Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

March 4, 2013

In Like A Lamb – March 4 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 1:32 am

In Like A Lamb – March 4 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

February went out like a lion last week with the signing of a 3-year contract with Manager-to-be Richard Rossi and the unanimous ordination of the Forest City zoning petition that had been the subject of much contrived controversy. In contrast, March arrives in comparative calm. Here’s what caught my attention this week:

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the appropriate City departments to expand enforcement of the prohibition on Cambridge pick-ups by non-Cambridge cabs not specifically called to Cambridge.   Councillor Cheung

Councillor Cheung’s Order asks "to expand enforcement of the prohibition on Cambridge pick-ups by non-Cambridge cabs not specifically called to Cambridge." Well, it’s in the regulations, as they say. That said, doesn’t it seem ridiculous that taxi service is completely balkanized with local city councils dictating who can and cannot pick up fares in their towns? Shouldn’t there be some kind of compact among the various municipalities of Greater Boston – like a taxi free trade zone? I would personally take it a step further and eliminate taxi medallions completely. Whoever can offer the best service at the lowest price should get the business – not who pays the most for a medallion.

Order #3. That the Chair of the Civic Unity Committee is requested to inform the City Council of plans to hold a committee meeting to discuss the Monteiro case and any lessons to be learned from it prior to the current City Manager’s leaving office.   Councillor Kelley

Beat that dead horse, Councillor Kelley. The chief lesson learned should be the importance of jury selection.

Three-fifthsOrder #4. That the City Manager is requested to confer with relevant City staff and report back to the City Council on the feasibility of creating a development program, whether through density bonuses or other means, where residents of new buildings would not be allowed to obtain on-street City parking stickers.   Councillor Kelley

I believe the illegality of this idea has already been settled, but why not get creative? How about we give those residents three-fifths of a parking sticker in honor of their less-than-citizenship status. It should hold us until the 13th Amendment to the City’s Plan E Charter is ratified by two-thirds of the city’s neighborhoods.

Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Information Technology Department to explore the possibility of adding an RSS feed feature to all of the City of Cambridge websites.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

I suppose there’s a way to do that, but I don’t believe the City of Cambridge uses a content management system (CMS) like a typical blog might have. I’m guessing here that Councillor vanBeuzekom wants the content of these pages to be fed directly into news aggregators and the like. Having played around this weekend with RSS feeds for the CCJ site, I know that it’s possible to do this (assuming I haven’t made any huge errors), but it seems like a rather poor idea to do this for "all of the City of Cambridge websites" as stated in the Order. There are, however, particular City web pages where important updates and events are posted. Those pages should have all the appropriate features added to make them easy to be picked up by the various electronic robots roaming the internets.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #1. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting a copy of a letter sent to Attorney Kathryn Brown of Forest City Boston requesting clarifying language contained in the "Letter of Commitment".

I’ve been reading with amusement an account elsewhere that makes this letter into some kind of controversy and a validation of things discussed during last week’s vote on the Forest City petition. To paraphrase Dr. Freud, sometimes a letter is just a letter.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #2. A communication was received from Councillor Craig Kelley regarding discussion about pending lawsuits.

I sometimes wonder if some of our elected councillors are working against the interest of the City and its residents. – RW

February 24, 2013

And the Oscar goes to…. Feb 25, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,City Council — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 11:11 pm

And the Oscar goes to…. Feb 25, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

There are a few major items on the agenda this week: (1) The possible signing of a 3-year contract with Rich Rossi as the next City Manager (starting July 1), and (2) a possible vote on ordination of the Forest City zoning petition. Starting with the big items:

Richard RossiCommittee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, for a public meeting held on Feb 13, 2013 to continue discussions with Attorney Elizabeth Valerio, representing the City Council in negotiations with the next City Manager, Richard Rossi.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #2. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting a copy of a letter sent to Councillor Kelley.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #3. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting the proposed contract between the City of Cambridge and Richard C. Rossi as the next City Manager for the City of Cambridge. [original PDF]

The contract offers a very generous salary for each of the next 3 years, but it’s also interesting in that part of the deal is that Rich Rossi gives up an enormous amount of accrued value in compensatory time and sick leave gathered over his decades of service. The City gets a good deal in the short term, and Mr. Rossi potentially gains in the very long term due to an enhanced pension. Read the contract and draw your own conclusions. I’m sure we’ll hear public comment from the usual suspects. The communication from Councillor Maher to Councillor Kelley is delightful.

Unfinished Business #10. A communication was received from Paula Crane, Administrative Assistant, Office of the City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 30, 2013 to continue discussions on a zoning petition filed by Zevart M. Hollisian, Trustee of Garabed B. Hollisian Trust and L-Z Realty Trust and Seth D. Alexander, President, MIT Investment Management Company to amend the zoning Ordinance and Map by extending the Cambridgeport Revitalization Development District from Green Street out to Massachusetts Avenue in the area adjacent to Blanche Street; said petition includes a map and a commitment letter. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after Feb 25, 2013. Planning Board hearing held Jan 8, 2013. Petition expires Apr 17, 2013.

Manager’s Agenda #13. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Council Order No. 14, dated 2/11/13 regarding the Forest City Petition and letter of commitment to ensure that it is consistent with other letters of commitment, and Council Order No. 15 dated 2/11/13 regarding whether the Forest City Petition would be considered spot zoning. [Legal opinion from Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor]

Communications and Reports from City Officers #4. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting a proposed amendment to the Forest City Zoning Petition and the Letter of Commitment as revised by Forest City to be accepted and incorporated into and made part of the Zoning Ordinance.

This is the Forest City petition and it could come to a final vote at this meeting. It’s been before the City Council in one form or another for about two years now, so please laugh out loud when anyone says that they need more time to study the issue. The votes of most of the city councillors have not changed since early in the process. It’s always been a matter of whether one or two councillors would value the overall public benefit of this petition over their need to cater to a few influential political supporters. The future debate over the potential for new housing development in and around Central Square is yet to come, and it will be a relief if we can allow the redevelopment of that long-neglected stretch of Mass. Ave. to proceed so that we can move on to the more important stuff.

Don’t be surprised if public comment turns into a circus with fear-mongering, accusations of corruption, and speeches by aspiring Council candidates all fighting over the same pool of a thousand votes.

Elsewhere on the City Manager’s Agenda:

Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-65, regarding a report on Sunday openings at the Library.

The bottom line is that even if everyone would love expanded Sunday Library hours, you still need workers to staff the place and that’s not necessarily a sure thing.

Manager’s Agenda #7. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-90, regarding a report on Executive Session to discuss lawsuits.

I’m not sure which lawsuits this refers to, but there will always be some people who want to milk Mother Cambridge.

Manager’s Agenda #15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge retaining the rare distinction of being one of 37 municipalities in the United States with three AAA ratings from the nation’s three major credit rating agencies.

We get a similar report every year around this time. Though it may seem routine, it really is something worth celebrating. I wonder how many of the aspiring Council candidates actually understand its significance.

Resolution #14. Happy 90th Birthday wishes to Mayor Emeritus Walter J. Sullivan.   Councillor Toomey, Councillor Maher

Happy birthday, Walter. You were the first person I ever met at the Count at the old Longfellow School about 30 or so years ago. I don’t know whether I should thank you or blame you for encouraging my interest in the Cambridge elections.

Resolution #15. Congratulations to Saul Tannenbaum on launching a daily compilation of local news in and out of Cambridge titled Cambridge Happenings.   Councillor Cheung

Though Cambridge Happenings is what they call a news aggregator (as opposed to a content provider), our good pal Saul is a pretty damn good content provider as well. Check out Saul’s CCTV site for a sample.

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Election Commission and Information Technology Department on the feasibility of passing an ordinance that requires landlords to provide new tenants with a voter registration form when they move into a property in the City of Cambridge.   Councillor Cheung

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Election Commission and Information Technology Department on the feasibility of providing a service in which residents are able to look up their voter registration status online.   Councillor Cheung

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Election Commission regarding the feasibility of including voter registration forms in the annual census mailings.   Councillor Cheung

These are highlighted because of all the recent interest in elections – not just this year’s municipal election but the game of musical chairs that has been set off by the exit of Senator John Kerry to become Secretary of State. Because Massachusetts is effectively a one party state with the custom of Democrats not challenging incumbent fellow Democrats, it becomes a cascading free-for-all whenever a vacancy occurs. I have no idea whether Markey or Lynch will get the party blessing to become Senator, but if and when one of them is elevated another vacancy for a U.S. Congress seat will then occur. That’s when things could get very interesting. Will one of our State Reps. or State Senators go for the seat? Yes. Maybe one of our city councillors? If a State Rep. or State Senate seat opens up, perhaps a city councillor will go for it (and maybe create a City Council vacancy). In Massachusetts, we get a cascade of vacancies and special elections instead of actual contested elections like you might have in a two-party state. It’s a sad state of affairs.

Order #9. That the City Council schedule a roundtable/working meeting for Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:30pm in the Sullivan Chamber to discuss the Central Square Advisory Committee Report.   Mayor Davis

It’s about time. Remember that the Central Square Advisory Committee Report is ultimately just a collection of good ideas and suggestions. The Community Development Department is now drafting actual proposed zoning language that should enter the public arena sometime this summer.

Order #12. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to instruct the City Solicitor and the appropriate city staff to evaluate the feasibility of revising the PTDM ordinance to include Parking and Transportation Demand Management Plans for "residential developments."   Councillor vanBeuzekom

I’m not really sure what Councillor vanBeuzekom is looking for here. Housing development generally has a relatively low impact on vehicle trips compared to most commercial development. I suspect this may be part of the budding anti-housing movement currently being pushed by people who paradoxically call themselves housing activists.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee, for a public hearing held on Feb 14, 2013 to conduct a follow-up meeting on the development in Kendall Square.

This was an incredibly interesting meeting held in the Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) in Kendall Square. I have to confess that it was my first visit to the CIC. When you arrive you enter your name into a computer and are issued a printed name tag that has a number corresponding to how many times you’ve been there. I had a #1 on my badge, but it looked especially appropriate to see the badge of current Council candidate Tom Stohlman #1. I believe Leland Cheung had a #37 next to his name – not so good in a municipal election year.

It was fascinating to see the beehive of activity in the CIC – almost like a flea market of entrepreneurs busy as can be in chaotic productivity. I may just have to go back there one of these days. – Robert Winters

Kristen von Hoffmann announces candidacy for Cambridge City Council

Filed under: 2013 Election,Cambridge — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 2:34 pm

Feb 24, 2013 – Kristen von Hoffmann announces candidacy for Cambridge City Council

Kristen von HoffmannCambridge resident Kristen von Hoffmann has formally announced her candidacy for Cambridge City Council.

Von Hoffmann, who currently works as the Sustainability Manager for the Cambridge Public Schools, plans on bringing her experience in sustainable practices, financial savings, and education to the municipal government.

Kristen previously taught 5th grade for several years in the area and also founded a local 501(c)(3) non-profit, Greenfox Schools, Inc., that has taught environmental science and math curriculums in Cambridge Public Schools. She was hired in 2010 as the first Sustainability Manager for the Cambridge Public School District. Notably, while she has served as Sustainability Manager, initiatives launched by her office saved the school district $300,000 in under two years.

In regards to her campaign, she states, "I look forward to spending this year listening to the residents of Cambridge, engaging in conversations that explore our values, and using our skills and experience together to improve the well-being of our city."

Janie Katz-Christy, Director of the Green Streets Initiative and a local Cambridge parent says, "I’ve known Kristen for many years now, as a colleague and friend, and have been impressed with her effectiveness, intelligence, and ability to collaborate. I am confident she will be a force for the best interests and overall well-being of the City of Cambridge."

Election Day is on Tuesday, November 5th. For more information about Kristen and her campaign, please visit www.kristenforcambridge.com or email info@kristenforcambridge.com.

Kristen’s Candidate Page can be found at http://vote.cambridgecivic.com/vonhoffmann.htm.
All of the announced and prospective candidates can be found on the 2013 Cambridge Candidate Pages.

February 11, 2013

Marijuana and More – Feb 11, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge Redevelopment Authority,City Council — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 12:41 am

Marijuana and More – Feb 11, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda highlights

Here are a few items that drew my wayward attention:

Manager’s Agenda #3. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation on the Medical Marijuana Interim Zoning Petition.

It would appear that Cambridge is approaching this with the same caution as many other Massachusetts cities and towns. It’s an interesting dilemma that marijuana sales may be legal at such dispensaries, but transporting it to the dispensaries may not be. It will be interesting to see how this evolves.

Manager’s Agenda #4. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a zoning petition received from the Planning Board regarding bicycle parking modifications. [Report]

Accommodation of secure bicycle parking for residents and patrons should be required of all property owners. This zoning petition will essentially apply only to new buildings containing more than three units, but all property owners and managers should really be providing this. It’s a little bizarre that the report requires 38 pages to convey this simple idea. The proposal would be better if it also applied to existing residential and commercial buildings. I say this as a person who accommodates bicycles for tenants of my building, yet my two commercial/residential neighbors provided barely any such accommodation during recent renovations and, in fact, made their structures less inviting for bicycles.

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appointment of D. Margaret Drury to the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority for a 5-year term, effective Apr 12, 2013.

This is a great reappointment and certainly leads you to wonder what role the CRA will play in future Cambridge development.

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to work together with the appropriate city officials including the City Solicitor and report back to the City Council regarding modification of the ordinance (10.12.030) that links the awarding of a one yearlong Visitor Parking Permit per household to the purchase of a $25 Cambridge Resident Parking Permit. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Decker on Order Number Eight of Jan 28, 2013.]

This is a pretty simple idea and a fair one. The Resident Parking Permit fee was recently raised significantly with the acknowledgement that the $25 fee was still very reasonable for the right to park anywhere in Cambridge. At the time when the fee was raised, nobody talked about the fact that this would also apply to Visitor Parking Permits which are used infrequently and which only apply in the immediate neighborhood. It seems very reasonable that a lower fee (or perhaps no fee) should apply for getting only the Visitor Permit. It was a little strange to hear Councillor Decker at the previous meeting characterizing this proposal in terms of potential loss of revenue. Relatively speaking, this is pocket change.

Resolution #33. Resolution on the death of Andrew Jackson Spears.   Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons, Mayor Davis

Andrew Spears was the husband of former Election Commissioner Artis Spears. Together they operated the A.J. Spears Funeral Home, a community institution in the Riverside neighborhood of Cambridge. He was a friend to many Cambridge families.

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to meet with NSTAR company officials to establish a firm timeline for maintenance and replacement plans for the transformers and electrical systems that serve the city to ensure that local businesses and residential communities are fully serviced   Councillor Cheung and Councillor Reeves

It’s unusual to see City Council orders that speak so directly to potential limitations of the essential infrastructure of the city and the need to maintain and enhance this infrastructure in anticipation of future growth. I expect there are some people who would actively oppose this as a means of limiting growth – the same people who would likely advocate cobblestone roads to limit traffic. I recall not so long ago hearing someone speak against renovations of Cambridge’s water treatment facility because he thought this would only lead to more development and more people living in Cambridge.

Order #6. That the City Council call upon members of the Cambridge Congressional Delegation to reject any proposal that seeks to balance the federal budget at the expense of state and local governments.   Councillor Cheung and Mayor Davis

This Order refers to a truly frightening proposal to remove the tax exemption on municipal bonds. I can’t believe there are people in the U.S. Congress who would advocate such a city-killing idea.

Order #10. That the City Manager is hereby requested to appoint a special task force of real estate and engineering professionals to assess and evaluate the current condition of the Foundry property and projected capital needs as well as anticipated expenses of maintaining the building.   Councillor Toomey and Councillor Maher

The battle lines over the future of this building are being drawn with some very different points of view among city councillors. This is just the next round in a continuing tussle.

Order #11. That the City Manager is requested to work with the appropriate city staff to provide a report to the City Council detailing how the City of Cambridge working in conjunction with the DCR will insure that oversize vehicles not be allowed travel along Memorial Drive so that accidents similar to the sad crushing of the tour bus of prospective Harvard Students do not occur again.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

They can start by making sure those heavy rubber hanging mats are all in place as a warning system for oversized vehicles on these DCR roads. Needless to say, it doesn’t help when the bus driver is paying more attention to his GPS than to the road in front of him. This, of course, is a problem everywhere. We have become a nation of robots.

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Craig Kelley, Chair of the Public Safety Committee, for a public meeting held on Nov 20, 2012 to continue discussions on security cameras in the City.

Committee Report #3. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Craig Kelley, Chair of the Public Safety Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 23, 2013 to continue discussions on security cameras in the City.

I don’t expect to see anything sensible happening as a result of these hearings. It seems obvious to many of us that judicious use of cameras on major roads and potential problem areas is just common sense use of available technology.

Committee Report #4. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 24, 2013 to discuss a zoning petition by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, to amend the Zoning Ordinance and Map by creating a new Section 13.80 – Planned Unit Development 5 (PUD-5) District, which includes several parcels totaling approximately 26 acres in the area north of Memorial Drive, east of Ames Street and south of Main Street and Broadway, and would also include a parcel at One Broadway. The new Section 13.80 PUD-5 is intended to allow mixed use developments with increased development densities and heights.

I was recently on an MIT panel that addressed the substance of this petition. Some thoughts on Housing and the MIT/Kendall Petition can be found at http://cambridgecivic.com/?p=2436.

Committee Report #5. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 17, 2013 to discuss the zoning petition filed by Zevart M. Hollisian, Trustee of Garabed B. Hollisian Trust and L-Z Realty Trust and Seth D. Alexander, President, MIT Investment Management Company to amend the Zoning Ordinance and Map by extending the Cambridgeport Revitalization Development District from Green Street out to Massachusetts Avenue in the area adjacent to Blanche Street; said petition includes a map and a commitment letter.

Committee Report #6. A communication was received from Paula Crane, Administrative Assistant, Office of the City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 30, 2013 to continue discussions on a zoning petition filed by Zevart M. Hollisian, Trustee of Garabed B. Hollisian Trust and L-Z Realty Trust and Seth D. Alexander, President, MIT Investment Management Company to amend the zoning Ordinance and Map by extending the Cambridgeport Revitalization Development District from Green Street out to Massachusetts Avenue in the area adjacent to Blanche Street; said petition includes a map and a commitment letter.

The Planning Board delivered its report at the last Council meeting and now the City Council has the report from the Ordinance Committee. The City Council may now be in a position to pass the petition to a 2nd Reading and get this petition in the queue for ordination in a few weeks. All the ducks appear to be in a row, but election year politics could still be a problem. Those of us who have followed all of the Central Square conversations over the last couple of years know that the really interesting zoning deliberations are yet to come. This petition was never more than a minor revision to the Cambridgeport Revitalization Development District (CRDD) with the potential to improve a long-neglected block of Mass. Ave. It will be good to get a few other benefits out of the process, but this is really just a warm-up to something much more interesting. – RW

Post-meeting update: The City Council passed the Forest City petition to a 2nd Reading at this meeting on a 7-2 vote with Councillors vanBeuzekom and Kelley voting NO while saying this would be "premature". It was Councillor Reeves who then correctly noted that this is the 2nd time the petition has been submitted and that it’s been batted around now for nearly a year. There’s no way to logically conclude that advancing this petition is "premature". The petition could come to a final vote as soon as Mon, Feb 25.

February 10, 2013

Housing and the Kendall Square/MIT Petition

Filed under: Cambridge,Kendall Square,MIT,planning — Tags: — Robert Winters @ 6:19 pm

Housing and the Kendall Square/MIT Petition

There was a forum at MIT on Wed, Feb 6 hosted by the MIT Graduate Student Council that addressed some of the issues associated with the current MIT/Kendall Sq. zoning petition now before the Cambridge Planning Board and the Cambridge City Council. This forum was intended for an MIT audience, and only MIT affiliates were invited. It was an honor to have been asked to be a panelist at this forum. The forum was very well attended and required an overflow room to accommodate all the graduate students, undergraduates, post-docs, faculty, staff and administration who came to hear the plans and ask questions.

The good folks of the MIT GSC know how to run a very good meeting that showcases multiple viewpoints while refraining from advocacy. Special acknowledgement goes to GSC President Brian Spatocco who deserves to one day be the mayor or governor of somewhere, somehow, based on his ability to be so informative, fair, and objective.

After the introductions, the forum opened with Israel Ruiz (MIT Executive Vice-President & Treasurer) and Steve Marsh (Managing Director of Real Estate, MIT Investment Management Corporation – MITIMCo) explaining the elements of the zoning petition and its purpose. The panelists were Martin Schmidt (Associate Provost & Prof. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science), Linda Patton (Asst. Director of Off-Campus Housing), Bob Simha (Director of Campus Planning, 1960-2001 and DUSP Lecturer), Jonathan King (Prof. of Biology), Robert Winters (mathematics lecturer, editor of Cambridge Civic Journal), Ruth Perry (Prof. of Literature), and Thomas Kochan (2030 Faculty Task Force & Professor of Management).

Though the organizers were aware of which panelists might speak favorably or unfavorably about the zoning petition (so that they could provide balance), there were no conditions on what specific topics each panelist could address. I chose to focus on the context of housing for graduate students and on the affordability of housing in general. I tried to look at things from my point of view as someone who was an MIT graduate student starting in 1978 and who bought a three-family house in 1985 where I continue to live today. Though I may have skipped a point or two, here are the points I tried to make during my presentation:

The situation as it used to be (circa 1978):

1) There was a significant supply of multi-family housing stock in Cambridge.

2) Rent control was the law for much of the housing stock.

3) The great majority of graduate students preferred to live off-campus rather than in MIT dormitories.

4) Most graduate students were content to live in housemate situations, often with 3 or 4 or more to an apartment. Luxury accommodations were not in demand.

5) There were relatively few post-docs.

6) Kendall Square as a job generator did not really exist.

What happened? (the perfect storm)

1) Rent control ended as a result of a 1994 statewide initiative petition.

2) Much of the multi-family housing stock was converted to (high-end) condominiums.

3) Kendall Square and elsewhere was developed without concurrent housing – greatly increasing the pressure on existing local housing stock for both rental and ownership opportunities.

4) There was a significant increase in post-doc opportunities (in lieu of tenure-track faculty opportunities) – significantly increasing the grad/post-doc pool of people competing for housing.

5) Changing expectations – grad students/post-docs are demanding much higher quality housing, often shunning housemate situations.

6) Among some grads/post-docs, there is a greater need to be close to their labs.

7) There has been a national shift toward people preferring to live in urban environments, reversing the earlier pro-suburban movement among faculty, professional people, and seniors.

8) Any new housing built in and around Kendall Square will also be occupied by people who work in Boston and elsewhere.

The Net Effect:

All of these factors (and more) affect the availability and affordability of housing in and around Cambridge – not just for graduate students but for everyone. The problem is pervasive and is compounded by the resistance by many existing residents toward the construction of new housing in Cambridge and elsewhere. The isolated construction of a limited amount of housing anywhere in Cambridge will have a negligible effect on the overall housing problem. Indeed, it can even paradoxically have the opposite effect by attracting people toward this limited supply of new units who will then bid up the price to create a local "bubble" in the price of housing.

Indeed, the only way to reverse this "perfect storm" is to advocate for significant amounts of new housing in Cambridge, in Somerville, in Allston, in Charlestown, and elsewhere in the greater Boston area. Only when there is a range of housing choices at various rents and locations will any kind of rental housing market be restored in which people can make rational economic choices such as living a little further away or in less luxury in exchange for paying less rent. Trying to create a smattering of "affordable housing" units via inclusionary zoning or government subsidy will never have more than a limited effect on the essential problem. There are just too many factors conspiring to make housing unaffordable. If graduate students really want affordable housing, they should be clamoring for many thousands of housing units to be built everywhere in the area – and not just in Kendall Square and Cambridge.

Locally, it may well be that condominium conversion has had the greatest impact on this loss of affordability. Where once there were streets lined with two-family houses and triple-deckers that provided affordable housing for a resident owner AND for the other tenants in a building (including many graduate students), there are now luxury condominiums where the prices have been bid up to the point of unaffordability except for those in the upper income echelons. The only "working class" residents remaining are those who bought their housing long ago, inherited it, married well, or those with some expertise in benefiting from government-subsidized housing and related programs.

There are also people like me who bought their homes and continued to rent apartments to graduate students, post-docs, and others and who managed to pay off their mortgages without ever excessively raising rents. My affordable housing continues to provide the affordable housing for two other families who were graduate students when they first arrived. Cambridge would be a better place today if more of its two- and three-family homes had never been turned into luxury condominiums. Failure to put some limits on that condominium conversion may be the single greatest reason why MIT graduate students can no longer find affordable housing opportunities in Cambridge. This is also one of the greatest public policy failures by Cambridge elected officials who put all their faith in rent control. Building "affordable housing" today really is like closing the stable doors long after the horses have run away.

The MIT/Kendall Petition

This petition basically redefines the upper limits (heights, density) of what might be constructed in the area east of Ames Street, south of Main Street (plus the area around One Broadway to Broad Canal), and down to Memorial Drive. This petition is both timely and appropriate. This area has always had a mix of uses, including industrial uses. It’s also located at a major Red Line T station, and virtually all planning professionals agree that it’s best to concentrate density close to public transportation. The petition would only define the envelope of what could be built and not precisely what will be built.

Any debate regarding the appropriateness of commercial buildings vs. academic buildings vs. residential buildings in the petition area should really not be taking place before the Cambridge Planning Board or the Cambridge City Council (though this may affect how the petition is received by these respective bodies). This debate is properly one that must occur within the MIT community – administration, real estate investment people, faculty, staff, and students – and preferably also among those who live and work in the surrounding area.

MIT/Kendall plan - courtesy of Israel Ruiz
photo from MIT’s The Tech

Text of MIT/Kendall Petition

Jan 11, 2013 Memo from Community Development Dept. (CDD)

Regarding the graduate student housing issue

MIT can provide a good "Plan B" option for graduate students and post-docs by having ample on-campus and near-campus MIT-owned residential properties (especially for those who need to be close to labs, etc.), but this will barely make a dent in the larger problem. Many, perhaps most, graduate students and post-docs will continue to seek housing options off-campus – preferably within walking or bicycling distance. The focus has to be on increasing housing options within a reasonable distance of the MIT campus and not just on building housing within the MIT campus. Unfortunately, this is not something that MIT can unilaterally accomplish. It also requires action by local and state government AND by the developers who will ultimately build sufficient housing to restore some kind of viable housing market. Building "affordable housing" is fundamentally just politically expedient window-dressing.

A note on transportation

People really are choosing to be less reliant on automobiles, so public transportation infrastructure has to grow and to provide more frequent service and more reliable connections, and the entire system has to evolve from a hub-and-spokes model to more of a regional network. Otherwise we will be forever limited by the capacity of the hub in Boston. In the coming decades it will be very advantageous if a variety of new transit lines can be developed that do not require passing through the hub of Boston.

Etcetera

Whatever comes of the MIT/Kendall petition and of future plans for the petition area, it is essential that the results should not be boring. There really is a place for food trucks, diners, bumper cars, miniature golf, and other things that will have great appeal to many people – especially to MIT affiliates who have always had a love for things eclectic, entertaining, and affordable. There’s a reason why those food trucks are so popular. Those whose memories go back several decades understand that those food trucks are modern versions of the old F&T Diner. There has to be a place in the future East Campus where modern-day memories will be created – the 21st Century incarnations of the F&T, Pritchett Lounge, and the Muddy Charles Pub. People can reasonably debate the relative merits of housing vs. academic buildings vs. commercial buildings that will help finance long-overdue renovations of existing MIT buildings. However, if the future is boring and pathetically predictable, that will be unforgivable. – Robert Winters

Comments?

F&T 1

F&T 2

F&T 3

January 27, 2013

Everything from Zoning to Soda Pop – Jan 28, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 11:58 pm

Everything from Zoning to Soda Pop – Jan 28, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

One apparently overdue item not appearing on this week’s agenda is the text of the proposed contract between the City Council and City-Manager-To-Be Richard Rossi. Order #6 of Dec 3, 2012 stated: "That a contract which sets forth, inter alia, the provisions specified above, shall be provided by the Chair of the Government Operations and Rules Committee to the City Council for approval no later than Jan 7, 2013."

The Gov’t Operations Committee has since met in Executive Session on Dec 19, Jan 3, and Jan 23 on this matter, and it was expected that a proposed contract would be made available for public review by now. [Pursuant to Council Order #11 of May 2, 2011 and the City Council Rules, "The committee shall also be responsible for negotiating the City Manager’s contract of employment and shall ensure that the contract the committee recommends to the City Council for adoption is posted on the City Council website at least ninety-six (96) hours prior to adoption.] There’s no hurry since Bob Healy’s contract extends through June 30, 2013. Here are the last three contracts for reference:

2009-2013 contract   2006-2009 contract   2002-2006 contract

Manager’s Agenda #4. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a recommendation from the Cambridge Historical Commission to approve the landmark designation for the Second Baptist/St. Francis of Assisi Church at 325 Cambridge Street.

We are fortunate to have the great staff of the Cambridge Historical Commission who produce reports like this one. You can always count on there being interesting information in these reports.

Manager’s Agenda #15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the Planning Board recommendation on the Forest City/Millennium Pharmaceuticals Zoning Petition.

The Planning Board unanimously recommends adoption of the petition. The proposed amendment and related development plan aligns well with recent recommendations of the Central Square Advisory Committee 2011/2012. It will dramatically improve the retail frontage of a block that has been an embarassment for decades. The new retail will focus on local businesses. The new development will provide office space (primarily) for Millennium – a locally spawned company that works primarily in oncology research and development, i.e. cures for cancer. The latest letter of commitment also promises the development of housing wherever a future Cambridge site can be located that will include a minimum of 25 "affordable" inclusionary housing units.

The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on the petition on Jan 16 and forwarded it to the full City Council w/o recommendation while also keeping the matter in committee. It could be passed to a 2nd Reading at the Jan 28 Council meeting which would make it eligible for ordination as early as mid-February. There will be another Ordinance Committee meeting on the petition on Wed, Jan 30. The expiration date of the petition is Apr 17. (Zoning Petitions) It will be interesting to see how this petition is eventually voted – and if politics trumps reason.

Manager’s Agenda #16. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the Planning Board recommendation on the City Council Petition to amend Section 13.59.33 Building and Site Requirements for Active Uses and Open Spaces, to delete requirement number 5 requiring public access in ground floor cafeterias.

Unfinished Business #10. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 9, 2013 to amend the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Cambridge by amending Section 13.59.33 Building and Site Design Requirements for Active Uses and Open Spaces by deleting condition numbered (5) which reads: In order to promote pedestrian activity on adjacent public streets from tenants and employees within commercial buildings, any cafeteria serving such commercial space may be located only on the ground floor level of a building and must be opened to the public at lease twenty hours per week. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after Jan 28, 2013. Planning Board hearing held Dec 18, 2012. Petition expires Apr 9, 2013.

This is relatively noncontroversial and reflects the evolution of the Kendall Square area over the last decade. There’s a good chance it will be ordained at this meeting.

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to arrange publicity about Earth Hour 2013 including information on the city web site, calendar, emails, cable channel and in front of City Hall so that as many people as possible are encouraged to participate.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

I’ll just take this opportunity to once again say how little value I place on token events like this. I used to help organize Cambridge Earth Day events and eventually came to see such events as meaningless distractions (or opportunities to have bands play on the Esplanade sponsored by local radio stations). If you believe in good environmental practices, you should live those beliefs. Turning off your lights for an hour so that people can witness your righteousness accomplishes nothing.

Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to work together with the appropriate city officials including the City Solicitor and report back to the City Council regarding modification of the ordinance (10.12.030) that links the awarding of a one yearlong Visitor Parking Permit per household to the purchase of a $25 Cambridge Resident Parking Permit.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

I guess nobody thought of this when they increased the Resident Parking Permit fee from $8 to $20 then $25. The intention of this Order is to allow residents who do not own a car to purchase an annual Visitor Pass for $10 instead of $25.

Order #9. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Cambridge Public Health Department and report back to the City Council on the status of any health measure in effect in Cambridge which would ban tobacco sales in pharmacies and drug stores.   Councillor Cheung

My instinct was to make some snarky comment about how tobacco junkies would just drive further to feed their habits, and maybe this is the truth. However, the Order notes that "According to the Massachusetts Municipal Association, 46 municipalities throughout Massachusetts, including Boston, Newton, Worcester, Somerville, Lowell, Brookline, Salem, Springfield, and Watertown have banned tobacco sales in pharmacies and drug stores." So the junkies will only have to drive to Arlington or buy it somewhere other than a drug store. It seems to me that this initiative will do little to convince people not to smoke and simply shift the sales to other outlets. Nothing solved.

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C. Decker, Chair of the Community Health Committee for a public meeting held on Dec 19, 2012 to discuss a ban on plastic bags.

If you’ve ever taken the tour of the Charlestown recycling facility where Cambridge recyclables are processed you’ll know how much difficulty plastic grocery bags can create in the process. They should never be included among curbside recyclables. You certainly don’t need them for buying groceries. Bringing your own reusable bags or boxes is a better option. However, the recommended Order says, "That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to instruct the City Solicitor to prepare a draft ordinance that will ban the use of plastic bags in the city." This appears to extend beyond grocery bags. What about plastic trash bags?

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Paula Crane, Administrative Assistant, City Clerk’s Office, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C. Decker, Chair of the Community Health Committee for a public meeting held on Jan 9, 2013 to discuss limiting the size of soda and sugar-sweetened beverages sold.

Initiatives like this are evidence that we’ve given up on education in favor of legislation. Rather than convince people to not swill down 2-liter bottles of Coke, we pass laws limiting what you can consume and/or how much you can consume. A more intelligent approach would be to require that drinks be sold on a strict per-volume basis so that there’s no advantage associated with super-sized drinks. In other words, if 60¢ buys you 12 ounces, $1 will buy you 20 ounces – the same 5¢ per ounce regardless of size. This won’t work with free refills, of course. Councillor Decker’s view: "She stated that while no one wants their choice to be taken away, as a larger society we need to ask what the tradeoffs are for the larger good." Yeah, that’s exactly who I want determining what’s good for me.

Finally, a few reports:

Miscellaneous #1. Transmitting notification of the 2012 Town Gown Reports.

Miscellaneous #2. Transmitting notification of the 2012 Public Health Annual Report.

Comments?

January 13, 2013

On the Jan 14, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 11:53 pm

On the Jan 14, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Here are the items that caught my attention:

City Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-145, regarding a report on how the City might provide a reduced rate Hubway bike-share membership to its limited income residents.

The communication from Brian Murphy (CDD) makes abundantly clear just how affordable and heavily subsidized Hubway already is. Perhaps Councillor vanBeuzekom’s Order needs an additional clause calling on the City to assign staff to pedal the bikes and ring their little bells for the helpless citizens of Cambridge.

City Manager’s Agenda #9. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Council Order Number 7 of 9/10/12 and Council Order Number 3 of 1/7/2013, regarding funding for Upward Bound.

It should surprise no one that our ever-generous City is coming forward with short-term funding to allow this academic year’s program to continue to its conclusion. However, this federally-supported program is not ripe for indefinite City funding far into the future. Note especially the Manager’s advice: "I will continue to strive to identify other funding sources for future years. However, unless, and until that goal is achieved, I would advise the program leaders to not commence enrollment for the 2013-2014 Academic term."

Resolution #9. Congratulating Nancy Glowa on her appointment as City Solicitor.   Mayor Davis

Yes, congratulations indeed.

Order #1. That the City Council move to Executive Session at the City Council meeting of Jan 14, 2013 to obtain legal advice and to discuss strategy with the City Solicitor regarding threatened litigation with respect to the Open Meeting Law complaint filed with the Attorney General by Tom Stohlman.   Mayor Davis

Those of us who have served on City boards and commissions have become aware of some of the unintended consequences of recent revisions and interpretations of the state’s Open Meeting Law. For example, it has been suggested that members of advisory committees with no regulatory function should refrain from ordinary or e-mail conversation outside of the setting of a public meeting. I would like to respectfully suggest that the State Legislature review the current law in regard to boards with no regulatory functions. There are good reasons for open meeting protocols for elected bodies and regulatory bodies. On the other hand, Mr. Stohlman’s complaint regarding the City Council’s adherence to the Open Meeting Law serves no useful purpose and focuses on the trees rather than the forest.

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Assistant City Manager for Community Development and any other appropriate City personnel, Renae Gray from the Area 4 neighborhood, and any other appropriate group or individuals from that neighborhood to initiate the process of renaming Area 4 to a more appropriate name.   Vice Mayor Simmons

The intent of this Order has been around for a while. However, I believe there’s a misunderstanding expressed in the Order regarding the origin of the "Area 4" name. Vice Mayor Simmons says, "Area 4 is one of only two neighborhoods in the City of Cambridge that is known by its police district number, as opposed to a formal name." In fact, the name "Area 4" is not a police district number. Its origin dates to a 1953 report by the Cambridge Planning Board called "Thirteen Neighborhoods: One City". Mark Fortune was the planning director at that time. The report states that, "The thirteen neighborhoods of Cambridge were defined by the Planning Board staff and approved by the Planning Board in 1952 after years of study." [Original Map]

Some of the more invented neighborhoods (like Area 6) later adopted more acceptable names (like Mid-Cambridge). Much of "Area Four" today was historically known as Cambridgeport, though the people of Area 5 have successfully appropriated that name. The truth is that people in any neighborhood can use whatever name they wish. If it sticks, and if the political people choose to use that name, it will eventually become the "official" name. It’s not so clear that having City staff meet with a few selected individuals in a neighborhood is the right way to assign a name to any neighborhood. The bottom line about Cambridge is that no person or group of people speaks for any neighborhood in this city. Only neighborhood-wide consensus about the name of a given area can define the name of that area.

This applies emphatically to those who are now referring to Central Square simply as "Central," and doubly for the recent reference to the stretch of lower Mass. Ave. between Lafayette Square and MIT as "LoMa". I almost wretched when I heard that.

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to investigate the possibility of a gun buy-back program in Cambridge.   Mayor Davis

You knew that one was coming.

Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the appropriate departments to initiate a plan of action setting up a procedure for future projects and report back to the City Council.   Councillor Cheung

I’m not sure what exactly Councillor Cheung is getting at with this Order. The text of the Order refers to "debris removal, including but not limited to hazardous waste," but one would think there must already be standards for dealing with these materials. It seems pretty certain that this is spelled out in state regulations.

Order #11. That the City Manager confer with the License Commission, Community Development Department, Planning Board and Board of Zoning Appeals on the logistic of deliveries of trash removal from business issue and report back with relevant information and ideas for improvement to the Cambridge City Council.   Councillor Cheung

Though much of this is probably already addressed in building codes, the subject of this Order has some value. There are many instances where the provision of recycling services and waste disposal have been compromised by building design and, quite significantly, by renovation. In the neverending quest to produce more rentable space, basements, alleys, rear yards, etc. are often designed in a way that makes these basic services unnecessarily difficult. The Planning Board currently is studying a similar issue regarding the provision of bicycle parking.

Order #12. That the City Council go on record urging Harvard University to give serious consideration to Homeowner’s Rehab’s bid to purchase Putnam Square Apartments and to work closely and cooperatively with the City, Homeowner’s Rehab, Inc., tenants and others to ensure a successful sale of the property to Homeowner’s Rehab, Inc. so that Putnam Square Apartments may continue to provide affordable housing for current and future elderly and disabled tenants.   Councillor Decker

Knock ’em dead, Marjorie. The key statement in the Order is "The City of Cambridge believes the affordability of this building is legally bound into perpetuity in exchange for the agreements and variances Harvard was granted prior to the development of 2 Mt. Auburn committing it as an affordable building to Cambridge seniors." That said, it seems a bit over the top to demand that Harvard donate "100% of the profits from the sale of the building to the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund." Sometimes I wonder if our City’s elected officials would move to carry out the City equivalent of "nationalizing the housing industry" if they could find a legal way to pull it off. Isn’t that what rent control was all about?

Committee Report #3. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 3, 2013 to continue discussion with Attorney Elizabeth Valerio, representing the City Council in negotiations with the next City Manager, Richard Rossi.

Not if Tom Stohlman can help it! – RW

January 7, 2013

A Sampler from the Jan 7, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,Kendall Square,planning — Tags: — Robert Winters @ 12:40 am

A Sampler from the Jan 7, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda

The 2013 City Council season opens this Monday with little at bat and a lot on deck. Here is a sampler of some interesting agenda items:

Communications #4. A communication was received from Tom Stohlman transmitting a copy of a letter to Ms. Amy Nable of the MA Attorney General’s Office in response to his Open Meeting Law Complaint.

This is an interesting interpretation of the Open Meeting Law. It seems to suggest that the only legitimate legislative actions the City Council or any public body can propose is the kind that’s dreamt up in a vacuum by an individual or that emerges spontaneously on the floor of the City Council. I don’t think ANY legislative body works this way nor do I think any effective organization or group of individuals works this way. People talk to each other. Elected officials talk to each other (or at least we hope this is the case). Sometimes a consensus around a good idea develops before the whole group gets together. The public gets a chance to chime in, discussion ensues, and a vote is taken. What is to be gained by turning elected officials into robots in straitjackets? What is so offensive about the practice of allowing councillors to individually sign on as sponsors of a City Council Order prior to voting on the record in favor of the Order? If you are unhappy about the decision to hire Rich Rossi as City Manager for a few years, so be it, but why make such a whine out of sour grapes?

Resolution #15. Resolution on the death of Karen Klinger.   Councillor Cheung

Karen Klinger, photo from CCTVWhen I receive email messages from Cambridge people, I confess to classifying the senders mainly into three categories: Friends, Civics, and Politics. Only my real friends are classified as Friends. I lump much of the mail I receive into the Politics category and, quite frankly, I don’t put a lot of weight in that stuff. The special category is Civics – for people who are really trying to do all the best things a citizen should do. These are the constructive people, the thoughtful people, and many of them I eventually call Friends. Karen Klinger was a Civic person, well on her way to being a Friend – a constructive and thoughtful citizen who did not participate in civic life merely to inflate her ego or to obstruct whatever comes along. Karen and I would often ride together on the bike rides sponsored twice per year by the Cambridge Bicycle Committee and we would catch up on things as we rode through the streets of Cambridge.

When I heard that Karen had died after an extended illness, I looked back at some of the messages we had exchanged over the last few years. Just two years ago when fellow cyclist Henry Lewis died suddenly, Karen wrote these haunting words: "That’s so sad about Henry Lewis. What happened? He looked to be the picture of health on the Bow Tie Ride. A very enthusiastic, charismatic guy. I always find it especially shocking when seemingly healthy people who are surely younger than I am suddenly die. I can’t get the image of him, enthusing about the ride and the one coming up next spring–with a music theme–out of my head." Karen was also a very enthusiastic, charismatic gal and I will especially miss her when riding in the next Cambridge Bike Tour on May 13.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with the appropriate city staff to provide a report to the City Council explaining the SOV target rate that has been established for the City of Cambridge; data that explains how the City of Cambridge is doing in relation to meeting its SOV target rate; and future plans to reduce the actual SOV rate including barriers to achieving as low a rate as is possible.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

Nothing unusual in this Order. It’s highlighted primarily to note how certain issues and language seem to rise and fall in importance over the years. It wasn’t so long ago that the City Council often referred to the problem of "single occupancy vehicles." Much of those concerns were incorporated into the City’s Vehicle Trip Reduction Ordiance that effectively replaced the old Interim Parking Freeze. That ordinance drives much of City policy today. We don’t really hear the phrase "single occupancy vehicle" any more. The language today tends to focus on larger themes like energy efficiency, climate change, LEED standards, smart growth, and transit-oriented development. I remember a day 24 years ago when recycling was the new wave. We really have come a long way since then.

Order #4. That the City Council go on record strongly urging the City Manager to fill the two vacancies on the Planning Board with people who have a background in, or association with, the skilled labor and building trades.   Vice Mayor Simmons and Councillor Cheung

I beg to differ. The Planning Board ideally consists of objective, fair-minded people who bring a range of relevant skills to the business of planning the future of the city and its urban design. What exactly is the value added by insisting on having skilled labor and building trades represented on the Planning Board? Will there be another Order forthcoming urging that representatives from the life sciences be appointed to the Planning Board in recognition of their major presence in Kendall Square and elsewhere? Why not have representatives from the universities in recognition of the dominant role they play in Cambridge? Those vacancies should be filled as soon as possible, but the pool should not be restricted to any specific interest group.

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee, for a public hearing held on Dec 12, 2012 to receive an update on the long-term vision for Kendall Square.

There’s not much to add other than to highlight all the potential activity that is now on deck. New buildings are under construction in Kendall Square and there may be other significant changes there from whatever emerges from the recently re-filed MIT Kendall Square zoning petition and the concurrent planning process now underway. Meanwhile, at the other end of Main Street, the Fennell properties – all 15 of them in the Lafayette Square area – recently sold for $32 million to New Jersey’s Normandy Real Estate Partners which is teaming up with Twining Properties, the New York firm that brought the Watermark apartment towers along with new retail and restaurant offerings to Kendall Square. Great things (or horrible things) could come of all this, but it’s guaranteed to not set well with many activists. It should keep things peppered up around here for the next few years.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, for a public meeting held on Dec 19, 2012 to introduce Attorney Elizabeth Valerio, who will represent the City Council, in negotiations with the next City Manager, Richard Rossi.

The specifics of the proposed contract with our next City Manager Richard Rossi are due to appear sometime this month.

Miscellaneous #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012.

There are a few City publications that are worth perusing, and this is one of them. If you really have time to waste, you can also check out the City’s annual line item budget at the Cambridge Public Library. That’s the one that gives the names and salaries and benefits of all the City’s full-time employees. Or you could go hiking. I’ll choose the latter.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress