Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

June 20, 2011

June 20, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights – The Joy of Opportunism

Filed under: City Council,cycling — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 11:36 am

June 20, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights

This Monday’s meeting could prove interesting. There are a number of significant zoning-related matters, but the items that jump right out are Committee Report #4 and Councillor Clarey Kelley’s Order #4. Opportunism apparently knows no bounds. Some may recall Councillor Kelley’s earlier Order in which he (or his ghost writer) prematurely speculated on the retirements of the City Clerk, the City Manager, and various department heads and how best to seize the moment. His colleagues handed him his head for that piece of spectacular rudeness. His latest Order is an attempt to renegotiate the City Manager’s contract based on an inadvertent omission in the 2006 and 2009 contracts that must now be corrected. Could someone loan Councillor Kelley a moral compass? He’s apparently quite lost.

Here are a few items of interest on the Agenda.

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 10-57, regarding a report on Harvard University’s acquisition of three properties formerly owned by the Society of Jesus of New England/Weston School of Theology and affordable housing in Cambridge.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C. Decker, Chair of the Housing Committee, for a public meeting held on May 9, 2011 for the purpose of receiving information regarding plans to sell Craigie Arms (also known as Chapman Arms) and the City’s options to preserve affordability.

Order #7. That the City Council go on record asking Harvard University to work closely and cooperatively with the City Manager, the Affordable Housing Trust, Homeowner’s Rehab, Inc., tenants and others to facilitate the sale of the property to Homeowner’s Rehab, Inc to ensure the continued affordability at Craigie Arms for current and future tenants.   Councillor Decker

I might also add to this the upcoming meeting of the Community Preservation Act Committee scheduled for Tuesday, June 21 at 6:00pm at the Cambridge Senior Center. It is again expected that they will dedicate the maximum 80% for "affordable housing" and the minimum 10% to both open space and historic preservation. Perhaps dedicating so much money and other resources toward "affordable housing" still makes sense, but there never seems to be any effort made to measure the need or the effectiveness of these expenditures. There is a "Freakonomics" concept that if one community (like Cambridge) dedicates a disproportionate amount of resources to this, the effect may be to actually increase the local demand for this housing. Expenditures seem to be driven more by beliefs than by any hard analysis and rarely, if ever, do we see a regional analysis of housing needs and provision. How many people believe that housing agencies ensure that only those with legitimate needs are receiving the benefits of government-subsidized housing? In many respects, it has become just another system to be "gamed".

Manager’s Agenda #12. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Richard Johnson as a member of the Cambridge Water Board for a five year term, effective June 30, 2016.

Here’s to the many men and women who serve without compensation on the many City boards and commissions. Voter turnout and civic responsibility may be in decline, but the tradition is carried on by all those who volunteer for these boards and commissions.

Manager’s Agenda #25. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to proposed zoning language to enable a regional bike share program.

It may seem strange that the zoning code has to be amended to allow this use, but it is a service for a fee just like any other commercial use and the zoning code does spell out what uses are permitted in which zones. One curiosity in the proposed amendment is that all signage and illumination for a Public Bicycle-Sharing Station is exempt from regulation. Does this permit advertisements by companies that might subsidize the bike-sharing program?

Manager’s Agenda #29. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation of the Section 5.28.2 Rezoning Petition.

Unfinished Business #9. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public hearing on May 5, 2011 for the purpose of considering proposed amendments submitted in response to City Council Order No.11 of Jan 24, 2011, in which the Council requested that Community Development Department (CDD) staff engage in a comprehensive review of Section 5.28.2, including the history of the use of the section for special permit applications for conversion of commercial and institutional uses to residential building, and the recent public conversations on this section of the Zoning Ordinance. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after June 20, 2011. Planning Board hearing held May 10, 2011. Petition expires Aug 3, 2011.

This proposed zoning amendment (spurred primarily by a development on Norris Street) will come to a vote either at this meeting or very soon. At issue is the appropriateness of language introduced in the years following the demise of rent control when new housing was being encouraged and when there may have been insufficient attention paid to the unintended consequences of those policies. One interesting idea expressed in this discussion and at the recent Roundtable meeting with the City Council and the Planning Board is to detail what could actually be built in various parts of the city under the current zoning ordinance. At a recent neighborhood study meeting (for Mid-Cambridge), CDD staff showed maps detailing where and how many new housing units could be built as of right without the need to seek a variance. Most proposed zoning changes are done either by developers who want increased densities for their projects (for which they often offer "community benefits" for the privilege) or by neighbors threatened by a specific development proposal. Ideally, the Planning Board and the Community Development Department should conduct "what if" studies throughout the city to identify potential problems before they arise.

Manager’s Agenda #32. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a request for approve of the alteration, layout and acceptance of the portion of Vassar Street that is between Massachusetts Avenue and Audrey Street in the City of Cambridge.

This is about the sidewalk bicycle paths that were underwritten by MIT along Vassar Street. Sadly, there are City staff who believe that the only safe place for cyclists is on the sidewalk, and they choose to ignore any testimony to the contrary. Few people will disagree with the value of such facilities along high-speed arterial roads such as Memorial Drive, but there are strong arguments to be made against such facilities along ordinary roads, especially when the creation of such sidepaths causes on-street lanes to be narrowed to the point that they become less safe for cyclists who choose to travel on the road rather than on the sidewalk (such as the current proposal for Western Avenue). The Vassar Street facilities are, at best, unnecessary.

Unfinished Business #7. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public hearing on Apr 6, 2011 and a follow-up public meeting on May 17, 2011 to consider a petition to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance filed by Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, joined by M.I.T. as land owner, to allow for the creation of a new Special District 15 along a portion of Massachusetts Avenue between Albany Street and Windsor Street opposite the location of the Novartis main campus at the former Necco Building. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after June 6, 2011. Planning Board hearing held Mar 29, 2011. Petition expires July 5, 2011.

Committee Report #5. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public meeting held on June 15, 2011 to continue to consider a petition to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance filed by Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, joined by M.I.T. as land owner, to allow for the creation of a new Special District 15 along a portion of Massachusetts Avenue between Albany Street and Windsor Street opposite the location of the Novartis main campus at the former Necco Building.

There is little doubt that the Novartis Petition, possibly with some amendments and certainly with some "community benefits" forked over, will pass either this week or next. Everybody loves Novartis. In the report, Councillor Reeves notes that the matter of community benefits has been referred to the Government Operations and Rules Committee to explore the issues of what principles should govern the negotiations for community benefits and to develop a formula based on these issues, but nothing has yet come of this. Reeves states that "there should be a community benefit fund and the City Councillors should decide what community agencies should benefit. He himself would tend to favor the settlement houses because they benefit some of the most disadvantaged residents."

It is indeed unfortunate that the Government Operations Committee has chosen not to address this issue. The inherent danger in the increased use of these "community benefits" deals is that the City Council might never reject a zoning petition as long as it has sufficient money promised that can be allocated at the discretion of the City Council. The committee report states that "Novartis is prepared to offer $1 million to go to the City of Cambridge for allocation of such benefits to the community as the City Council determines."

Unfinished Business #8. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public hearing on Apr 6, 2011 for the purpose of considering the re-filed Fox petition to rezone an area primarily along Cottage Park Avenue from Business A-2 to Residence B. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after June 20, 2011. Planning Board hearing held Mar 29, 2011. Petition expires July 5, 2011.

As with the Novartis Petition, this must come to a vote either this week or next, or it will expire. The Planning Board has not yet reported on the re-filed Fox petition, but it gave a negative recommendation in January on the original petition.

Committee Report #4. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Co-Chair of the Government Operations and Rules Committee for a public meeting held on June 8, 2011 to discuss clarification/correction to the City Manager’s contract.

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to submit an order allocating funds from the current budget so that the City Council can hire outside counsel to provide independent advice about the manager’s employment contract and his request to amend it.   Councillor Kelley

These two items will likely guarantee the attendance of the perennial Healy-haters – led by Councillor Kelley’s mentor/ghost writer Richard Clarey who has carried on his vengeful campaign for decades through a variety of venues. It’s one thing to harbor ill feelings about Robert Healy or even to take the position that the City should cave in to every lawsuit filed by those seeking "to milk Mother Cambridge" (as Councillor Reeves once characterized it). It’s an entirely different matter to opportunistically try to use an unintentional error in the wording of the Manager’s contract to renegotiate that contract after the fact. – Robert Winters

June 6, 2011

June 6, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 12:30 am

June 6, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights

The City Council returns Monday to a relatively light agenda. I suspect there will also be some discussion of the major water main break that occurred Saturday night. While most people tend to focus on the inconvenience and losses due to flooded basements, the most serious aspect to the incident was the period of a few hours during which fire protection was seriously compromised due to the lack of any water pressure at fire hydrants in a large portion of the city. Thankfully, there was little or no damage to the Main Library and the Water Department workers did themselves proud by completing all the essential work within one day. A section of Broadway may remain closed for part of the work week as the Trowbridge/Broadway intersection is restored.

Here are a few items of interest on the Agenda:

City Manager’s Agenda #1. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 11-33, regarding the feasibility of using City-installed and managed cameras in the Clifton Street area.

Though I suppose the ACLU whiners may show up to protest this perceived intrusion, hopefully sense will prevail this time and the City Council will give its blessing. On the heels of the City Council’s pinheaded disapproval a few years ago of cameras provided by the federal government (at no cost), one can understand why the City Manager states that "it is not my intention to purchase these cameras absent a City Council endorsement."

There is one annual item from the City Manager about balancing the books prior to the June 30 end of the fiscal year. More interesting, however, is a string of rescissions for money authorized by various loan orders which are no longer necessary. This is the content of City Manager’s Agenda items #20 through #26.

City Manager’s Agenda #18. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order authorizing the City Manager to transfer appropriations of available balances prior to the close of the books for FY10-11.

City Manager’s Agenda #20-26. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to various loan orders requesting the rescission of the remaining amounts of the loan orders:

#20. $5,000 of $1,355,000 authorized by the City Council on May 12, 1997 for the first phase of the Fiber Optic Infrastructure Project. This project has been successfully completed and the balance of $5,000 on the loan order is no longer required.

#21. $315,000 of $315,000 authorized by the City Council on May 11, 1998 for the second phase of the Fiber Optic Infrastructure Project. This project has been successfully completed and the balance of $315,000 on the loan order is no longer required.

#22. $495 of $31,500,000 authorized by the City Council on Feb 23, 2004 for the construction of the new Main Library. This project has been successfully completed and the balance of $495 on the loan order is no longer required.

#23. $1,555 of $157,405 authorized by the City Council on May 20, 2002 for the Public Works Department Sewer Division Infiltration/Inflow Project. This project has been successfully completed and the balance of $1,555 on the loan order is no longer required.

#24. $205,000 of $305,000 authorized by the City Council on Feb 22, 1999 for the Public Works Department Sewer Division. This project has been successfully completed and the balance of $205,000 on the loan order is no longer required.

#25. $277,358 of $5,700,000 authorized by the City Council on June 4, 2007 for renovations to the War Memorial. The War Memorial renovation project has been successfully completed and the balance of $277,358 represents less than 1% of the total project cost including the State grant and other loan authorizations.

#26. $700,000 of $1,000,000 authorized by the City Council on May 18, 2009 for the remediation of soil contamination at Yerxa Road. The original estimate for the remediation of soil contamination and other environmental issues at Yerxa Road was $1,000,000. However, the bids received were considerably lower, thus creating a surplus of $700,000 in the loan authorization.

We tend to expect only requests for additional appropriations, so it’s noteworthy when the opposite is the case. Perhaps most noteworthy is the fact that the Yerxa Road project cost only 30% of what was authorized. There’s also something charming about the $495 left over from the $31,500,000 loan authorization for the Main Library. The overall cost for the new Library and related projects was actually considerably more than $31.5 million.

Unfinished Business #8. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public hearing on Apr 6, 2011 and a follow-up public meeting on May 17, 2011 to consider a petition to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance filed by Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, joined by M.I.T. as land owner, to allow for the creation of a new Special District 15 along a portion of Massachusetts Avenue between Albany Street and Windsor Street opposite the location of the Novartis main campus at the former Necco Building. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after June 6, 2011. Planning Board hearing held Mar 29, 2011. Petition expires July 5, 2011.

This zoning petition could come to a final vote at this meeting. On the other hand, the MIT/Forest City petition affecting a nearby area expires July 13 and there may be some logic in deliberating and voting on these two petitions in some unified way rather than piecemeal.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Assistant City Manager of Community Development and the City Solicitor to provide the City Council with background information on the current ownership of the land that was transferred to Neighbors for a Better Community for the benefit of the Area Four community and whether it has been or is being sold and how the benefits will accrue to the community.   Councillor Simmons

This Order really should be amended to more appropriately reflect the possibly criminal aspects of what happened with the self-serving "Neighbors for a Better Community." The Council Order only says "ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Assistant City Manager of Community Development and the City Solicitor to provide the City Council with background information on the current ownership of the land, whether it has been or is being sold and how the benefits will accrue to the community."

There really should be additional language in this Order directing the City’s Law Department to investigate and potentially prosecute those who have misappropriated funds, though technically this arrangement was made only between the developer and this ad-hoc group during the negotiations prior to a zoning vote. In a related matter, a full accounting of the $195,000 payoff made a decade ago to 13 individuals who protested a project across the street from the Alewife T Station should be made public. That money was initially offered by Oaktree to the Affordable Housing Trust ($60,000) and the Mystic River Watershed Association ($135,000), but it was placed under the control of these 13 individuals instead after some legal conflicts. Where did the money go?

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to contact relevant City officials and the officials of Belmont, Arlington and appropriate State agencies and non-profit agencies such as the Trustees of Reservations to determine if the Silver Maple Forest could be purchased for preservation.   Councillor Kelley

If there’s any of that $135,000 left (see above) it might make a good down payment on the purchase. Perhaps Councillor Kelley can provide one or two thirteenths of the answer. – Robert Winters

June 7 Update: Order #1 was greatly amended before passing on an 8-0 vote.

Amended Order #1     June 6, 2011
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
WHEREAS: Questions continue to be raised by members of the Area Four community regarding what benefits the community has received from monies and land at 131 Harvard Street, the corner of Clark and Harvard Streets, transferred to Neighbors for a Better Community (NBC) for the benefit of the Area Four community; and
WHEREAS: It has come to the attention of the City Council that this land has been sold by NBC for $100,000 after its rejection of an offer of $450,000, which would have resulted in the building of eight affordable homeownership units at 131 Harvard Street and the distribution of the proceeds to community groups for youth and family services; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to provide the City Council with background information and a chronology on the ownership of the land, including the establishment and purposes of the Neighbors for a Better Community 501(C)3, the $450,000 offer from CASCAP and the recent sale for $100,000; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to contact the Attorney General’s Office with a view toward freezing all monies from the sale of the property at 131 Harvard Street and insuring that all proceeds from the sale of the property will ultimately go to the benefit of the community; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to contact the Attorney General’s Office with the request that the Attorney General’s Office investigate whether NBC has violated the obligations conferred by its 501(C)3 status and the purposes set forth in its charter to use its resources for the benefit of the community and further how NBC can be required to fulfill these obligations; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter; and be it further
ORDERED: That the Mayor send a letter to Attorney General Martha Coakley on behalf of the City Council conveying its deep concern for the ability of a nonprofit agency to abuse the community trust and urging the Attorney General to take all possible steps to require the return to the community the benefits to which it is entitled.

May 23, 2011

May 23, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights – Budget Adoption

Filed under: City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 1:45 pm

May 23, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights – Budget Adoption

The main item on the menu is the adoption of the FY2012 Budget and a variety of final authorizations to borrow money for capital projects. The Manager’s Agenda also includes responses to 12 of the 36 items on the 2011 Awaiting Report list. Another 16 items from 2010 remain on Awaiting Report. Perhaps a little more spring cleaning is in order.

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 11-53, regarding a report on way to make the Follen Street/Little Concord Avenue intersection safer for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists.

Bicycle safety expert John Allen has a few things to say regarding the original Order as well as in response to this report. John Allen is the author of Street Smarts, a guide for safe cycling that has been adopted in several states. It is generally best to heed his advice even when it goes against current trends/fads. I know of no one who understands the nuts and bolts of bicycling safety more than John Allen.

Manager’s Agenda #11. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 11-12, regarding a report on any foreseeable tax revenue implications of Vertex’s decision to leave Cambridge.

The analysis from Director of Assessment Bob Reardon indicates that the length of time associated with Vertex’ exodus as well as the continuing high demand for Cambridge lab space will result in no significant tax impacts. The sky shall not fall.

Manager’s Agenda #12. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to information regarding Information Technology (IT), which was requested at the Information Technology Department (ITD) Budget Hearing.

Though much of this report will appeal only to techies, two items are noteworthy:

• Citizen Complaint System – Enhancements to the current Cambridge Request System (CRS) to allow the public to enter a complaint directly to the work order system and receive notification of the work order ticket, an estimate of when the problem will be resolved and notification when the problem is resolved. The Complaint System will include access to a website database that shows the ticket and status.

• An Optimized Search Function – Using Google Search, enhance the search function on the City website to return more relevant information.

Manager’s Agenda #15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to dedicated funding for GLBT Commission activities.

Manager’s Agenda #16. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 11-02, regarding a report on tax treatment of health benefits for couples in same sex marriages.

The first of these provides $2,500 in supplemental funds to the GLBT Commission in addition to continuing support from other departments. This may not satisfy those who would prefer a dedicated staff position, but the whole matter of staffing for this and similar commissions still needs some attention and political will. The second of these indicates that the total financial impact of this added benefit is quite manageable – the estimated cost to the City with full implementation is approximately $12,000 per year; for the School Department the cost with full implementation is estimated to be closer to $21,000 per year.

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to ask the City’s private law firm to waive any statute of limitations defense regarding potential liability to Cambridge for its actions and advice in the Monteiro case. [Charter Right exercised by Vice Mayor Davis on Order Number Fourteen of May 16, 2011.]

Perhaps this Order is now moot since the expiration referenced in this Order occurred yesterday. It’s hard to know for sure what the intent of this Order was, but its author appears to be Councillor Kelley’s mentor Richard Clarey who has been at war with the City Manager for perhaps two decades. On the surface, the Order seems designed to drive a wedge between the City administration and its outside legal counsel. Specifically, if the City’s actions in the dismissal of a problematic employee were done on the advice of this legal counsel, the case can be made that City’s actions were not "retaliation." This Order suggests that the City should retain the option of suing its own legal counsel – not exactly the best move in ongoing litigation.

Budget-related items to be voted at this meeting:

Committee Report #1. Finance Committee Report for public hearings held on May 4, 2011, May 11, 2011 and May 12, 2011 relative to the General Fund Budget for the City of Cambridge for Fiscal Year 2012 and recommending adoption of the budget in the amount of $439,008,170.

Committee Report #2. Finance Committee Report for a public hearing held on May 11, 2011 relative to the Water Fund Budget for the City of Cambridge for Fiscal Year 2012 and recommending adoption of the budget in the amount of $14,902,620.

Committee Report #3. Finance Committee Report for a public hearing held on May 11, 2011 relative to the Public Investment Fund for the City of Cambridge for Fiscal Year 2012 and recommending adoption of the budget in the amount of $11,613,225.

Unfinished Business #10-13, 15-17. Various orders requesting appropriation and authorization to borrow:
• $1,300,000 to provide funds for improvements to Alberico, David Nunes and Fulmore Parks and the establishment of a community garden at Riverside Press Park;
• $33,754,300 to continue sewer projects in the Harvard Square, Agassiz, Western Avenue and Alewife Watershed areas of the City.
• $2,000,000 to provide funds for improvements to several City facilities including the East Cambridge and Inman Square Fire Stations and the Ryan Garage/Simard Building at Public Works;
• $2,000,000 to provide funds for the reconstruction of several streets included in the Complete Streets Initiative as shown in the five year street and sidewalk program;
• $2,000,000 to provide funds for the second phase of the reconstruction of the Harvard Square Tunnel (Cambridge Street Underpass);
• $300,000 to provide funds to facilitate coordination among the various consultants working on the design and planning projects for Kendall Square and perform interim repairs in the area; and
• $3,000,000 to provide funds for the architectural design and construction of an elementary school to be either rebuilt or renovated as part of the multi-year Elementary School Rebuilding Program.

Barring a delayed Rapture, it’s expected that the General Fund Budget ($439,008,170) will pass on an 8-1 vote with Councillor Kelley, as always, voting in the negative. You can expect a speech from Kelley regarding the Law Department budget, possibly conflated with the topic of Charter Right #2. Though the Annual Budget is the single most important vote by the City Council almost every year, there are basically never more than a few minor changes to the Manager’s submitted budget – regardless how much time is spent pontificating about the Budget. High priority items for individual councillors are usually worked out (when feasible) before submission of the proposed Budget, so the adoption is usually noncontroversial. If Cambridge’s financial resources were as strained as many other Massachusetts cities and towns, it might be an entirely different story.

Unfinished Business #14. Ordinance Committee Report for a public meeting held on Mar 2, 2011 to consider a zoning petition originally filed by Chestnut Hill Realty and re-filed by the City Council to create a new section that would allow for the construction of rental units in the basement levels of existing multifamily buildings in Residence C Districts within 1200 feet of Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge Street or the Red Line through a special permit process. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after May 16, 2011. Planning Board hearing held Mar 29, 2011. Petition expires May 31, 2011.

This "workforce housing" petition will likely be voted at this meeting or be allowed to expire if there are insufficient votes to pass it. As has been mentioned here many times, the amount of campaign contributions that flowed from the petitioner to several elected councillors makes this a vote worthy of scrutiny.

Committee Report #4. Ordinance Committee Report for a public hearing on Apr 6, 2011 and a follow-up public meeting on May 17, 2011 to consider a petition to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance filed by Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, joined by M.I.T. as land owner, to allow for the creation of a new Special District 15 along a portion of Massachusetts Avenue between Albany Street and Windsor Street opposite the location of the Novartis main campus at the former Necco Building.

This will likely be Passed to a 2nd Reading tonight, perhaps with the amendments recommended by the Planning Board. When it comes to a final vote, most likely in a few weeks, it will almost certainly be passed. Together with the concurrent MIT/Forest City petition affecting an area just up the street on Mass. Ave., there will likely be a major transformation of Mass. Ave. over the next few year between Sydney Street and the railroad tracks. – Robert Winters

May 20, 2011

Response to City officials’ comments about Concord/Follen

Filed under: Cambridge government,City Council,cycling,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 8:49 pm

Robert Winters has posted a comment (#3 here) to my post about bicycling issues on the May 16 City Council agenda. Robert quotes Assistant City Manager for Community Development Brian Murphy and Traffic, Parking & Transportation Director Susan Clippinger about Follen Street and Little Concord Avenue. Their response, by way of the City Manager, is addressed to the City Council at next week’s meeting.

Their response (again, in comment #3 here) addresses some of the issues with the Follen Street/Concord Avenue installation, and reflects some progress.

Serious design issues, however, will still remain:

  • The configuration still has the same blind corners.
  • Because of the location of the curb cut into the brick plaza, bicyclists traveling away from the Common must still swerve to the right, toward approaching motor traffic, to reach the curb cut at the crosswalk on the far side of Follen Street. Bicyclists entering from the brick plaza are still close to a wall which also obscures motorists’ view of them.
  • Motorists approaching on Follen Street still won’t have a stop sign — see this Google Street View (and still not in 2020)– despite the blind corners.
  • The contraflow bike lane adjacent to wrong-way parking remains.
  • There is another blind corner at the Garden Street end of the pedestrian plaza, particularly for cyclists who continue toward the Radcliffe Quadrangle on the sidewalk (and many do, though that is inadvisable).
  • The “bike box” on Concord Avenue leads to more confusion than anything else, as described here. Also, many cyclists ride east on the north sidewalk, so they can access the plaza directly, posing a risk of head-on collisions with westbound cyclists and pedestrians at the blind corner between the sidewalk and the plaza.

Contraflow bicycle travel would be safer if parking were removed from one side of Follen Street — however, the public insists on using public street space for private car storage. As a bicycling advocate and former Cambridge resident who owned a (rarely used) car and had no other place to park it than the street, I can see both sides of this issue. It is not going to go away. The people who laid out Cambridge’s streets could not foresee the deluge of private motor vehicles that would descend on the city, and had no plan either to accommodate it or to forestall it.

I do think that a very significant safety improvement could be made without removing parking, by reversing the direction of one-way motor traffic on Follen Street and Little Concord Avenue. Then cyclists headed toward the blind corner would be going in the same direction as motorists. The motorists would be going very slowly here, and cyclists could easily merge toward the center of the roadway. A curb cut into the plaza in line with the center of the roadway would avoid cyclists’ having to swerve right. This curb cut would lead cyclists traveling toward the Common to the right side of the street.

A contraflow bike lane could then be installed on the south side of Little Concord Avenue, but it would still be adjacent to wrong-way parking. I’d rather see shared-lane markings far enough from parked cars to allow a motorist to start to exit a parking space without running head-on into a cyclist or forcing that cyclist into oncoming traffic. One-way, slow streets where bicyclists are allowed to travel contraflow are common in Germany, without bike lanes, and research has demonstrated their safety.

As to Murphy’s and Clippinger’s comments:

Motor vehicle volumes on the street are very low and most drivers are ones who live there and use the street regularly. The contraflow lane was installed to improve safety for cyclists by creating a dedicated facility for them to ride in and through the presence of pavement markings to remind motorists that bicyclists are traveling there.

The low motor-vehicle volume argument is an example of what I call “bean counter” safety analysis. I have heard the same argument before from Cara Seiderman, in connection with the wrong-way contraflow lane on Scott Street. This approach offers cyclists and motorists only statistical comfort, leaving them defenseless against actually preventing a crash through their own actions — as in “well, I can’t see over the SUV parked in front of my car, but probably no cyclist is coming so I’ll pull out.”

The bike lane does serve as a buffer to help prevent collisions between cars and other cars, but it doesn’t pass the test of preventing collisions between cars and cyclists. The comforting words “dedicated facility” don’t actually describe how it works in practice. Reminding motorists that bicyclists are traveling in the bike lane doesn’t count for much if the motorists can’t see the bicyclists.

Clippinger describes a safety analysis which looked at generalities about traffic volume. The claim that the dedicated facility was installed to improve safety may describe intention, but it does not describe either the design, or the outcome. This is a crash hotspot, remember. I have described design issues, and some solutions that look rather obvious to me. The city, as usual, installed a boilerplate bike lane design without much insight into whether it actually would be functional and safe.

May 16, 2011

About bicycling issues on City Council agenda tonight, May 16, 2011

Filed under: City Council,cycling,planning — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 11:03 am
A cyclist and a motorist approach the blind corner at Concord Avenue and Follen Street

A motorist cuts off a cyclist at the blind corner of Concord Avenue and Follen Street

The city's own picture of this scene shows a cyclist happily steering straight toward a curb.

A picture of the same scene from the City's Web site shows a cyclist happily steering straight toward a curb, which is cropped out of the picture.

Looking from the opposite direction, this is the path a bicyclist must take, swerving toward traffic to reach the curb cut.

Looking from the opposite direction, this multiple-exposure photo shows the path a bicyclist must take, swerving toward Follen Street traffic to reach the curb cut at the crosswalk.

This post attempts to shed some light on agenda items on tonight’s City Council agenda.

The quoted sections are from another commenter. I’m not sure I know how to reach him, and time is pressing. I don’t know whether I have permission to use his name, so I won’t. The unindented paragraphs  are my own. We’ll start with the other person who commented.

Two of the three items on the city council agenda are interesting examples of problems related to bicycle infrastructure that has been implemented over the past several years.  The third is simply a request to fill potholes, but includes an ignorant comment about bicycles needing to ride near the curb (not true according to Massachusetts law or Cambridge ordinance).

That is agenda item O-7 on the page linked here

The first bicycle facility problem is a contra-flow lane through a blind corner where motorists have no expectation that there will be contra-flow traffic of any sort as they round the corner on a one-way street.

http://bit.ly/iAHCfU

That is agenda item O-3 on the page linked here.

The street view is looking south on Follen Street as it intersects (Little) Concord Avenue.  The bike lane crosses in a contraflow manner from left to right, and then continues across the small brick plaza to the right to join with Garden Street and the continuation of Concord Avenue.  The intersection just beyond the plaza is the same one where Cambridge has installed a bike box critiqued by John Allen

(http://bit.ly/jQN595).

The contraflow bike lane is adjacent to wrong-way parking, another odd feature of this installation — see this for a description and explanation of wrong-way parking:

http://bikexprt.com/bikepol/facil/lanes/contraflow.htm#scottst

Upon reaching the corner, bicyclists have to ride out past a stop bar and stop sign before they can see around the corner. A stop sign requires two actions, a stop and a yield. The yield is what actually prevents a collision — but it is only possible where you can see conflicting traffic.

Many if not most of the bicyclists approaching this intersection are Harvard students headed up to the Radcliffe quadrangle. Are we to assume that they aren’t bright enough to figure out that they must yield? The problem is that nobody ever instructed them, and many have little bicycling experience as they suddenly find themselves dependent on a bicycle for transportation. Also, the stop bar isn’t where there’s anything to yield to unless a pedestrian happens to be crossing — it encourages running the stop sign, sort of like traffic ju-jitsu: aha– fooled ya!.

See Google Street View looking toward the stop sign:

http://tinyurl.com/4yfz9bc

I have a discussion of this contraflow bike lane in the page linked below this paragraph. The third photo down the page shows the stop sign. I prepared the page linked below years ago, shortly after the installation. This was clearly going to be a problem location.

http://bikexprt.com/massfacil/cambridge/harvardsq/litlconc.htm

The curb ramp on the far side of the intersection is located at the end of the crosswalk rather than in line with the bike lane. Bicyclists must ride toward approaching traffic to reach the ramp.

Bicyclists coming in the opposite direction off the little pedestrian plaza are hidden by a wall and subject to similar risks. This entire treatment is a prime example of Cambridge’s principle of Design by Wishful Thinking.

The second problem is at a rather unremarkable intersection, so it is not clear to me why there would be issues.

See Council Order O-19 on the page linked here.

http://bit.ly/kQWgBQ

The street view is looking south on Ellery Street as it approaches Broadway.  Ellery is a narrow one-way street with a bike lane.  Traffic is typically slow, but can be heavy at rush hour.  Broadway is a two-way narrow connecting through street with parking and no bicycle infrastructure in this area.  Traffic typically runs about 25-30mph, slower and heavier at rush hour.  The intersection is also at the corner of a local public high school campus.  Neither street is difficult to cycle on if you have at least modest traffic experience.

There is a flashing yellow and red overhead signal indicating a stop sign for Ellery Street entering from the north.  I tried to find data related to the several accidents cited, but did not see anything apparent on the Cambridge city web site.  I can speculate that most of the car/bike accidents are probably due to scofflaw behavior — either bicyclists in the Ellery bike lane not heeding the stop sign as they continue across Broadway, or wrong-way riders in the Ellery Street bike lane illegally approaching Broadway from the south.  Also likely would be standard right hook, left cross, and failure to yield collisions caused by motorists, but I don’t see why those would be any worse at this intersection.

I see a double-whammy right-hook provocation for bicyclists headed south on Ellery Street, in that the bike lane on the far side of the intersection is to the left of parking (and in the door zone, as is usual in Cambridge), while the bike lane on the near side is at the curb and carried all the way up to the intersection. So, bicyclists are encouraged to overtake motorists on the right, then merge left inside the intersection where motorists turn right.  I think that the high traffic volume and prevalence of high-school students probably also account for the number of crashes. There probably are scofflaw crashes too. Yes, it would be very interesting to see details so as to get a handle on what is actually happening here.

I’m not looking for any answers, but I thought people on this list might be interested in what Cambridge lawmakers are thinking.

May 16, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: City Council,Kendall Square — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 2:23 am

May 16, 2011 City Council Agenda Highlights

There was actually a Special City Council meeting last week (May 9) to move along three capital budget items that were subject to the charter right at the May 2 meeting. Details are available here. The City Manager’s Agenda this week contains a variety of transfers of funds between statutory categories within a number of departmental budgets – general housekeeping in advance of the anticipated vote on the annual budget next week. There are also Planning Board reports on two current zoning petitions – one unfavorable (Chestnut Hill Realty) and one favorable (Novartis) with proposed amendments.

Manager’s Agenda #13. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a recommendation from the Planning Board not to adoption the Chestnut Hill Realty Zoning Petition.

Unfinished Business #15. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public meeting held on Mar 2, 2011 to consider a zoning petition originally filed by Chestnut Hill Realty and re-filed by the City Council to create a new section that would allow for the construction of rental units in the basement levels of existing multifamily buildings in Residence C Districts within 1200 feet of Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge Street or the Red Line through a special permit process. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after May 16, 2011. Planning Board hearing held Mar 29, 2011. Petition expires May 31, 2011.

The City Council could potentially vote on the Chestnut Hill Realty petition at this meeting. This petition reeked of mendacity from its introduction as a vehicle supposedly for the creation of basement "workforce housing." It seemed clearly designed entirely to maximize potential revenue from existing properties. The Planning Board report explains some of the negative aspects of the petition without explicitly calling out the petitioners for their mendacity. One potentially interesting aspect to this petition is the extraordinary amount of money that was passed from the top brass of Chestnut Hill Realty into the campaign accounts of (at least) two city councillors. Even if innocent of attempting to buy votes, the scale of the contributions cast enough doubt to fill a basement (or several basements).

Manager’s Agenda #14. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation on the petition by Novartis Institutes of Biomedical Research to create a new Special District 15 on the site bounded by Massachusetts Avenue, Albany Street, Osborn Street, State Street and Windsor Street.

This petition will likely be passed to a 2nd Reading and come to a final vote in the next few weeks. It seems certain that this petition will prevail with appropriate amendments. The Planning Board seems to have done a good job in proposing design guidelines and regulating the massing of any future buildings, though the 85 foot height limit on the Mass. Ave. frontage may seem a bit high. The maximum height in the affected area could be as great as 140 feet. In any case, this portion of Mass. Ave. and the neighboring section that is the subject of the MIT/Forest City petition will likely soon experience a radical transformation – hopefully for the best.

Charter Right #1. A petition has been received from Theresa M. Stone, Executive Vice-President and Treasurer, MIT, together with a transmittal letter from Steven C. Marsh, Managing Director, MIT Investment Management Company to amend the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Cambridge to add a new section 13.80 to the Zoning Ordinances entitled PUD-5 District and to amend the Zoning Map to add a new PUD-5 District in the Kendall Square area; said petition rezones a 26-acre parcel in the Kendall Square area. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Toomey on Applications and Petitions Number Four of May 2, 2011.] [Text of petition]

The May 9 City Council Roundtable meeting with the Goody Clancey consulting firm working on the Kendall Square/Central Square (K2C2) analysis yielded a fairly optimistic response from most in attendance. The scale of MIT’s proposal for Kendall Square is very significant – enough to have triggered a major backlash movement had it been introduced a decade or so ago – yet most affected parties now seem more interested in working constructively with the City, MIT, and other major property owners in the area to ensure the maximum benefit to the adjacent neighborhoods. The change has been gradual, but there has been a radical shift in the manner in which major development proposals are now received by both elected officials and residents. With some good faith on all sides, there is the possibility of some great outcomes.

At one of the recent East Cambridge Planning Team forums about the future of Kendall Square, I made some suggestions that might have been viewed as ridiculous, i.e. a batting cage and/or a miniature gold course in the heart of the new Kendall Square. I actually wasn’t kidding. Anyone who knows the ways of MIT will understand that the unusual and even the seemingly ridiculous can often be exactly the right match. Perhaps a rollercoaster that wraps around the buildings?

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to designate the appropriate person to fill the pot holes and dangerous road imperfections on the stretch of Putnam Avenue between Western and Massachusetts Avenues, especially those that appear near the curbs where bicyclists must ride.   Vice Mayor Davis

I’m glad someone said it. Usually, the City does an impressive job at patching the potholes at the end of winter. This year it’s been an adventure on many streets, including Pleasant St. between Mass. Ave. and Western Ave., Mt. Auburn Street near Fresh Pond Parkway, many portions of Broadway, and other Cambridge roads. Is this the new traffic calming technique?

Order #9. That the City Council go on record as requesting that the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy maintain the existing State laws governing cable licensing, which adequately protect cities and towns, residents of the Commonwealth, and video service providers.   Vice Mayor Davis

I’m not entirely convinced about this. While I don’t believe cities and towns should lose the ability to negotiate good contracts with potential television providers, it would be a shame if potential competitors to Comcast (The Evil Empire) were dissuaded from doing business in Cambridge. The status quo is not the best.

Order #12. That the City Manager direct the appropriate department heads to install a discreet, unobtrusive, drop down projector presentation screen in the Sullivan Chamber and report back to the City Council.   Councillor Cheung

You might have to rearrange or remove some of the painted portraits of former mayors in order to accommodate the screen. I have some suggestions where you could start.

Order #14. That the City Manager is requested to ask the the City’s private law firm to waive any statute of limitations defense regarding potential liability to Cambridge for its actions and advice in the Monteiro case.   Councillor Kelley

It’s hard to tell what Councillor Kelley’s motive is here. He recently said how he wants the City Council to take over the Law Department (not exactly kosher under the city charter). My guess is that Kelley is just taking direction from his handlers in order to undermine the City’s legal strategy.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Economic Development, Training and Employment Committee for a public meeting held on Apr 26, 2011 to conduct a follow-up meeting on outdated city ordinances.

There are some interesting proposals contained in the committee report. I especially like the idea of permitting food vendors in city parks, though I imagine they would probably be selling organic roll-ups rather than hot dogs or sausages – this is Cambridge after all. I’m a little concerned about some of the proposed changes affecting mixed residential/commercial areas. I don’t believe any of the city councillors live in such zones, but I live right in the middle of one. Will they look after my best interests? Sometimes the only way residents can negotiate for a peaceful existence is when businesses have to seek a variance for a change of use. It doesn’t prevent the change so much as help to ensure that it’s something we can all live with. – Robert Winters

May 2, 2011

May 2, 2011 City Council Agenda – The Budget Cometh

Filed under: City Council,Kendall Square — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 12:50 am

May 2, 2011 City Council Agenda – The Budget Cometh

Top of the Agenda is the Budget Overview by the City Manager, 6 major loan authorizations, and an expenditure related to the consultants addressing planning issues for the Kendall Square/Central Square area. The content of each item speaks for itself. The Budget Hearings start this Wednesday.

Manager’s Agenda #8. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $2,000,000 to provide funds for the second phase of the reconstruction of the Harvard Square Tunnel (Cambridge Street Underpass).

Manager’s Agenda #9. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $300,000 to provide funds to facilitate coordination among the various consultants working on the design and planning projects for Kendall Square and perform interim repairs in the area.

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $1,300,000 to provide funds for improvements to Alberico, David Nunes and Fulmore Parks and the establishment of a community garden at Riverside Press Park.

Manager’s Agenda #11. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $33,754,300 to continue sewer projects in the Harvard Square, Agassiz, Western Avenue and Alewife Watershed areas of the City.

Manager’s Agenda #12. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $3,000,000 to provide funds for the architectural design and construction of an elementary school to be either rebuilt or renovated as part of the multi-year Elementary School Rebuilding Program.

Manager’s Agenda #13. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $2,000,000 to provide funds for improvements to several City facilities including the East Cambridge and Inman Square Fire Stations and the Ryan Garage / Simard Building at Public Works.

Manager’s Agenda #14. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $2,000,000 to provide funds for the reconstruction of several streets included in the Complete Streets Initiative as shown in the five year street and sidewalk program.

Unfinished Business #12. That the FY2012 City Budget be referred to the Finance Committee, with the exception that the Budget Overview be postponed to a certain date, that being the May 2, 2011 City Council meeting and will be placed on Unfinished Business at which time the City Manager will give an overview of the FY2012 City Budget. [Order Number Twelve of Apr 25, 2011 referred to Unfinished Business.]

Discussion and action on several Orders from April 25 were postponed via charter right. These include:

Charter Right #3. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council with a complete and comprehensive list of all concessions made to the City and broader Cambridge community by developers and the universities in exchange for zoning relief, special permits, or Council approval. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Reeves on Order Number Eleven of Apr 25, 2011 (Councillor Cheung).]

Councillor Cheung’s Order concerns the "community benefits" and other forms of soft currency associated with the wheeling and dealing for zoning amendments – a questionable practice that elected officials seem to relish. It’s no wonder that discussion of the Order was postponed.

Charter Right #4. That the City Manager is requested to review all PILOT agreements with non-profits and institutions in the city. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Kelley on Order Number Thirteen of Apr 25, 2011 (Vice Mayor Davis and Councillor Simmons).]

This Order from Councillors Davis and Simmons is motivated by Mayor Menino’s recent initiative in Boston and calls for a review of all existing and potential payment-in-lieu-of-tax agreements with non-profits and institutions in Cambridge. At the last meeting, Vice Mayor Davis expressed some dissatisfaction that Menino had not also gone after religious institutions for taxes. It’s not at all clear what the sponsors of this Order would like to see come out of this review, and it’s worth noting that it was not so long ago that the City of Cambridge executed long-term PILOT agreements with (at least) both Harvard and MIT.

Applications & Petitions #4. A petition has been received from Theresa M. Stone, Executive Vice-President and Treasurer, MIT, together with a transmittal letter from Steven C. Marsh, Managing Director, MIT Investment Management Company to amend the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Cambridge to add a new section 13.80 to the Zoning Ordinances entitled PUD-5 District and to amend the Zoning Map to add a new PUD-5 District in the Kendall Square area; said petition rezones a 26-acre parcel in the Kendall Square area. [Text of petition]

This petition has been anticipated for some time. The full buildout associated with this zoning proposal is very significant, but it’s mostly confined to an area within the existing MIT campus. Neighboring East Cambridge nonetheless has a significant stake in the outcome. This is primarily a good and interesting proposal if anything close to the image presented at public meetings becomes reality. Based on the recent optimistic actions of all the major Kendall Square property owners we’ve seen lately, good things will come – regardless of any role the City or its consultants have yet to play.

Communications #1. A communication was received from Thomas J. LaRosa, Acting General Counsel, Department of Conservation and Recreation, informing the City that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, acting through the DCR, has under consideration the acquisition of approximately 2.2753+ acres of land, or other property interest, in the City of Cambridge. The property is located between a previously protected section of the Watertown Greenway in Watertown and Fresh Pond.

This concerns the railroad right-of-way that runs along Fresh Pond, behind the Shaw’s on Mt. Auburn Street, along the ege of the Mt. Auburn Cemetery and into Watertown. Hopefully, this will soon become a recreational path – a plan that’s been discussed for an eternity but which may finally become a reality.

Resolutions #28-63 by Councillor Reeves are a regurgitation of the Cambridge winners of the Boston Phoenix’s 2011 "Best of Boston" reader contest. That’s 36 totally irrelevant suitably engrossed resolutions costing perhaps $5 or more each plus postage. It’s just great spending other people’s money. This makes you wonder what exactly is the job description of a city councillor.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Director of Traffic, Parking and Transportation to examine how parking spaces are designated for delivery/loading with a view towards reclaiming some of these spaces for the use of the general public.   Councillor Simmons

You know, if the City’s Traffic Board mandated by state law had been appointed, there may have been a vehicle for residents and businesses to actually petition for changes in how these spaces are regulated. Just saying….

Order #7. That the City Council amend Rule 23A which deals with the Order of Business to include a dedicated section for Councillors to make announcements.   Councillor Simmons

Does this really require a change in the Rules just to make occasional announcements? Answer – No.

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee for a public meeting held on Mar 2, 2011 to consider a zoning petition originally filed by Chestnut Hill Realty and re-filed by the City Council to create a new section that would allow for the construction of rental units in the basement levels of existing multifamily buildings in Residence C Districts within 1200 feet of Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge Street or the Red Line through a special permit process.

Communications & Report #1. A communication was received from Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, regarding motion to discharge the Ordinance Committee of the Re-filed Chestnut Hill Zoning Amendment Petition.

As I’ve said before, regardless of the merits this is a case where you have to follow the money. The petitioners (Zuker and company of Chestnut Hill Realty) have contributed obscene amounts of money to the political campaigns of several city councillors. They are asking for the right to squeeze nearly 200 additional units of housing into the basements of existing buildings and have comically referred to this cash bonanza as "workforce housing".

Committee Report #3. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel and Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Co-Chairs of the Government Operations and Rules Committee for a public meeting held on Apr 14, 2011 to discuss moving to a paperless City Council Agenda, connecting City Council goals and City Department staff and City Council Committees to foster efficient and collaborative results and a proposal to amend the Municipal Code to require posting of the City Manager’s contract 96 hours before it is to be voted on by the City Council.

Though I could not attend this meeting, the report seems to suggest that (a) half the councillors would like to keep their printed agendas; and (b) they’re willing to pass either a rules change or an ordinance regarding the posting of a future contract in advance of the vote, but they’re not sure which. Great. Wonderful. But not really all that important. – Robert Winters

April 25, 2011

April 25, 2011 City Council Agenda – An Air of Resignation

Filed under: City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 12:46 am

April 25, 2011 City Council Agenda – An Air of Resignation

The most interesting item on this week’s agenda is a March 10 communication to the Mayor from Councillor Simmons in which she informs him that she has resigned from half (5) of the City Council committees on which she serves. Why only half a resignation? If the job no longer interests you, why not go all the way? Oh yeah – big paycheck, minimal responsibilities, great retirement and health care benefits, and your own personal valet.

Manager’s Agenda #1. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the FY2011 submitted budget and appropriation orders.

This is, of course, the big item on the agenda – the biggest item of the year. The Budget Hearings (mostly pro-forma during which the same councillors ask the same questions they ask every year) are still to come with a final vote expected in mid-May. That said, the Budget Hearings (and the conversations that you can have with City officials while the hearings are happening) can be one of the best lessons for new City Council candidates.

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to begin filing the necessary paperwork with the Federal Railroad Administration to designate the East Cambridge railroad crossings as an official Quiet Zone. [Charter Right exercised on Order Number Three of Apr 4, 2011.]

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to relay opposition to additional train service through East Cambridge until a full environmental impact assessment and a public participation process are completed. [Charter Right exercised on Order Number Four of Apr 4, 2011.]

These two Orders from the April 4 meeting appear to be primarily obstructions to the Tim Murray Express. Normally I find obstructionist tactics to be distasteful, but Lt. Gov. Tim’s fast-tracking of his Worcester to North Station rail plan leaves little other choice.

Charter Right #5. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the City Solicitor and other relevant City staff and report back to the City Council with a detailed and formal legal opinion on the ability of 5.28 conversions to bypass use prohibitions in the Table of Uses. [Charter Right exercised on Order Number Eight of Apr 4, 2011.]

Presumably there will be some kind of legal opinion forthcoming on this before the re-filed zoning petition comes to a vote. It seems clear enough that the answer will not be what Councillor Kelley wants to hear, i.e. that it is often the case that some parts of the zoning code (or any law for that matter) supersede other parts.

Communications #1. A communication was received from Carl F. Barron, transmitting thanks for the resolution on his speedy recovery.

Best wishes to Carl – the man who stuck with Central Square through the toughest of times.

Resolution #13. Welcome Gather Here, a fabric, yarn and fibers store, to Cambridge.   Councillor Seidel

This is in the building next to mine, right next to the new yoga studio. Just down the street is the Broadway Bicycle School. Until recently, this stretch of Broadway was "Antique Row" where at one time there were perhaps 7 businesses dealing in antiques and other vintage goods. They are all gone now, but perhaps we have the nucleus of a new theme for the block – participatory arts and crafts. Gather Here appears to be quite popular – a most welcome addition to the block.

Resolution #57. Happy 50th Birthday wishes to Budget Director David Kale.   Councillor Toomey

David, you don’t look a day over 49! I hope you’ll have my copy of the Budget Book waiting for me Monday night after the councillors get theirs.

Resolution #66. Congratulations to Assistant City Manager for Human Services Ellen Semonoff on being appointed by President Obama as a member of the Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion and Integrative and Public Health.   Councillor Decker, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Maher

An excellent choice by El Presidente. Ellen has always been one of the most sincere and dedicated people I have known in Cambridge City government. It’s a good thing this is just an advisory committee because we’d like to keep her.

Resolution #69. Acknowledge May 22, 2011 as Harvey Milk Day.   Councillor Simmons

Let’s not forget that when Harvey Milk was murdered in 1978, San Francisco Mayor George Moscone was also murdered. The murderer, Dan White, was sentenced to only 5 years in prison after killing these two men. Fortunately, this murderer had the good grace to commit suicide in 1985 a little over a year after being released from prison. How does a double murderer get sentenced to only 5 years in prison? Answer – blame it on the twinkies.

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to confer with relevant City staff and report back to the City Council on the feasibility of allowing property owners to get separate sewerage and water meters so that people are not charged sewerage rates for water used outside the home.   Councillor Kelley

Property owners have had this option for many years, though you might never know it from the Water Department’s website. There is no "sewerage meter" involved – just a separate water meter for outdoor irrigation use. The property owner is billed for the water passing through both meters, but only the domestic use meter is billed for sewerage. Call the Water Department if you have a substantial amount of outdoor water use. There are costs involved in the installation, but it may be worth it if your irrigation use is substantial.

Order #5. That the regular City Council meeting scheduled for Mon, May 9, 2011 be changed to a Round Table for the purpose of discussing the planning process for Kendall and Central Squares with the Community Development Department and the consulting firm Goody Clancy.   Mayor Maher

The public meetings yet to be scheduled by Goody Clancy and the Community Development Department will be the place to go. My guess is that this Roundtable meeting will primarily be an opportunity for a few Red Ribbons to be waved about in honor of an unimpressive effort that will hopefully soon draw to a close in time for a more substantial planning process to commence. If the Red Ribbon Etc. Commission has had any value at all, it will be in the continuing efforts of some business owners and property owners who have taken on initiatives for the betterment of Central Square independent of any ribbons or municipal election campaigns.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to instruct the Director of Traffic, Parking and Transportation to create a plan which would reduce the overall pedestrian crossing distance of the highway to the relocated Lechmere Station by reducing the proposed number of traffic lanes, either through lanes or dedicated turn lanes, and to work with the MassDOT to implement the plan and report back to the City Council.   Councillor Toomey

This Order is a constructive response to a rumored plan from the Dept. of Transportation to actually widen the highway in the vicinity of the Lechmere Station – a plan that is bewildering at best. Every plan to date associated with the relocation of the Lechmere Station to the NorthPoint side of the O’Brien Highway (formerly Bridge Street) indicated an "urban boulevard" that would be much more pedestrian friendly than the current configuration and with no additional traffic lanes. Let’s hope that the urban boulevard prevails over some obsolete highway plan.

Order #11. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council with a complete and comprehensive list of all concessions made to the City and broader Cambridge community by developers and the universities in exchange for zoning relief, special permits, or Council approval.   Councillor Cheung

This is a most interesting order. There are some councillors who believe sincerely in the idea of zoning relief as currency to be spent to purchase "community benefits." Others (including me) find the practice to be the slipperiest of slippery slopes in which almost anything goes as long as the price is sufficiently high. It’s bad enough that the unquenchable desire for additional real estate taxes often conflicts with good planning, but it’s even worse when zoning votes are delivered in exchange for one-time monetary contributions to favored charities. Perhaps this Order together with Order #11 of Feb 7, 2011 and Order #1 of Dec 13, 2010 will help shine a little sunlight onto this questionable practice.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Economic Development, Training and Employment Committee and Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee for a joint public meeting held on Mar 22, 2011 to discuss the future of the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority.

This was a very interesting committee meeting in which a lot of misconceptions about the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority were dispelled. Some very informative background material on the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority is available courtesy of Bob Simha and Joesph Tulimieri.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #1. A communication was received from City Councillor E. Denise Simmons, transmitting her withdrawal from the Transportation, Traffic and Parking, Neighborhood and Long Term Planning, Human Services, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations and University Relations Committees.

This is not the first committee resignation of the current City Council term, but it’s the biggest by far. Councillor Decker quit the Neighborhood and Long-term Planning Committee a year ago and Councillor Toomey quit as co-chair of the Ordinance Committee a few months ago. Councillor Simmons’ resignation from 5 committees is unprecedented in the several decades during which I’ve followed the Cambridge City Council. As Woody Allen once said, "eighty percent of success is just showing up." I’m sure there is a back story of some kind here – perhaps the frustration of dealing with colleagues who feel that "their committee" is a personal venue for acting out. Then again, Councillor Simmons’ Civic Unity Committee is really a committee of one.

Councillor Simmons states in her letter that "the number of committees that I sit on has become an impediment to my effectiveness as a City Councillor." To this I’ll simply note that through the end of March, Councillor Cheung had attended 44 committee meetings and Councillor Seidel had attended 41 committee meetings. Councillor Simmons had attended only 19 committee meetings and had chaired only 5 of them. I have a lot of respect for people who actually show up for work and do their job in exchange for their salary and benefits. For a city councillor to walk away from most of her committee assignments while still enjoying a substantial paycheck and the luxury of a personal staff assistant is despicable. Candidates take note – there may be a City Council seat available this November. – Robert Winters

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress