME FLEXIBILITY THERE.
UM, THE, THE SPECIAL PERMIT THAT IS, UH, PROPOSED IN THE, IN THE PETITION MM-HMM
WOULD ALLOW FOR A, A MODIFICATION OF THE LOCATION, UM, AND OR, UH, FLOOR AREA OF THE REQUIRED ACTIVE USE.
UM, THAT'S INTENDED TO BE A SORT OF A MINOR CHANGE.
AND, AND I THINK AS, AS WRITTEN IN THE, THE SPECIAL PERMIT CRITERIA, IT WOULDN'T ALLOW BY SPECIAL PERMIT SOMEONE TO WAIVE THAT REQUIREMENT ALTOGETHER.
SO THEY'D STILL HAVE AN ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT, BUT THEY MIGHT BE PROVIDED A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY.
UM, FIRST I WANNA CONFIRM MY UNDERSTANDING, PARTLY BUILDING ON WHAT COUNCILOR FLAHERTY JUST SAID.
RIGHT NOW, PORTER SQUARE TO LINEAR PARK IS MASS 12, CORRECT? YEP.
AND WHICH MEANS YOU CAN BUILD UP TO EIGHT STORIES WITHOUT ACTIVE USE AND ABOVE THAT YOU CAN GO TO 12 WITH ACTIVE USE.
AND 12 A RIGHT NOW IS FROM A LITTLE BIT SOUTH OF PORTER SQUARE TO THE COMMON AND THAT'S 12 A, WHICH MEANS YOU CAN GO UP TO FOUR STORIES WITHOUT ACTIVE USE AND ANYTHING ABOVE THAT, YOU CAN GO UP TO 12, BUT ONLY WITH ACTIVE USE.
SO THAT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE FOUR AND THE EIGHT AND WHAT THIS PROPOSAL MIGHT BE IS TO SWITCH FROM NORTH OF MASS AVE TO LINEAR PARK TO JOIN THE REST OF MASS AV.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DEBATING HERE? THAT'S THE PROPOSAL.
AND MORE OR LESS, AND OF THE OPTIONS, THE POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS WHICH ARE LISTED IN REFERENCE TO THE PROJECT AT 2326 MASS AVE, THERE ARE THREE POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS MAKE NO CHANGE.
SO KEEP THAT MASS 12, ALLOW SMALLER PROJECTS WITHOUT ACTIVE USE, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS UP TO
[01:15:01]
SIX STORIES ON, DEPENDING ON LOT SIZE I BELIEVE WOULD BE THE CRITERIA THEN AND THE DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE.I THINK THE DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE DOESN'T MAKE SENSE BECAUSE THEN YOU JUST RUN INTO THE SAME PROBLEM WITH ANY OTHER FUTURE PROJECT, BUT BETWEEN THE OTHER TWO OF EITHER JUST KEEP IT MASS 12 OR ALLOW THESE SMALLER PROJECTS, WHETHER IT'S, I, I DUNNO IF THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE.
IS THERE ANY ANY PREFERENCE FOR EITHER OF THOSE OR, OR, OR, OR KIND OF THE PROS AND CONS OF PICKING EITHER ONE OR TWO ON THAT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE THROUGH YOU CHAIR MCGOVERN TO THE CDD YEAH.
UM, I CAN START AND OTHER FOLKS CAN, CAN JUMP IN.
I THINK THE PROS AND CONS HERE AND, AND THE PLANNING BOARD HAD RECOMMENDED THE, THE, THE FIRST OPTION JUST, JUST MAKE NO CHANGE.
UM, I THINK THE PROS OF, OF THAT OPTION ARE, UM, ONE, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE, IT'S THE SIMPLEST APPROACH, UM, BUT REALLY WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD WAS COMING FROM WAS, UM, A, UH, A RECOGNITION THAT THAT HOUSING SHOULD BE THE PRIORITY IN THIS SECTION OF, OF MASS AVE.
AND, UM, DEFAULTING BACK TO, UH, WHAT THE, THE ZONING IS NOW, WHICH, UM, YOU KNOW, STILL IT WAS STILL DESIGNED TO INCENTIVIZE ACTIVE USES, UM, BUT, BUT PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, SOME FLEXIBILITY.
UM, SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S SORT OF THE, THE SIMPLEST APPROACH.
THE SECOND ONE, UM, EXEMPTING SMALLER PROJECTS FROM THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS, UM, YOU MENTIONED AND, AND, UM, UH, VICE MAYOR ZE MENTIONED, UH, A MINIMUM LOT SIZE.
UM, IT COULD BE THAT IT COULD BE, UM, A, UH, TOTAL GFA OF THE PROJECT THRESHOLD.
UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU, WE HAD VERY SIMILAR CONVERSATIONS WHEN DEVELOPING THE FIRST, UM, ITERATION OF THE MASS A IN, IN CAMBRIDGE STREET ZONING.
WHAT, WHAT WE STRUGGLED WITH WAS FINDING THE RIGHT NUMBER AND, AND YOU CAN SORT OF KEEP TWEAKING THINGS AND MOVING THEM BACK AND FORTH, BUT I THINK WHAT WE FIND IS THAT DIFFERENT PROJECTS, REGARDLESS OF, YOU KNOW, LOT SIZES OR, OR YOU KNOW, THE, THE SIZE OF PROJECTS CAN MAKE DIFFERENT TRADE OFFS AND, AND APPROACH THESE, THESE THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY, UM, TO MAKE SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS WORK AND, AND PROVIDE THOSE, THOSE USES.
SO IT'S HARD I THINK, FOR, FOR US, AND, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO IT MORE IF THAT'S WHAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL THINKS IS, IS THE RIGHT APPROACH.
BUT I, I THINK IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR US TO REALLY LAND ON, WELL WE THINK WE THINK THIS, UH, SIZE PROJECT IS, IS THE THRESHOLD AND, UM, OR, OR THIS SIZE, UM, YOU KNOW, LOT AREA MAKES THE MOST SENSE.
SO, SO IT'S REALLY, YOU KNOW, THE PROS OF THE FIRST ONE IS IT'S VERY SIMPLE.
IT DEFAULTS BACK TO THE, UH, EXISTING LOGIC THAT WE HAVE, UM, IN THE, IN THE NEW ZONING.
UM, THE SECOND ONE WOULD INTRODUCE A NEW SORT OF COMPONENT THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO, I THINK, THINK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT MORE.
I, I THINK, GIVEN THAT I'D RATHER DEFAULT TO THE EXISTING ZONING, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
WE HEARD IN PUBLIC COMMENT OF SOMEONE SAYING THAT FIRST FLOOR RETAIL IS ACTUALLY PROFITABLE.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT DEPENDS ON THE CITY.
THERE WAS A TIME WHEN IT FELT LIKE PEOPLE WERE PRACTICALLY GIVING AWAY FIRST FLOOR RETAIL BECAUSE THE RENTS WERE SO LOW THAT IT WAS VERY CHALLENGING FOR PEOPLE TO EVEN HAVE FIRST FLOOR RETAIL.
HAS THAT, HAS THAT CHANGED IN THIS ECONOMIC, DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF THAT? BECAUSE I THINK THAT FACTORS INTO THIS DECISION ABOUT REQUIRING FIRST FLOOR RETAIL.
UM, JUST CURIOUS, UH, THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
I THINK IT DEPENDS ON THE PART OF THE CITY.
UM, SO I THINK ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AND SOME OF THE LIKE, UH, PARTS OF MASS A MAYBE THAT IS THE CASE, BUT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT PROFITABLE.
AND IN MANY WAYS IT'S ALMOST LIKE, UM, THEY'RE DOING IT.
THE DEVELOPERS ARE DOING IT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE AND IT'S, YEAH.
SO THEY'RE MAKING MORE MONEY UPSTAIRS.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO, UM, HEAR FROM ON, ON BIKE STORAGE.
I THINK THE KEY THERE IS HOW WELL UTILIZED IS IT, WE REQUIRE IT, IT'S, IT'S, UH, FOR EVERY, I THINK TWO UNITS, WE REQUIRE ONE SPOT.
IT'S I THINK 0.5 AND IT HAS TO BE INDOORS AND COVERED.
AND IF THAT'S VERY WELL UTILIZED, THEN IT MAKES SENSE.
WE DO HAVE, I THINK, A PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION.
IF YOU CAN'T DO IT, YOU CAN, YOU CAN ASK FOR THIS TO BE OUTSIDE ON THE PUBLIC WAY TO REQUIRE THAT.
I'M JUST CURIOUS AS HOW WE'RE MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THAT.
I, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S REALLY
[01:20:01]
IMPORTANT WE PROVIDE BIKE STORAGE.IF, IF WE'RE MAKING PEOPLE DO IT AND IT'S UNDERUTILIZED, THEN THAT SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT WHETHER THAT CONTINUES OR NOT.
UM, AND THE OTHER, MY, MY QUESTION IS, THERE WAS ALSO MENTION OF ZERO SETBACKS ON THE, UH, REAR, WHICH PRESUMABLY TENDS TO BE FACING RESIDENTIAL.
WAS THAT, UM, EVER CONSIDERED? IS THERE AN IMPACT? IS THERE SOMETHING WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT THAT AS OPPOSED TO HAVING, YOU KNOW, A 12 STORY BUILDING RIGHT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON SOME OF THIS? OR EIGHT STORY OR FOUR STORY OR SIX? OKAY.
I CAN START ON THE, THE MOST THE, THAT QUESTION
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
I THINK THAT WAS MORE OF A COMMENT.
THIS IS A QUESTION ABOUT THE SETBACKS.
AND THEN, AND THEN I YIELD SHARE.
SO, UM, AND, AND THIS PETITION MAKES NO CHANGES TO THE SETBACKS, BUT THE WAY, UM, THE SETBACKS ARE STRUCTURED IN, IN BOTH MASS AVE IN CAMBRIDGE STREET IS THERE ARE, UM, NO REQUIRED SIDE OR REAR YARD SETBACKS WITHIN 85 FEET OF THE STREET.
SO THE DISTRICT TYPICALLY GOES 100 FEET FROM THE STREET, SO 85 FEET, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY, UM, SIDE OR REAR YARD SETBACKS.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S MOSTLY INTENDED TO MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT STREET WALL.
UH, ALONG THE, UM, ALONG THE MAIN STREET BEYOND, UH, 85 FEET, YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT, UM, SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACK, WHICH, WHICH IS THE SAME AS THE EXISTING SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS IN THE, IN THE C ONE DISTRICT.
SO, SO THERE WAS AN INTENT TO, YOU KNOW, BEYOND SORT OF THE, UM, INITIAL KIND OF SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE STREET ITSELF TO START TO KIND OF BREAK UP, UM, THE, THE BUILDING AND PROVIDE SOME MORE SETBACKS, UM, AS YOU GET CLOSER TO, TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO, TO MATCH THOSE, THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO, SO THERE IS A, A REAR YARD SETBACK, KIND OF THE FURTHER AWAY YOU GET FROM THE STREET.
COUNCILOR NOLAN? YES, THAT WAS, UM, HELPFUL.
SO I YIELD, AND I MIGHT HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, BUT I YIELD, YEAH.
I HAVE COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER, FOLLOWED BY COUNCILOR ZUZI.
THANKS MR. CHAIR, THROUGH YOU.
THANK YOU TO CITY STAFF, UH, FOR THIS PRESENTATION, WHICH IS HELPFUL.
I THINK THE MAIN THING THAT, UH, THE COUNCIL WAS BEING ASKED FOR FEEDBACK ON WAS ON THE NORTH MASS AVE PORTION.
UM, THE THREE OPTIONS ON SLIDE 17.
I THINK, UH, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE FOR OPTIONS NUMBER TWO, UH, ALLOWING SMALLER PROJECT WITHOUT ACTIVE USE, UP TO SIX STORIES, OR NUMBER THREE, DELAYING EFFECTIVE DATE TO NOT IMPACT IMMEDIATE PROPOSALS.
UM, THOSE ARE THE, THE TWO WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE.
I THINK MY, MY ACTUAL, UH, ONE WOULD BE A, A FOURTH OPTION, WHICH WAS A THING I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A WHILE OF, UH, IF THE CORRIDOR HAS CURRENTLY HAS GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, A REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO KEEP THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
UH, AND THAT WOULD WOULD ONLY INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, ACTUAL RETAIL AND NOT JUST OFFICE SPACES IN THE GROUND FLOOR.
AND IF IT DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, IT WOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO IT.
I THINK FOR, WE'VE DECIDED FOR, UH, STATE LAW THAT THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.
UM, I THINK THIS SORT OF GETS TO THAT.
AND, AND IF YOU LOOK AT 2326 MASS AVE, WHICH WAS THE EXAMPLE HERE, I THINK THAT THAT FITS, THERE'S NO CURRENT GROUND FLOOR RETAIL IN 2326 MASS AVE.
I DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO REQUIRE THAT A, A NEW PROJECT WOULD HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL WHEN THE CURRENT, UH, BUILDING DOES NOT HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL THERE.
UH, AND SO, YOU KNOW, OPTIONS TWO OR THREE WOULD PROVIDE, UH, A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR THAT.
I'M OPEN TO, TO EITHER OF THOSE.
UM, THAT WAS THE, THE MAIN PIECE, YOU KNOW, HAPPY TO, TO WEIGH IN IF THERE ARE OTHER, OTHER THINGS THAT WAS COUNCIL FEEDBACK ON, BUT IT SEEMED LIKE THAT WAS THE MAIN ONE.
AND I JUST WON'T HAVE TO FLAG THAT.
I'LL HAVE TO RUN A LITTLE BIT EARLY AT 4 45.
THANK YOU CHAIRMAN MCGOVERN, UH, ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UH, ARE THERE MANY? 85 FOOT? LET'S, LET'S, WE'RE STICKING WITH MASS AVE NOW.
OH, WHAT WE'RE DOING MASS AVE.
UH, I AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE CAMBRIDGE TREE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PROJECT AT 2326.
UM, COUNCILLOR ZUI, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO MY YES, I WILL.
I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE CRA PROJECT AT 2326 NORTH MASS AVE.
AND I AGREE THERE YOU, WE COULD CONSIDER SMALLER PROJECTS UNDER 5,000 SQUARE FEET, UH, TO NOT HAVE THE RETAIL, UH, REQUIREMENT OR ELSE DELAY THE EFFECTIVE DATE, WHICH SORT OF GIVES US AN EXEMPTION.
[01:25:01]
TO EITHER OF THOSE THERE.UM, MY QUESTION WITH, UH, IT MAKES SOME SENSE TO ME TO INCENTIVIZE HOUSING FROM LINEAR TO LINEAR PARK.
THE ARLINGTON LINE, THOUGH, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE COUNTERINTUITIVE BECAUSE IT'S THE FURTHEST FROM THE T, RIGHT? SO, UH, I, UH, SO IF THOSE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE CARS, THERE IS THE NUMBER ONE BUS.
SO I, I GUESS WE'LL BE RELYING ON REALLY RELIABLE, REGULAR NUMBER ONE BUSES FOR THOSE RESIDENTS.
UM, BUT I, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE, IT MAY NOT, I THINK THAT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD IDEA.
WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE REGULAR MASS TRANSIT.
UM, SO THOSE, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS.
ANYBODY OUT THERE? UM, SO
UM, SO THERE'S NO, WE'RE NOT ON ANY DEADLINE WITH THIS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO NEED TO MAKE ANY FINAL DECISIONS ABOUT EITHER ONE OF THESE, UM, TODAY.
UM, AND SO I GUESS MAYBE MY QUESTION, I MEAN, I HEARD DIFFERENT THINGS FROM DIFFERENT FOLKS, SO WHAT DO YOU NEED IN TERMS OF DIRECTION FROM US? THE PLANNING BOARD MADE THE RECOMMENDATION? SHOULD WE BE VOTING ON WHETHER OR NOT TO ACCEPT THOSE, NOT ACCEPT THOSE, ACCEPT SOME OF THEM NOT OTHERS? UM, SOMETHING TO GIVE YOU SOME MORE DIRECTION TO MAKE ANY KIND OF EDITS, UM, TO BRING BACK TO US AT A, AT A LATER MEETING? HI, UH, THIS IS JEFF.
I'LL, I'LL JUMP IN AND, AND SAY THAT IT IS DEFINITELY HELPFUL FOR US TO GET THE COUNCILOR'S VIEW OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION.
YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE, IF THE COUNCIL, THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, ENDORSES THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE PLANNING BOARD, WHICH ARE, ARE FAIRLY CLEAR IN TERMS OF THE DIRECTION THAT THEY ADVISE ON, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET TO WORK AND EVAN CAN GET TO WORK ON, UM, YOU KNOW, DRAFTING POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS THAT COULD, COULD BE INCORPORATED.
UM, BUT CERTAINLY IF, IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, IT'S GOOD FOR US TO HEAR THAT TOO, SO WE CAN, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT PATH THAT WE NEED TO TAKE.
YOU KNOW, THE SOONER WE KNOW ABOUT THAT, THE SOONER WE CAN START NARROWING IN ON, ON WHAT THE CHANGES TO THE PETITION COULD BE.
UM, JUST A QUICK, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
WHICH WOULD APPLY TO BOTH OF MASS AVEN AND CAMBRIDGE RETREAT.
AND THAT'S WRITTEN THAT'S WRITTEN IN THERE.
UM, SO ON THE MASS AVE PIECE, UM, THE, JUST GO OVER AGAIN THE PLAN.
SO THE PLANNING BOARD, PUBLIC HEARING WAS ON THE SECOND.
ARE THESE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT NUMBER, THE SLIDES DON'T SEEM TO BE NUMBERED.
UM, THESE THREE CONSIDERATIONS ARE THOSE, THE SUMMARIES OF THOSE AREN'T THE SUMMARIES OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ON THE LAST SLIDE OF, OF EACH PRESENTATION.
SO SUPPORTER OF THE GOAL TO ENCOURAGE ACTIVE USES REQUIREMENTS ARE APPROPRIATE IN AREAS WITH EXISTING DENSITY OF ACTIVE USES, SUPPORTED STRONGER ACTIVE USE MANDATES IN PORTER SQUARE AND AREAS SOUTH HOUSING SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE TO PROVIDE STRONGER ECONOMIC SUPPORT FOR ACTIVE USES AND MEET HOUSING GOALS, MAINTAIN EXISTING MASS 12 ZONING NORTH OF PORTER.
UH, AND THEN PLANNING BOARD SUPPORTED ASPECTS OF THE PETITION, INCLUDING ALLOWING CHANGES TO THE AMOUNT LOCATION OF ACTIVE USE BY SPECIAL PERMIT, APPLYING ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS ONLY ON LOTS ABUTTING A PRIMARY STREET.
SO THE QUESTION FOR US TO, TO GIVE CDD SOME DIRECTION IS, DO WE WANT TO ADOPT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD OR DO WE IN FULL, DO WE WANNA ADOPT SOME OF THEM AND NOT OTHERS? I MEAN, THAT'S UP TO THE COMMITTEE COUNCIL FLAHERTY.
SO I THINK THE PLANNING BOARD WAS SAYING WE SHOULD NOT EXTEND 12 A FROM PORTER SQUARE TO LINEAR PARK, WHICH I THINK IS A BAD IDEA.
I THINK WE SHOULD EXTEND 12 A FROM PORTER SQUARE TO LINEAR PARK, AND WE SHOULD SEEK TO REPLICATE SORT OF THE ACTIVE DYNAMIC USE THAT WE SEE ON CAMBRIDGE STREET IN EAST CAMBRIDGE.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS REIN VIG RE-INVIGORATING NORTH CAMBRIDGE.
I I ACTUALLY THINK THAT 12 A SHOULD BE EXTENDED ALL THE WAY ALONG MASS AVE, UM, TO THE, UH, ARLINGTON LINE.
BUT I KNOW THAT THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH SOME OF THE THOUGHTS WITH MY COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL.
AND, UH, WITH PROBABLY CDD AND ALSO, UH, THE PLANNING BOARD.
I RECOGNIZE, UH, THE DESIRE TO
[01:30:01]
CREATE MORE HOUSING.AND I WILL SAY THAT TRANSPORTATION, UM, HUBS OF DAVIS SQUARE AND OUR WIFE ARE WALKABLE TO, UH, NORTH MASS AVE.
BUT I, I'M NOT SO CERTAIN THAT THE EXISTING RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA ARE IN FAVOR OF, UM, YOU KNOW, LARGE APARTMENT BUILDINGS WITHOUT ANY ACTIVE USE ON THE, ON THE FIRST, UH, ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
UM, IT'S A, IT'S A VERY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S A VERY, UM, FAMILY ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOOD AND HISTORICALLY MATTON HIGH SCHOOL WAS LOCATED THERE.
THERE'S, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT COULD USE A, AN INFUSION OF ENERGY FOR ACTIVE RETAIL IN THAT NORTH, UH, MASS AVE AREA.
UM, YOU KNOW, I GREW UP RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE THE CAMBRIDGE RE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS, UH, TALKING ABOUT DOING THE SIX UNIT BUILDING WITH 16, UM, FIRST TIME HOME HOMEOWNERS BUYING THERE.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA.
AND I THINK MAYBE A MODIFICATION THROUGH SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW THEM TO, UM, USE A DIFFERENT USE ON THE FIRST FLOOR RATHER THAN ACTIVE USE SO THAT BUILDING CAN GO FORWARD, MAYBE BIKE STORAGE OR WHATEVER THEY CAN.
UM, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THEY CAN DO TO, TO MAKE SOME SORT OF USE OF THAT FIRST FLOOR OR USE IT FOR HOUSING.
UM, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT THAT IS A DENSE DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S DENSITY RIGHT THERE, RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER ON NORRA STREET IS WHERE THE OLD NORTH CAMBRIDGE CATHOLIC WAS TURNED INTO CONDOS.
AND THE ACT OF RETAIL USES LIKE FRANK STEAKHOUSE, WHICH IS THE VERY NEXT, UH, DOOR ON MASS A IS A, UH, AN ATTRACTIVE USE AND IT'S A COMMUNITY HUB FOR NORTH CAMBRIDGE.
SO IF WE CAN ENCOURAGE THAT AND REPLICATE SOME OF THE ACTIVE, UH, AND DYNAMIC FIRST FLOOR RETAIL USES WE SEE ON CAMBRIDGE, THINK, I THINK THAT'S EXCELLENT FOR NORTH NORTH CAMBRIDGE.
BUT I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT THE EXPANSION OF 12 A FROM FROM NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE TO LINEAR PARK IS ESSENTIAL.
BECAUSE WHEN I THINK OF ALL THOSE, UH, BUSINESSES ALONG THAT STRETCH OF MASS AVE, I MEAN THAT INCLUDES, UM, UM, GEEZ, I, I, I THINK GREEK CORNER IS EVEN NORTH OF, UH, LINEAR PARK AND JOE SENT ME, OR, AND DO I HAVE THAT WRONG? I MASS HAVE, SO IT'S WITHIN, IT'S WITHIN LINEAR PARK.
SO ALL OF THAT SHOULD BE IN ENCOURAGED AND SHOULD BE REPLICATED AS BEST IT CAN.
LIKE, I MEAN, THINK OF WHEN WE THINK OF WHETHER OR NOT A FIRST FLOOR ACT OF DYNAMIC USE IS PROFITABLE IN CAMBRIDGE, UM, I THINK IT'S SITE SPECIFIC, IT'S OWNER SPECIFIC, IT'S OPERATION SPECIFIC.
UH, GEOGRAPHY HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT.
BUT THINK OF MAMAS RIGHT ON THE CORNER OF RICE STREET AND MASS AVE.
I MEAN, THAT'S JUST A LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD MARKET THAT HAS BECOME A TREMENDOUS STAPLE TO NORTH CAMBRIDGE.
I MEAN, YOU GO BY THERE ANY NIGHT, THERE'S PEOPLE HANGING ON THE CORNER WAITING TO GET A, UH, MAPLE ICE CREAM.
AND THE MORE THAT WE CAN INCENTIVIZE THAT TYPE OF USE ON MASS AVE, I THINK IS GREAT, UH, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, FOR THE RESIDENTS, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE.
AND FOR THE, FOR THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY, FOR, FOR BUILDING FAMILIES AND BUILDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE HAVE TO ALWAYS, I THINK KEEP IN MIND WHEN WE MAKE THESE ZONING DECISIONS, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE NOW AND HOW DO THEY CHOOSE TO LIVE THEIR LIVES? WHAT WILL ENHANCE THEIR LIVES? AND, UH, AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE CENTRAL IN ALL OF OUR DECISIONS.
MAYBE WE WANT TO HAVE MORE HOUSING IN THAT AREA OF CAMBRIDGE, SO BE IT.
BUT WHILE WE DO THAT, LET'S FIRST AND FOREMOST THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE NOW, HOW THEY WANNA LIVE THEIR LIVES.
SO I WOULD, UH, I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY THINK WE SHOULD NOT EXTEND 12 A I THINK WE SHOULD, UH, AND WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE REPLICATING WHAT MR. MCGEE TALKS ABOUT, UH, IS A PROFITABLE FIRST FLOOR IN HIS BUILDINGS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, BEFORE I GO THE OTHERS, I MEAN, I WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE DELICATE BALANCE THAT, THAT WE HAVE TO STRUGGLE WITH, RIGHT? WE CLEARLY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING HERE NOW, BUT THE JOB OF THIS COUNCIL IS ALSO TO THINK ABOUT HOW THE CITY MOVES FORWARD.
WE WOULD NEVER MAKE ANY CHANGES.
WE ALL SAT IN HERE FOR A PLAY FRIDAY NIGHT ABOUT A VERY IMPORTANT VOTE THAT WAS ABOUT THE FUTURE, UM, OF CAMBRIDGE.
AND THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE AT THAT TIME WHO DIDN'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.
IMAGINE IF THAT VOTE WENT THE OTHER WAY.
[01:35:01]
YOU KNOW, I HEAR THAT, BUT WE ALSO, IT IS ALSO OUR JOB TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE MOVE THIS CITY FORWARD.I'VE GOT COUNCILOR ZE, COUNSELOR ZUZI, COUNSELOR NOLAN, UM, UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
ONE IS, UM, I JUST WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THE VACANCY RATE.
HOW CONFIDENT ARE WE THAT IF, YOU KNOW, WE ARE REQUIRING FIRST FLOOR RETAIL TO BE BILLED THAT IT'S GONNA ACTUALLY GET FILLED, UM, THROUGH YOU CHAIR? UM, I CAN'T OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD SPEAK TO THE VACANCY RATE IN NORTH MASS AVE, BUT I WILL SAY THAT IS THE BIGGEST CONCERN ABOUT INCREASING RETAIL IN AREAS WHERE WE DO NOT SEE, UM, KIND OF OUR MAIN SQUARES AND CORRIDORS, IS THAT IF WE CONTINUE TO INCREASE RE RETAIL REQUIREMENTS, WE WILL HAVE MORE VACANCY.
UM, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, UH, I GUESS I'LL JUST SAY IS THAT UM, THE WAY WE ALL SHOP, HOW WE SHOP IS ALL CHANGING.
YOUNGER DEMOGRAPHICS ARE QUITE HONESTLY NOT INTERESTED IN BUYING A LOT OF THINGS.
THEY LIKE VINTAGE, THEY, UM, SHOP DIFFERENTLY OR THEY DON'T SHOP AT ALL.
AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE JUST SEEING THE DYNAMICS OF OUR RETAIL SPACES CHANGE.
UM, AND SO, UH, WHEN YOU THINK OF NORTH MASS AVE, THERE IS, YOU KNOW, WHILE DAVIS IS NOT IN CAMBRIDGE, THERE IS DAVIS, THERE IS AL WIFE AND THE GROWTH WE'RE SEEING IN AL WIFE WILL OBVIOUSLY PROBABLY DEMAND SOME CHANGES IN, IN ACTIVE USES.
UM, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY KEEPING PORTER AND MASS A THAT HAS RETAIL VIABLE IS A CONCERN.
SO I THINK, UM, THAT IS, YOU BRING UP A POINT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD SAY THAT EOD IS CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT IF YOU CONTINUE TO KEEP A REQUIRING RETAIL EVERYWHERE, IT MAY, IT MAY NOT BE VIABLE.
SO, UM, REQUIRING RETAIL OR HAVING ACTIVE USES TO, UM, LINEAR PARK MAKES A LOT OF SENSE 'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE OUR RETAIL IS ACTIVE CURRENTLY.
COUNCILORS, UH, VICE MAYOR, SORRY, VICE MAYOR.
I SEE THAT THE PLANNING BOARD SUPPORTED OTHER ASPECTS OF THE PETITION, INCLUDING, UM, UH, ALLOWING CHANGES TO THE AMOUNT, UM, UH, UM, INCLUDING, UM, UH, PROVIDING EXEMPTIONS FOR, UH, SMALLER PROJECTS.
ARE WE STILL THINKING THAT, LIKE WHAT DOES EXACTLY VOTING FOR SUPPORTING THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS MEETING? IS THERE GOING TO BE AN EXEMPTION FOR SMALLER LOSS WHERE WE CAN'T FIT ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OR LIKE, YOU KNOW, TOTAL GFA, LIKE HOW IS THAT STILL LIKE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN WORK ON, UH, THROUGH YOU? I, I WOULD SAY THE, THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS WERE, WERE PRETTY SIMPLY JUST KEEP THE AREA NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE WITHIN THE MASS 12 DISTRICT.
THAT WAS THEIR, THEIR KIND OF PRIMARY RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGES TO THE PETITION THEY AGREED WITH.
UM, THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE PETITION THEY DISCUSSED IF THE COUNCIL DOES WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STRONGER ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS NORTH OF PORTER SQUARE, THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME, UM, EXEMPTIONS FOR, FOR SMALLER PROJECTS.
AND THEY, THEY TALKED ABOUT A, A COUPLE DIFFERENT WAYS TO APPROACH THAT.
THE SAME THAT, THAT I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HERE.
UM, BUT THERE WASN'T A, A SPECIFIC, UH, RECOMMENDATION ON, ON EXACTLY HOW TO DO THAT.
AND, AND I THINK THE, THE PREFERENCE WOULD BE FROM THE PLANNING BOARD TO NOT, UM, CHANGE THE ZONING NORTH OF PORTER AT ALL.
UM, SO I THINK THAT, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS, I WILL ASK LATER THAT WE DO HAVE AN EXEMPTION FOR SMALLER LOTS WHERE I THINK WE CAN'T FIT ALL THESE USES EVEN IF WE WANTED TO, UM, AND, OR LIKE SMALLER BUILDINGS.
UM, SO I THINK THAT THAT WILL BE A SEPARATE POINT.
I JUST ACTUALLY JUST WANTED TO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CHAIR PERHAPS, AND THEN I, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES ARE HERE.
I KNOW COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER ALSO HAS TO LEAVE IN A MINUTE AND I HAVE A FIVE O'CLOCK HARD STOP.
UM, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO SEE HOW MANY COLLEAGUES ARE HERE VERSUS IF IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE A VOTE TODAY OR WAIT GIVEN THE TIME.
WELL GOOD THING YOU ASKED THAT.
'CAUSE WE ARE, WE ARE DOWN TO FIVE MEMBERS HERE, UM, WHICH MEANS WE BARELY HAVE A QUORUM, SO WE DON'T IT NEEDS TO BE SIX FOR THIS.
SHE MUST HAVE, OH, SHE'S GONE.
AND, AND COUNCILOR SABRINA WHEELER JUST LEFT, SO WE DO NOT HAVE A QUORUM.
[01:40:01]
THE 1 2, 1 2, 3 4.HAN'S LEAVING HAN WHEN HE ACCOUNT VICE MAYOR.
VICE MAYOR, WHEN ARE YOU LEAVING? FIVE O'CLOCK.
UM, BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT DOESN'T GIVE US, YOU KNOW, A TON OF TIME.
I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO, I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO TRY AND GIVE CDD SOME SENSE OF DIRECTION, AT LEAST ON MASS AVE.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE CDD SOME SENSE OF DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, UH, ON MASS AVE.
I, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA GET TO CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, SO I'VE GOT VICE MAYOR DO YOU YIELD FOR, FOR A FEW MINUTES AND GO TO COUNCILOR UZI? UH, SURE.
I WOULD LOVE IT BACK TO MAKE A MOTION AFTERWARDS, BUT HAPPY TO YIELD THE DISCUSSION.
COUNCILLOR UZI, I, UH, JUST POINT OF INFORMATION, I, I THOUGHT PEOPLE WERE SHARING THOUGHTS ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET AS WELL, BUT ARE, ARE WE REALLY TRYING TO STAY FOCUSED JUST ON NORTH MESS? I'M TRYING TO DO ONE AT A TIME.
I'LL, I'LL BE READY TO TALK ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET WHEN YOU ARE COUNCILOR NOLAN.
UM, I DO HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE THEN.
WHAT, 'CAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A FEW PEOPLE WHO FEEL LIKE OPTION TWO, WHICH IS KEEP, UM, DEFINITELY HAVE MA UH, 12 A EXTEND UP TO LINEAR PARK AND EXEMPT SMALLER PARCELS OR JUST KEEP IT MASS 12 AND, AND FRANKLY I BELIEVE I COULD GO EITHER WAY.
I, I LIKE, I THINK THERE'S ELEMENTS OF BOTH OF THEM, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION, WHICH IS, IS THERE A WAY TO SPLIT THEM? IS THERE A REASON WHY IT WAS EIGHT STORIES INSTEAD OF SIX? I'M SURE THERE WAS, AND I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER BECAUSE THAT'S, I I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS FOUR STORIES IS JUST TOO LOW, BUT EIGHT STORIES MAY SEEM TOO HIGH.
I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO WHETHER THAT WAS CONSIDERED AND IF THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
I REALIZE I JUST THREW A MONKEY WRENCH IN, BUT I, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD.
ME TO MR. ROBERTS, UM, THROUGH THE CHAIR.
SO, I MEAN, IT'S A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED.
WE DID, WE DID TALK A LOT ABOUT IT.
I THINK THE EIGHT STORIES, YOU KNOW, IT DOES CO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL, THE MASS APP PLANNING STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH, WHICH TALKED ABOUT WANTING TO, TO ALLOW, YOU KNOW, JUST ALLOW MORE HEIGHT GENERALLY ON MASS AVE, BUT THEN TO WANNA HAVE KIND OF AN INCENTIVE TO, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT, UM, TO, TO ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE USE.
AND SO THAT ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, FEW STORIES WAS KIND OF SEEN AS, AS THE TRADE OFF.
SO THAT WAS THE SORT OF THE ORIGINAL APPROACH.
AND THEN SORT OF GOING, GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO FOUR STORIES WAS AN A, AN ATTEMPT, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE WERE, YOU KNOW, WHICH CAME UP WHILE WE WERE, UM, IN THE HEARING PROCESS FOR THE MASS APP PETITION, AN ATTEMPT TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE, WE LIKE THE IDEA OF AN INCENTIVE.
WE REALLY WANT IT TO BE KIND OF A HARDER, MORE, YOU KNOW, A REALLY MORE SUBSTANTIAL INCENTIVE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS THAT'S AT LEAST HAPPENING RIGHT NOW WITH, UM, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IS THERE'S, THERE'S KIND OF DIFFERENT CUTOFFS OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE, WHERE THE ECONOMICS OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS AT DIFFERENT HEIGHTS LAND.
YOU KNOW, PEOPLE TALK ABOUT HOW SIX STORIES IS KIND OF A SWEET SPOT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU GO UP, YOU, YOU, YOU CO UP TO THE TOP OF THE MID-RISE BUILDING CODE AND ONCE YOU GO ABOVE THAT TO SEVEN STORIES, SO IN, IN SOME WAYS IT, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THAT COULD CHANGE, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, BUILDING CODES COULD CHANGE AND ECONOMICS COULD CHANGE WITH DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION TYPES.
SO WE'RE, WE, WE, WE TRY NOT TO SET THINGS TOO MUCH BASED ON THAT, BUT FROM A STRATEGIC POINT OF VIEW, IF IT WERE SET INSTEAD OF EIGHT STORIES AT, AT SORT OF SEVEN STORIES, THEN YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE ISSUE OF UM, YOU KNOW, THE ECONOMIC FAVORABILITY OF GOING UP TO SIX STORIES WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT THE ACTIVE USE.
AND THE SEVEN STORY MIGHT NOT MAKE THAT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE.
PEOPLE MIGHT SAY, WELL I'VE, I'VE, I'VE GOTTA ADD A WHOLE BUNCH OF COST AND ADD THE ACTIVE USE, WHICH GIVEN, GIVEN THE ECONOMICS MIGHT NOT BE FAVORABLE.
SO WHY NOT JUST STICK WITH SIX STORIES? IF YOU SET IT AT SORT OF FIVE STORIES, THEN YOU'RE NOT REALLY, MAYBE YOU'RE NOT GIVING A STRONG ENOUGH INCENTIVE.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF YOU SAY THAT, IF THE CHOICE IS BETWEEN FIVE STORIES ALL RESIDENTIAL AND SIX STORIES, YOU KNOW, WITH THE ACTIVE GROUND FLOOR, IF YOU WEIGH THE ECONOMICS OF IT, YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL THAT ADDITIONAL SIX, THAT SIX STORY NOW ISN'T REALLY MAKING A LOT OF SENSE, SO YOU MIGHT AS WELL BUILD, BUILD FIVE STORIES.
SO THE, THE GOAL WITH ALL OF THIS IS TO HAVE INCENTIVES THAT GIVE US A KIND OF OUTCOMES WE WANT.
I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, BY SETTING, YOU KNOW, UNDER THIS, YOU KNOW, 12 A SCHEME BY SETTING THE, THE MINIMUM HEIGHT FOR, UH, OR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR, FOR HOUSING ONLY AT FOUR STORIES, WE'RE NOT SAYING WE WANNA SEE FOUR STORY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EVERYWHERE.
[01:45:01]
SAYING WE WANNA GIVE A STRONGER INCENTIVE TO, OR AS STRONG INCENTIVE AS WE THINK WE CAN TO, UM, TO GET THAT ACTIVE USE AND TO RESERVE THE FOUR STORIES ONLY FOR EXCEPTIONAL CASES OF SOMEBODY, MAYBE SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO DO A SMALL ADDITION TO THEIR BUILDING.YOU, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL WITH AN EXISTING BUILDING ON MASS APP.
AND THAT FOUR STORY LIMIT PROVIDE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO DO THAT WITHOUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE CITY COME IN AND SAY, OH, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T, SORRY, YOU CAN'T PUT AN ADDITION ONTO THAT BUILDING BECAUSE NOW YOU NEED TO REDO YOUR WHOLE GROUND FLOOR TO, TO HAVE ACTIVE USE.
SO, SO I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE LANDED ON THOSE DIFFERENT, SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CERTAINLY COULD LOOK AT THINGS IN BETWEEN, BUT ONCE YOU GET CLOSE TO THAT SIX, CLOSER TO THAT SIX STORIES, IT DOESN'T MAKE IT, UM, IT DOESN'T CREATE A MEANINGFUL AND INCENTIVE, ESPECIALLY ON UNDER THE CURRENT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS.
YEAH, IT JUST, IN SOME WAYS I JUST REALIZED LOOKING AT THIS, IT MAY MAKE SENSE IF WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, HEY, FOUR CAN WORK FROM CAMBRIDGE COMMON UP TO PORTER, THEN MAYBE SIX CAN WORK FROM PORTER UP TO LINEAR AND THEN EIGHT WORKS FURTHER UP.
BUT IT, IT DOES COMPLICATE THINGS.
BUT THE FACT IS, SIX STORIES WE KNOW IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE AND IT SEEMS TO BE IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY, RETAIL IS ALSO, OR ACTIVE USE IS ACTUALLY ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.
BUT I, I RECOGNIZE THAT'S, THAT'S NOT ON THE TABLE.
I THINK THAT WOULD'VE BEEN A REALLY GOOD THING TO EXPLORE.
'CAUSE THAT MAKES, IT MAKES INTUITIVE SENSE TOO THAT THE FARTHER AWAY YOU GET, YOU NEED, YOU NEED MORE OF AN INCENTIVE.
SO, UH, IF YOU WANT FEEDBACK ON THIS, IT SEEMS LIKE A COUPLE OF THE REQUIREMENTS, THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE PETITION MAKES SENSE.
AND FOR THE OTHER OPTIONS, UM, I'M, I COULD SUPPORT EITHER ONE.
I DO THINK IF WE DID KEEP THE, THE 12 A OR EXTEND IT, WE, WE NEED TO EXEMPT THOSE SMALLER PARCELS.
UM, BEFORE I GO TO THE VICE MAYOR, I WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED CONS, NOLAN, THAT, YOU KNOW, SIX STORIES SEEMS TO BE WORKING, PEOPLE ARE BUILDING SOME SIX STORY BUILDINGS AND OTHER PARTS, BUT THAT'S WITHOUT THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, RIGHT? SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE GETTING SIX STORIES OF HOUSING, EATING UP ONE WHOLE STORY WITH COMMERCIAL USE AND THEN BUILDING FIVE ABOVE IT OF HOUSING.
THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT TYPE OF PROJECT.
UM, AND, AND I WOULD JUST SAY BEFORE I GO TO THE VICE MAYOR, UM, YOU KNOW, I DO WANT TO TRY TO LOOK AT THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING NEXT WEEK, I GUESS IT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ORDINANCE, THERE'S THE BROWN PETITION.
YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GONNA BE MOVING TOWARDS BUILDING LESS HOUSING IN NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU KNOW, THE INTERIOR OF NEIGHBORHOODS 'CAUSE PEOPLE, WE SHOULD BE BUILDING MORE ON THE CORRIDORS AND HIGHER ON THE CORRIDORS, NOT LESS.
SO ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU WANT, IF YOU SAY I DON'T WANT SIX STORY BUILDINGS AND NEIGHBORHOODS ANYMORE, YOU SHOULD BE SUPPORTING 12 STORY BUILDINGS ON THE CORRIDORS IF WE'RE GONNA REACH OUR HOUSING GOALS, IF YOU, IF YOU KNOW, SO I'M NOT GONNA, I AM IN THIS IF, IF EXTENDING 12 A THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE STREET IS GOING TO IMPACT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON THE MADE THE MOST, THE LARGEST MAJOR CORRIDOR IN THE CITY, UM, I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT THAT, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT POTENTIALLY TO BUILD HOUSING IN OTHER PLACES.
UM, BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT AT THIS POINT.
BUT I DO THINK WE, YOU KNOW, THIS MAY NEED A LITTLE MORE TIME TO COOK, UH, VICE MAYOR.
UM, I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT PERHAPS INSTEAD OF TAKING A VOTE TONIGHT, 'CAUSE THERE'S BEEN SO MANY DIFFERENT IDEAS THROWN AROUND AND THE MAJORITY OR LIKE FOUR OF OUR COLLEAGUES ARE NOT HERE AND I ALSO HAVE TO DASH IN A FEW MINUTES.
UM, I THINK THAT PERHAPS IT WOULD MAKE SENSE JUST TO TALK ABOUT, UM, CAMBRIDGE STREET AND INSTEAD AND LET COUNCILOR SCI MAKE HER POINTS.
I KNOW SHE'S BEEN NICHING TO DO SO.
UM, AND THAT WAY AT LEAST WE GET SOME THOUGHTS AND THEN PERHAPS CDD CAN, YOU KNOW, TAKE AT LEAST THE CONVERSATION AND THEN TALK TO OUR OTHER COLLEAGUES.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE THE FAIREST THING TO DO IN THIS MOMENT.
AND I THINK I'M VERY, YOU KNOW, UH, FEEL LIKE VERY STRONGLY OPPOSED TO HAVING A VOTE WHERE I ACTUALLY DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE I STAND ON THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS, GIVEN ALL THE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT SMALL LOTS AND ALL THAT STUFF AT THIS POINT.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE 10 MINUTES AND WE'RE GONNA LOSE THE QUORUM.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DIG INTO CAMBRIDGE STREET QUITE THAT QUICKLY.
COUNCILLOR ZUZI, YOU HAVE BEEN NIPPING AT THE, YOU KNOW, SO WHY DON'T I TURN THIS LAST PART OVER TO YOU TO TALK ABOUT CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, BUT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK.
I GENERALLY SUPPORT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOTH, THOUGH I THINK THAT WE SHOULDN'T LOWER THE ACTIVE USE THRESHOLD FOR CAMBRIDGE STREET.
AND I, I AM CONCERNED THAT IF WE LOWER THE THRESHOLD TO THREE STORIES, UM, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT TO FOUR STORIES FROM THREE STORIES THAT WE WILL BE INCENTIVIZING TEAR DOWNS AND WE DON'T WANNA DO THAT TO THE FABRIC ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, AND IT WAS REALLY GOOD TO HEAR FROM PATRICK MCGEE ABOUT HOW RETAIL ON CAMBRIDGE STREET IN SOME PLACES IS ACTUALLY VERY PROFITABLE.
[01:50:01]
THINK WE SHOULD KEEP ACTIVE USE AT THREE STORIES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.UM, I THINK WE SHOULD BE, UH, THE FOUR STORY SETBACK AT THE GROUND LEVEL I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
'CAUSE WE DO WANT MORE TREES ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AND IN EAST CAMBRIDGE OVERALL, I DO THINK WE SHOULD BE THINK CONSIDERING DISALLOWING WET LABS OR ELSE NOT ALLOWING THEM TO BE AS OF RIGHT.
SO AT LEAST THE COMMUNITY CAN WEIGH IN ON WET, WET LABS.
AND I, I'M EAGER TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE REAR SETBACK OF FIVE FEET BECAUSE AGAIN, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A SIDE SETBACK AND WE'RE HOPING TO INSPIRE THE PRODUCTION OF HOUSING, WE DO WANT THERE TO BE WINDOWS IN THE FRONT AND IN THE BACK.
AND IF WE HAVE A ZERO, UM, IF WE HAVE AN IF, IF WE HAVE NO SETBACK AT AT THE BACK, THEN WE MAY NOT HAVE WINDOWS AS WELL.
SO I WANTED TO HEAR MORE ABOUT, ARE THERE 85 FOOT LOTS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT LAST QUESTION JUST ONE MORE TIME? THINK I MISSED HER IDEA? I JUST REMEMBER HEARING YOU ALL TALK ABOUT HOW THE LOTS ARE REALLY NARROW ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
ARE, ARE THERE A LOT OF, I THOUGHT, I THINK WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY EARLIER WAS THAT, UM, THAT IF YOU HAVE AN 85 FOOT LOT, THEN THERE IS A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, BUT IF YOU HAVE A LESS THAN 85 FOOT LOT, YOU HAVE A ZERO SETBACK, A REAR SETBACK.
SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE THERE A LOT OF 80 FOOT, UH, LOTS, UH, DEEP LOTS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET? YEAH.
I I APPRECIATE IT THROUGH YOU.
UM, THERE ARE, UH, THERE ARE SEVERAL SMALL LOTS ON CAMBRIDGE STREET AND, AND I DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN ANALYSIS IN, IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I, I SUSPECT THERE ARE A LOT OF LOTS THAT, UM, THAT DON'T, UH, EXTEND 85 FEET BEYOND, UM, CAMBRIDGE STREET.
SO THEORETICALLY YOU COULD HAVE A, A BUILDING THAT, UM, THAT SORT OF MAXES OUT THE, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, UM, GOING STRAIGHT TO THE, THE LOT LINE IF THE, IF THE LOT IS LESS THAN 85 FEET DEEP, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU STILL HAVE UH, BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT THAT WOULD, UH, REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, WINDOWS IN, IN, IN CERTAIN CASES.
SO I DON'T THINK WE THINK THAT IT'S LIKELY THAT, THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AN OUTCOME WHERE YOU'VE GOT A BUILDING MAYBE THAT'S, UH, THAT FRONTS CAMBRIDGE STREET IS SURROUNDED BY PARCELS AND ON THREE SIDES, IT'S, IT'S BLANK WALLS, UM, AND JUST WINDOWS ON, ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
I DON'T, I, I WOULDN'T REALLY EXPECT THAT OUTCOME.
UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE, IT, IT COULD BE ALLOWED THAT YOU COULD GO UP TO THE, THE LOT LINE THERE, BUT IT, IT INTRODUCES A LOT OF OTHER COMPLICATIONS OUTSIDE OF ZONING THAT WOULD PROBABLY PREVENT YOU FROM DOING THAT.
SO, SO WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE A REAR SETBACK OF FIVE FEET OR 10 FEET THROUGH YOU CHAIR MCGOVERN, UM, THROUGH YOU CHAIR? I, AND, AND I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THIS IS, THIS IS NOT PART OF THE CURRENT PETITION AND, AND I DON'T THINK COULD BE, I THINK THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE THE, THE CHARACTER OF, OF THIS PETITION.
UM, WE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, I DON'T THINK THERE'S NECESSARILY A NEED TO INTRODUCE AN ANOTHER SETBACK, UM, BEYOND WHAT, WHAT ALREADY EXISTS BECAUSE I THINK THE, THE OUTCOME THAT YOU ARE, UM, DESCRIBING, I I I DON'T THINK WOULD BE, WOULD BE LIKELY.
AND THE WAY THAT IT'S DESIGNED IS, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WE, WE DO HAVE, UM, SORT OF A HUNDRED FOOT DEPTH LOTS.
UM, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE VARIED ON, ON CAMBRIDGE STREET.
UM, BUT THAT WAS SORT OF HOW IT WAS DESIGNED.
SO YOU, UM, YOU DO HAVE THESE INCREASED SETBACKS AS YOU GET FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE OUTCOME ON, ON PROBABLY MOST DEVELOPMENT AND CERTAINLY MOST SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT LARGER DEVELOPMENTS.
SO WE ARE AT TWO MINUTES TO FIVE AND CONSULAR AZI HAS HAD TO LEAVE.
UM, SO WE DO NOT HAVE A QUORUM, UM, UH, VICE MAYOR
[01:55:01]
AZI, SORRY.UM, SO WE DO NOT HAVE A QUORUM, SO WE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AND FINISH THIS.
AND I THINK WE'LL TALK ABOUT, I KNOW WE'VE BEEN TRYING, THESE, THESE TWO PETITIONS HAVE RUN SORT OF HAND IN HAND THROUGHOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE NEED TO JUST DO ONE ON NEXT MEETING ON NORTH MASS AVE AND THEN DO ANOTHER ONE IN CASE DO THEM SEPARATELY.
WE KEEP TRYING TO PUT ALL THIS TOGETHER AND WE KEEP RUNNING OUTTA TIME AND THAT'S JUST NOT, I DON'T WANT TO, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE SHOWING UP FOR CAMBRIDGE STREET WHO MAY NOT CARE AS MUCH ABOUT NORTH MASS AVE AND THEN WE NEVER GET TO IT BECAUSE WE GET THINGS WE THINK SHOULD GO FAST, DON'T GO FAST.
SO, UM, WE'LL FIGURE THAT OUT AND WE'LL, WE'LL ANNOUNCE THOSE APPROPRIATELY.
UM, SO WE'RE JUST GONNA RECESS, UH, FOR LACK OF A QUORUM.
DON'T FORGET TO GO TO HARVARD SQUARE FOR THE WATCH PARTY TONIGHT.