Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

February 6, 2023

Play Resumes – February 6, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,Deaths — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 10:23 pm

Play Resumes – February 6, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

I hope this meeting proceeds as scheduled without the stamping of young socialist feet. If so, here are a few things under consideration this week:

[Note: The idiots from the Party for Socialism and Liberation once again disrupted the Cambridge City Council meeting – forcing them to run and hide and conduct the rest of the meeting in Zoom.]City Hall

Whose Choice?

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number #22-81, related to improving marketing and communication efforts and outreach for the Cambridge Community Electricity (CCE) program.
pulled by Nolan, Order Adopted 7-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Order #11. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Community Development Department and all other relevant departments to engage with community groups and the City’s existing multi-member bodies to design the next iteration of the Cambridge Community Electricity Aggregation program.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon
pulled by Nolan; Adopted as Amended 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Picking Weed Winners

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Calendar Item No. 10 of 3/21/22 requesting that the City Manager amend all existing Host Community Agreements (“HCA”) previously issued by the City by reducing the Impact Fee to 0.05% of Gross Revenue and to refrain from placing this burden upon any future HCAs that may yet be issued, unless supporting evidence is provided by the City showing a finding that it incurred additional expenses and impacts upon its road system, law enforcement, inspectional services, permitting services, administrative services, educational services and public health services greater than the .05% of Gross Revenue collected from all the Economic Empowerment applicant and Social Equity applicant dispensaries annually.
pulled by Toner, Placed on File 7-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to have the appropriate City staff establish the framework that will allow for the immediate elimination of the bicycle parking fees imposed upon Economic Empowerment and Social Equity applicants and cannabis dispensary operators in the City of Cambridge. [Charter Right – Zondervan, Jan 23, 2023]
Zondervan amendment to reimburse any such fees that have already been paid – Adopted 7-0-2; Order Adopted as Amended 7-2-0 (BA,DC Absent); Reconsideration moved by Simmons – Reconsideration Fails 0-7-2

In the Zone (including The Twilight Zone)

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Council Order No. O-8 of 1/23/2023, regarding (1) whether there is a two year bar on considering repetitive zoning petitions that have been unfavorably acted upon by the Council, (2) if so, whether that bar on repetitive petitions would prohibit the Council from moving forward with a Council initiated lab use zoning petition if there is unfavorable action on the pending Callender, et al. Petition, and (3) if so, what types of changes to zoning petition would be necessary for it to no longer be considered a repetitive petition.
pulled by Toner, Referred to the Petition to be discussed at Feb 7 committee meeting; Toner moves Reconsideration “hoping the same will not prevail”; Reconsideration Fails 0-7-2

Unfinished Business #5. An Ordinance has been received from Diane P. LeBlanc City Clerk, relative to Ordinance #2022-23 Removing the Limit on BZA Compensation. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 9, 2023; To Be Ordained on or after Jan 30, 2023; Expires Mar 14, 2023]
Ordained 7-0-2

Committee Reports #7. The Ordinance Committee met on Jan 26, 2023, to continue the discussion on proposed Ordinance #2022-9, Climate Resilience Zoning. The Committee Voted favorably to send the Petition to the Full Council with a favorable recommendation to pass to a second reading. [text of report]
pulled by Zondervan; remarks by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading; Report Acceepted, Placed on File 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Communications & Reports #3. A communication was received from Diane LeBlanc, City Clerk, regarding the Douglas Brown Petition. (COF23#27)
pulled by Nolan (early) – asks why defective; City Solicitor Glowa says petition affects entire city and not just the property of the petitioner; Nolan and Mallon seem peeved at City Solicitor for apparently contradicting what she said at the previous meeting; Mallon moves to Rescind Previous Vote, but Zondervan exercises Charter Right first; Charter Right – Zondervan
Zondervan makes additional (new) motion asking for legal clarification; Motion Adopted 7-0-2; Communication Placed on File 7-0-2

Envision Danehy

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to relative to a request for approval to seek authorization from the Massachusetts Office of the Inspector General (the “IG”) for the City to use the Construction Manager at Risk (“CMaR”) procurement and construction method (the “CMaR Method”) in connection with the Danehy Park Gateway Pavilion project. (CM23#25) [Attachment A] [Attachment B]
Order Adopted 7-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Well Appointed – and other tales

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment and reappointment of members of the Recycling Advisory Committee.
Appointments Confirmed 7-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Committee Reports #6. The Government, Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee held a public meeting on Jan 11, 2023 for the purpose of reviewing recent report of Boards and Commissions from the City Manager which are subject to City Council approval, and to discuss the City Clerks request for a dedicated email address for City Council communications. [text of report] [EXTRA – Full Info Sheets from Oct 24, 2022 City Manager Communication]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Note: The report suggests that several city councillors would like to further change the City Charter in order to transfer even more executive authority into their entirely inappropriate legislative hands – specifically to get control of any remaining boards for which they do not currently have confirmation authority. A few lessons in history illustrate that while proportional representation may be a good model for legislative representation, it has a terrible record in terms of actual governance. This is why it’s important that PR be coupled with a strong city manager and why city councillors need to be prohibited from directing City staff or having appointing authority.

Police and Police-Related (with the hope that none of these be referred to the Public Safety Committee unless the Mayor replaces its Chair)

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Police Review and Advisory Board quarterly reports.
pulled by Zondervan, QZ noved suspension to take with #8 and #9; Zondervan moves to refer to Public Safety Committee; Referred to Public Safety Committee 7-0-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a report on an itemized statement of all materials, tools, and property owned by the Cambridge Police Department. (CM23#28) [Cover Letter] [Materials, Tools, and Property as of 6/30/21] [Photographs of Inventory as of 6/30/21]
pulled by Zondervan, Referred to Public Safety Committee 7-0-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a report on an itemized statement of all materials, tools, and property owned by the Cambridge Police Department. (CM23#29) [Cover Letter] [Materials, Tools, and Property as of 6/30/22] [Photographs of Inventory as of 6/30/22]
pulled by Zondervan, Referred to Public Safety Committee 7-0-2 (Azeem, Carlone ABSENT)

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to take immediate steps to begin the process of obtaining police body worn cameras for the Cambridge Police Department, and to work with all appropriate Departments to produce policy recommendations that would allow body worn camera usage while also not violating civil liberties in compliance with the City’s Surveillance Ordinance.   Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Toner, Councillor Simmons
pulled by McGovern; additional remarks by Nolan, Mallon, Toner, Simmons, Siddiqui; Zondervan opposed to body cameras and anything that adds to Police budget; Order Adopted as Amended 6-1-2 (QZ – No; BA,DC – Absent)

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to direct Police Commissioner Elow to work on providing publicly-accessible traffic stop, arrest and citation police data on a new Procedural Justice Dashboard as soon as possible.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern
pulled by Mallon; additional remarks by McGovern; Order Adopted 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Order #5. That the Finance Committee convene a meeting on Police Budget including body camera discussion.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone
Order Adopted 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to look into the feasibility of automated traffic enforcement in Cambridge as well as using unarmed CPD traffic details for future discussion Automated/Unarmed Traffic Enforcement.   Councillor Azeem, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone
pulled by McGovern; Charter Right – Toner (McGovern was going to do it as well)

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Police Commissioner to explore additional less-than-lethal alternatives that pose the smallest risk of injury when deployed for standard issue in the Cambridge Police Department.   Councillor Azeem, Councillor Toner, Councillor Simmons
Order Adopted 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Order #10. That the City Manager is requested to engage a third party, independent firm/consultant or university partner to review and examine the Cambridge Police Department’s policies and practices regarding de-escalation methods, mental health calls for service, training, and more.   Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Siddiqui; additional remarks by Mallon, McGovern, Toner, Nolan, Simmons, Zondervan; Order Adopted 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Order #12. That the City Manager is requested to work with staff in the Cambridge Public Health Department to review the current state of mental health resources, particularly for underserved communities, within the Cambridge Health Alliance.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toner, Councillor Zondervan
pulled by Siddiqui; additional remarks by McGovern (Human Services Committee meeting to follow), Zondervan (add all as sponsors); Adopted 7-0-2 as Amended (BA,DC – Absent)

The Ongoing BEUDO Saga

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to instruct the Community Development Department to draft amendments to the proposed BEUDO language to change the net zero deadline from 2050 to 2035 and to propose language to meet that deadline throughout the document (From the Apr 20, 2022 Ordinance Committee).   Councillor Zondervan
Rules Suspended 7-0-2 to take up early; Toner asks Iram Farooq if this Order is helpful at this time; Farooq says they have initiated some conversations with affected property owners, “trying to build trust” as she emphasizes the “climate crisis” as justification for just about anything; Charter Right – Toner

Committee Reports #5. The Ordinance Committee met on Apr 20, 2022, to continue the public hearing on proposed amendments to the Building Energy Use Disclosure Ordinance (Ordinance #2021-26). The Committee voted favorably to ask the City Manager to instruct the Community Development Department to draft amendments to the proposed BEUDO language to change the net zero deadline from 2050 to 2035 and to propose language to meet that deadline throughout the document. [text of report]
pulled by Zondervan; Report Accepted, Placed on File; Minutes Amended to correct attendance 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent); Mallon attempts to exercise Charter Right; Clerk suggests this is proper – but THIS IS NOT NEW BUSINESS; Mallon says “the Order that we charterwrote” – which is not an actual word, nor is the make-believe word "charterwritten". Siddiqui also rules that committee reports are subject to the Charter Right; Zondervan suggests referring report to the Order contained therein. Clerk suggests taking no action on the report which will move it to Unfinished Business.

Trains, Planes, and Automobiles (actually just Cars & Bikes)

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager continue our current policy of towing cars on street cleaning days and come back to the Council with a plan to create an annual fund to reimburse economically disadvantaged residents who are unable to pay the towing fee before the beginning of towing season. [Charter Right – Zondervan, Jan 23, 2023]
Zondervan notes many communications on this topic, claims that he speaks for low-income residents; Toner calls this a “solution without a problem” – wants to create a fund to reimburse fees and expresses concern for tow companies; McGovern bristles at Zondervan’s characterizations, says City should do more outreach about towing days (as if the announcements somehow aren’t heard); Nolan likes pilots – even though they are often actually not just pilots; Siddiqui aligns with Nolan; Order Fails of Adoption 3-4-2 (MM,DS,PT – Yes; AM,PN,QZ,SS – No; BA,DC – Absent)

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to determine the best ways to promote bike safety with a particular focus on expanding the distribution of bike lights throughout the City.   Councillor McGovern, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Zondervan
pulled by McGovern; additional remarks by Toner (about penalties for not having a light), Nolan (on safe distance); Order Adopted 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Remembering Alice

Resolution #13. Resolution on the death of Alice Wolf.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Nolan
pulled by McGovern; remarks by McGovern, Simmons, Nolan, Siddiqui, Zondervan, Toner, Mallon; Resolution Adopted 7-0-2

Late Resolution #15. Resolution on the death of Jane Richards who died on Jan 31, 2023 at the age of 86.   Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toner, Councillor Simmons
Resolution Adopted 7-0-2

Next Steps toward Universal Pre-K

Order #9. That the City Council and the School Committee will hold a joint roundtable on Tues, Feb 14, 2023, at 5:00pm to receive an update from the City Manager, Superintendent, and the Cambridge Office of Early Childhood on the next steps towards the implementation of universal Pre-K in Cambridge.   Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Looking Back In Time

Committee Reports #1. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Sept 26, 2019 to discuss the petition by Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of Cambridgeside Galleria Associates Trust, to amend the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by adding a Section 13.100 that creates a new PUD-8 District and to amend the Zoning Map of the City of Cambridge by adding the new PUD-8 District, which District would include the property located at 100 Cambridgeside Place (currently zoned in the Business A and PUD-4 Districts). [text of report] [Note: This meeting was already reported Nov 25, 2019]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Committee Reports #2. The Ordinance Committee met on Nov 14, 2019 to continue discussions on the petition by Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of CambridgeSide Galleria Associates Trust, to amend the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by adding a Section 13.100 that creates a new PUD-8 District. [text of report not yet available] [Note: This meeting was already reported Nov 25, 2019]
Referred to Unfinished Business due to lack of report

Committee Reports #3. The Ordinance Committee met on Mar 30, 2022 to conduct a public hearing on, Ordinance #2022-3, the Wage Theft Ordinance. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

Committee Reports #4. The Ordinance Committee met on Apr 13, 2022, to hold a public hearing on proposed ordinance number 2022-2, Charter Change Municipal Code Amendments. The Committee voted favorable to send the following language to the Full Council with a recommendation to pass to a second reading. [text of report]
pulled by Zondervan; Report Accepted, Placed on File; Ordinance Amendments Passed to 2nd Reading 7-0-2 (BA,DC – Absent)

January 31, 2023

Arlington to Harvard Square on a Bicycle

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 1:44 pm

The video embedded in this post is of my bicycle ride on Massachusetts Avenue from the Arlington town line to Harvard Square and Brattle Street, November 29, 2022. I recorded continuously, so the video runs for 15 minutes. I have added narration explaining my actions. I describe many different riding conditions and strategies, so think that your patience to watch it all the way through is warranted. Most of the time, I chose not to ride in the designated bikeway, in the interest of my safety or to avoid obstructions. I didn’t cause delay for anyone: quite the contrary, the traffic signals established travel times and at the end, I caught up with a truck that had passed me 12 minutes earlier.

This is a high-definition video. For the best viewing experience, expand it to fill the screen.

January 28, 2023

Alice Wolf: 1933-2023

Filed under: Cambridge,Deaths — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 2:38 pm

Jan 28 – Former Mayor Alice Wolf passed away on Thursday, January 26, 2023 after a short battle with leukemia at the age of 89.

WOLF, Alice K. (Koerner) – Former Democratic member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives (1997-2013), member of the Cambridge City (1984-1994), Mayor of Cambridge (1990-1992), member of the Cambridge School Committee (1974-1982) died on Thursday, January 26, 2022 after a short battle with leukemia. Alice Wolf worked to make government accessible to all and make it work hardest for society’s most vulnerable. Her focus was early childhood education, children at risk, and equality & equity for all people (especially women, racial and religious minorities, and the LGBTQ community). Her vision and compassion led her to pursue goals and policy solutions years, sometimes decades, ahead of common recognition of a need. For 67 years, she was the beloved wife of Robert A. Wolf. Loving mother of Eric J. and Adam N. Wolf. Adored grandmother of 4 and great-grandmother of 4. A private funeral for family & friends will be held on Tuesday, January 31st. A public celebration of Alice’s life and work will be announced at a later date. Shiva will be observed at the family home, Wednesday and Thursday from 4-7pm. (Per Alice’s wishes, masks will be required at both the funeral and shiva). In lieu of flowers, please consider a donation to Massachusetts Advocates for Children (MAC), www.massadvocates.org or the Cambridge Community Center, www.cambridgecc.org
Published by Boston Globe from Jan. 28 to Jan. 29, 2023. https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/bostonglobe/name/alice-wolf-obituary?id=39091726

Alice Wolf Wikipedia page

Former Cambridge mayor Alice Wolf, an advocate for refugees and LGBTQ equality, dies at 89 (Boston Globe, by Bryan Marquard)

Alice Wold, Evelyn Murphy
Alice Wolf, Evelyn Murphy – April 1990		 Fred Salvucci, Alice Wolf
Fred Salvucci, Alice Wolf – July 1990

January 26, 2023

An Idea Whose Time Has Come Again – Redress of Grievances

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Charter,City Council,history,School Committee — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 9:13 am

An Idea Whose Time Has Come Again – Redress of Grievances

Jan 26, 2023 (modified June 2) – In this year when charter review is underway and possible charter revision may be on the horizon, it is perhaps valuable to look back at some provisions of previous Cambridge City Charters for some guidance. For example, in the original 1846 (proposed) Cambridge City Charter, there’s this:Petition

Sect. 19. General meetings of the citizens qualified to vote may, from time to time, be held, to consult upon the public good, to instruct their representatives, and to take all lawful measures to obtain redress of any grievances, according to the right secured to the people by the Constitution of this Commonwealth; and such meetings may, and shall be duly warned by the mayor and aldermen, upon the requisition of thirty qualified voters.

Note: This provision did not appear in the adopted 1846 Charter nor its subsequent amendments.

Perhaps “the requisition of thirty qualified voters” may not be the appropriate standard today in a city of 120,000 people, and perhaps the procedure should be modified to be more aligned with the way our City Council and School Committee is constituted under the current charter, but there should be a reasonably attainable standard that would allow for “redress of grievances.” The current situation is that a group of hundreds of citizens could send a petition to the City Council (or, presumably the School Committee) asking for reconsideration or change in some policy or ordinance, or action of the City or School administration, but that petition would likely only appear as a “Communication” on an agenda that could, and generally is, simply “Placed on File.” A better system would be to have the respective elected body or City department be required to respond and vote on any reasonable question or request in a timely manner, e.g. within thirty days.

It is a deficiency in the current Plan E Charter that other than begging a city councillor to file a policy order (which could well end up under “Awaiting Report” for months or years), there is no effective way for citizens to hold their elected officials or the City Administration (or any specific department) or the School Department accountable. Requiring a positive or negative response – on the record – would go a long way toward addressing the problem expressed by so many Cambridge residents that they “are not being heard.” – Robert Winters

January 23, 2023

January Tidings – Featured Items on the January 23, 2023 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 7:54 pm

January Tidings – Featured Items on the January 23, 2023 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Note (Mon, 7:15pm): I just left City Hall where the petulant children of the Party for Socialism and Liberation disrupted the City Council meeting forcing the meeting to be relocated to a Zoom-only meeting. Their endless chants were variations on “Justice for Faisal” and “Release the Name” (of the officer involved in the Jan 4 officer-involved shooting), but it was abundantly clear that few of the protesters were from Cambridge, few (if any) of them knew the young man who was killed, and all of them were there to promote their twin agendas of socialism and the abolition of police. It was particularly noteworthy that Cambridge City Councillor Quinton Zondervan and his taxpayer-funded political activist aide Dan Totten chose to stand with the protesters as they broke up the meeting. Honestly, it shows complete dereliction of duty that the City Council and their City Manager continue to allow taxpayer money to be used to pay for Zondervan and Totten’s activism in pursuit of their socialist and anti-police agenda. It’s one thing to hold a contrary political philosophy and to exercise your free speech, but it’s an entirely different matter when taxpayer dollars are being used to shut down a City Council meeting and to advocate for vigilantism in regard to a Cambridge police officer.

I don’t generally make statements here about who Cambridge residents should or should not vote for in the municipal elections, but I will make an exception. Nobody, and I mean nobody, who cares about Cambridge should vote for Quinton Zondervan. Furthermore, if the City Manager continues to employ Dan Totten as a paid City Council aide, then the tenure of the City Manager should also be questioned.

I’ll have a few words to say soon about the January 18 Special Meeting “to discuss protocols, processes, and training of the Cambridge Police Department”, but in the meantime here are some interesting items for the regular Monday meeting:City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Order 2022 #283, regarding the feasibility of banning turns on red signal indications.
pulled by Mallon; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Siddiqui ABSENT)

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Order #312, regarding the feasibility of conducting street cleaning without towing. [text of response]
pulled by Carlone; Placed on File 5-3-0-1 (BA,AM,PN,QZ,SS-YES; DC,MM,PT-NO; DS-PRESENT); Toner Late Order – Charter Right (QZ)

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $390,000 from the Mitigation Revenue Stabilization Fund to the Public Investment Fund Public Works Extraordinary Expenditures account. These mitigation funds have been received from the sources below and will be used for the design of a transportation connection between Terminal Road and Wheeler Street.
pulled by Carlone; Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board report recommending that the City Council adopt the Climate Resilience Zoning Petition.
Referred to Petition 9-0

Charter Right #2. That the City Council adopt the Specialized Stretch Code, as outlined in 225 CMR 22.00 and 225 CMR 23.00, with an effective date of July 1, 2023. [Charter Right – Toner, Jan 9, 2023]
Toner motion to Table Failed 2-7 (DS,PT-YES); Order Adopted 7-1-0-1 (DS-PRESENT, PT-NO)

There’s also this thoughtful request from Patrick Barrett:

Mayor Siddiqui and Cambridge City Council,

Last year a policy order was unanimously passed in November requesting CDD to “report in a timely manner” on the effect of linkage increases, parking minimum reductions, BEUDO, and other legislation that may be passed considering its impact on development, the effect on cost, competitiveness with other cities, and the overall consequence of putting all of these regulations in place all at once. To date no report has been provided and yet we passed a reduction in parking minimums and have tried to pass the specialized stretch code without so much as a presentation to anyone about how that might impact housing construction or anything else. I am asking that no further regulations be passed until the Director of CDD and City Manager provide this requested report. Further I’d like the Director of CDD to give her professional opinion on the stretch code, BEUDO, lab ban, gas hookup ban, linkage increases, and climate resiliency zoning and how she feels we compare to other cities and towns and what effect these proposals will have on development in our city. It seems a very low bar that we at least understand the impact of something prior to passage especially when we have market conditions that do not comport to those anticipated through older studies and competing interests such as the need for housing and viable small and large businesses, and support for our cultural district in Central Sq which, when under so many competing pressures, will undoubtedly feel the impact of these proposals disproportionately to any other district.

Regards,
Patrick W. Barrett III

Unfinished Business #5. An Ordinance has been received from Diane P. LeBlanc City Clerk, relative to Ordinance #2022-23 Removing the Limit on BZA Compensation. [Passed to 2nd Reading Dec 9, 2022; To Be Ordained on or after Jan 9, 2023; Expires Mar 14, 2023]

Lotsa Communications on the Brown Zoning Petition and the police-involved fatal shooting in Cambridgeport and related matters.

Order #1. That the City Manager ask the City Solicitor to provide a legal opinion concerning (1) whether there is a two-year ban on considering repetitive zoning petitions that have been unfavorably acted upon by the Council, (2) if so, whether that ban on repetitive petitions would prohibit the Council from moving forward with a Council initiated lab use zoning petition if there is unfavorable action on the pending Callender, et al. Petition, and (3) if so, what types of changes to zoning petition would be necessary for it to no longer be considered a repetitive petition.   Councillor McGovern
pulled by McGovern; Rules suspended to take with Committee Report #6; Order Adopted 9-0; Referred to Economic Development & University Relations Committee and to NLTP Committee 9-0

Committee Report #6. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Jan 4, 2023 regarding the Citizens Zoning Petition from Duane Callender, et al. Cambridge Lab Regulation Zoning Amendment – AP22#53. The Committee voted favorably to forward this petition to the full City Council with a recommendation to forward to the Economic Development and University Relations Committee and to the Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebration Committee. The Committee voted favorably to request a legal opinion concerning (1) whether there is a two-year ban on considering repetitive zoning petitions that have been unfavorably acted upon by the Council, (2) if so, whether that ban on repetitive petitions would prohibit the Council from moving forward with a Council initiated lab use zoning petition if there is unfavorable action on the pending Callender, et al. Petition, and (3) if so, what types of changes to zoning petition would be necessary for it to no longer be considered a repetitive petition. [Note: This request appears on this agenda as a policy order.] [report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File; Referred to Economic Development & University Relations Committee and to NLTP Committee 9-0

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City personnel to explore the special permitting fees and bicycle parking requirements that are required of local recreational cannabis dispensaries, to provide a report on how these requirements may impact these businesses, and to determine whether these requirements may need to be modified or eliminated.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toner
pulled by Simmons; Order Adopted 9-0 as Amended

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City staff to determine the feasibility of purchasing the property located at 37 Brookline Street, former home of Peter Valentine, with the intent of utilizing this as a community arts space.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Simmons; Order Adopted 8-1 (Toner-NO)

Just a Little Late…

Committee Report #1. The Ordinance Committee conducted a hearing on Sept 10, 2019 at 12:00pm regarding AP19#75: Refiled Zoning Petition – Grand Junction Pathway Overlay District. [report] [Note: This meeting was already reported Sept 23, 2019.]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Ordinance Committee conducted a hearing on Sept 26, 2019 at 2:00pm regarding PO19#206: Zoning Petition on Special Permit Criteria. [report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. The Ordinance Committee conducted a hearing on Nov 12, 2019 at 12:00pm, regarding a proposed amendment to Article 22 of the Zoning Ordinance – Green Building Requirements. [report] [Note 1: This meeting was already reported Nov 18, 2019.] [Note 2: The report actually shows testimony from “Councillor Patricia M. Nolan” – even though she did not assume office until January 2020.]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

January 22, 2023

Completing the Square [June 11, 2013]

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,planning — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 2:30 pm

[This was originally posted almost ten years ago — June 11, 2013. What has changed? What remains the same?]

Central Square in Cambridge has once again become a focal point for planners, activists, property owners, developers, elected officials, and residents. There is much that can be said, but the primary point of this picture book is to emphasize the opportunities that exist in what may be a narrow window in time to “Complete the Square” in a manner that should satisfy most people. Here are a few images (mostly taken on Monday, June 10, 2013) to help tell this story.

It’s important to understand that Central Square today is just an echo of the days when it was a prime shopping district for the residents of Cambridge and elsewhere. There are proposals today that would encourage a more diverse mix of retail and bring more residents close to the Square. This may require some creative changes in the zoning laws to bring about these positive changes. There’s plenty of room for debate on location, height and density but there are good opportunities now to make some great changes for the better. – RW

Central Square
This was once the site of the Cambridge Athenaeum
which also served for a time as City Hall		 Central Square
There seems to be something missing next to the
beautiful facade of the Barron Building.
Cambridge Athenaeum
Central Square
This site at Pearl Street could be so
much more vital than it is today.		 Central Square
Another strip of “taxpayers” – one story structures that occupy
space formerly occupied by far more appropriate structures.
Central Square
The rhythm of Mass. Ave. benefits from a mixture of taller
and shorter structures, especially when the sides of the
taller buildings have something to offer visually.		 Central Square
This is one of the most deficient parts of the Central Square streetscape
– a site where new retail and residential uses would be a great benefit.
Today the most prominent feature is the graffiti next door.
Central Square
Central Square could be so much better than prominent displays of
vandalism. There should be great buildings all the way to Norfolk St.		 Central Square
The site of the Middle East Restaurant today occupies what was a
building with several stories. It could use some upstairs space.
Central Square
Many of us remember this block when you could rent tools in one
location, watch a movie in another, buy clothes at another,
and enjoy some great Chinese food.		 Central Square
This block is improving, but we could still do better.
Central Square
One of the blocks that seems to be missing a lot. The Central
Square Cinema and other storefronts once occupied this space.		 Central Square
Lafayette Square now hosts Jill Brown-Rhone Park. This end of the
Square can only improve with more residents in proximity.
Central Square
Standing like a lone soldier in what should be a series of great buildings.		 Central Square
Miracle of Science at the eastern edge of the Square
Central Square
The park is beautiful and tries to draw attention from the
scene’s most prominent feature – a blank pink wall.		 Central Square
This may be the most incomplete corner in all of Central Square.
The decaying billboard on the roof guards the deficit.
Central Square
The U-Haul is convenient for those who are moving, but this stretch
of Main Street would be so much better with residential uses.		 Central Square
One of the many Quest sites recently sold which may soon
potentially enhance this area.
Central Square
Another missing tooth. The outline of a former building
is apparent on the blank brick wall.		 Central Square
Ideally, the future Central Square would still retain some of its industrial
past, but maybe people could live next door to the chocolate factory.
Central Square
The view from Main Street across Lafayette Square		 Central Square
The view toward the hotel at University Park. Ideally, Central Square
should have more of a rhythm of heights and density.
Central Square
Architecturally Lacking – #1		 Central Square
Architecturally Lacking – #2
Central Square
This end of Columbia St. would be so much better with more activity.		 Central Square
A great Central Square building
Central Square
Central Square Hardware and Tool Rental was once here until a
spectacular fire destroyed the building. It’s now a parking lot.
A view of what this block once looked like is shown at right.		 Central Square
Central Square
Another great Central Square building		 Central Square
The Odd Fellows Hall (now the Dance Complex)
seems to be missing a neighbor.
Central Square
Vacancies where there was once a very active street		 Central Square
Though this site at Pearl Street is just feet from public transit and should
support more height, the existing building seems to be in good shape.
Central Square
The site of the former Manhattan Market has cycled
through multiple commercial tenants in recent years.		 Central Square
The old signage on the side of the Barron Building
Central Square
This block could stand to have a lot more character.		 Central Square
The Barron Building – another great Central Square building
Central Square
Here’s an example of a good-looking tall building in Central Square.		 Central Square
Most of us agree that we don’t want this kind of tall building again.
Central Square
The often-criticized Holmes Building was supposed to have cafes and other
amenities on the ground floor. Instead we got banks and phone stores.		 Central Square
With the old pool removed, we get a brief look at the YWCA prior
to new housing construction on Temple Street.
Central Square
Looking across the Temple Street lot toward City Hall		 Central Square
The ultimate eyesore – Vail Court still vacant after decades
Central Square
Lost opportunity – Vail Court still vacant on Bishop Allen Drive		 Central Square
View from the balcony of the new Alice K. Wolf Center
Central Square
View of the Holmes Building from the Alice K. Wolf Center		 Central Square
View of City Hall from the Alice K. Wolf Center
Central Square
Central Square Central Square Central Square
Central Square Central Square Central Square

January 18, 2023

Concerns about Garden Street and environs

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:22 am

Concerns about Garden Street and environs – a letter from Beth Gamse and Judith Singer

From: Beth Gamse
Date: January 12, 2023
To: City Manager; City Councillors; City Clerk; Dept. of Traffic, Parking and Transportation
Subject: Concerns about Garden Street and environs

January 12, 2023

Dear City Manager,
CC: City Council Members, City Clerk, and Acting Director of the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department

We write to you to express concerns about the recent changes on Garden Street, which have caused numerous unintended consequences on nearby streets and on the overall system of interconnected streets in western Cambridge. We are residents of one of those nearby streets – Walker Street – and are homeowners, taxpayers, and avid pedestrians.

Over the past year, we have attended all of the informational sessions about changes to Massachusetts Avenue as well as each community meeting about changes to Garden Street, and many City Council meetings at which street safety was a topic. Because our primary mode of transportation is on foot, we are especially interested in pedestrian safety, and we support the City’s commitment to improved safety for its residents and visitors. We appreciate the efforts made by the City, including the City Manager as well as the Traffic, Parking and Transportation (TPT) Department to engage in outreach to the community and conduct research about then-planned, since-implemented changes. However, in our opinion – and those of many of our neighbors on affected streets – the communication efforts and data collection/analyses fall far short of intended goals. Below, we outline specific issues and questions (in bold and italicized) about which we would deeply appreciate a response.

Communication and Participation

TPT engaged in a number of efforts to inform residents about proposed changes, including use of postcards to selected residential/business addresses in the neighborhoods thought to be most likely to experience disruption and posted placards announcing upcoming public meetings. This well-intentioned outreach did not take into account the fact that many people who use Garden Street do not live in the immediate catchment area; rather, they use Garden Street to get somewhere else, and now they use Raymond, Walker, Concord, Bond, Robinson, Madison, Huron, and Walden, among other local streets. From what we understand (based on comments from Representative Decker and other Raymond Street residents at the first and second Listening Sessions in November), Raymond Street residents were not included in the initial outreach about changes to Garden Street even though it [Raymond] is arguably one of the most adversely affected streets. Other than the Listening Sessions and periodic updates on the TPT website, how does the City plan to communicate its decisions about any updates and/or changes in implementation of Garden Street Safety Improvement efforts to ensure that information is available/provided to residents across the city’s system of interconnected streets?

Our understanding of the Garden Street Project is that it is part of a “Quick-Build” approach to make progress toward the Networked Streets and the Cycling Safety Ordinance (CSO). Recently, low concrete curbs were placed on Garden Street between Walker Street and the intersection with Concord Avenue, further narrowing the space available to motorists. Can the City please describe how installing concrete barriers is part of the “Quick Build” solutions? Additionally, how will snowplows navigate when snow renders the barriers less visible?

Project costs are not transparent. As taxpayers, we believe residents should be informed about the City’s budget, and the City should be transparent about how it allocates resources. When residents asked about additional pedestrian crossings across Garden Street at the Listening Sessions, we were told that because curb cuts able to accommodate universal access (e.g., wheelchairs, strollers) would require additional infrastructure costs, no additional crosswalks were possible with incurring capital costs. However, even though the installed bicycle lanes are designed as “quick-build” projects that do not include structural changes, the new concrete barriers clearly represent additional infrastructure costs to install – and plow around. How has the City communicated about planned/expected CSO costs to its citizens? When the CSO was passed by the City Council in 2019, was there a projected budget? How much has been allocated/spent so far?

There is little information about intra-departmental communication with other City agencies, including the Fire, Police, Public Works, School, and local hospital/emergency service providers. Informal communication with a dozen police officers assigned to monitor traffic patterns in the weeks after the Garden Street implementation (on Shepard, Garden, Raymond, Bond) revealed they were blind-sided by the changes, and were dismayed about the increased vehicular speeds on Garden and Raymond in particular, despite the speed alert signs. Walker Street, without the electric speed alert signs, has also seen increased vehicular speeds and volume. We raise this issue because we have observed – on multiple occasions – emergency vehicles blocked from traveling eastward on Garden Street because there is nowhere for cars to pull over. On a related note, the state recently passed a new law governing the minimum distance (4 feet) between cars and those who are “vulnerable,” including pedestrians, cyclists, and those engaged in the provision of emergency services (see the Boston Globe, January 3, 2023): “Pedestrians, cyclists gain protections with new law meant to reduce traffic deaths.” While the separated bike lanes may provide close to the required 4 feet, there is insufficient room to provide that distance to emergency vehicles anywhere on Garden Street between Huron Avenue and Arsenal Street. Can the City please describe pre- and post-implementation communication with other departments to ensure that emergency vehicles have the clearance required to pass traffic on Garden Street?

Listening Sessions both in person and via Zoom have always begun not with listening but with presentations by City staff; attendees have only been allowed to voice comments after City staff presentations. While many attendees of these events have noted that they are city residents, many have reported that they live elsewhere, and traverse Cambridge streets to reach their respective destinations. Despite the fact that the sessions were seemingly designed for residents of the affected neighborhoods – the people whose taxes support our city – too many residents were not even able to speak in thee time allotted for feedback, as individuals from other communities voiced their opinions. Can City officials explain why non-residents have equal speaking priority at meetings for Cambridge residents?

It is not clear that feedback provided at the Listening Sessions registers with the City. TPT personnel have described minor and incremental changes while indicating that the overwhelming majority of comments have been in favor of the current arrangement on Garden Street. The two in-person November listening sessions we attended at the Graham and Parks School were overwhelmingly dominated by residents who are concerned about the unintended consequences and whose questions to TPT remain unanswered; the January 4 Zoom session included both those who applaud the Garden Street Safety Project and those who asked the City to reconsider the Garden Street Safety Project, whether in part or whole. Additionally, the recent TPT report indicated that there is strong support for the changes to Garden Street, yet did not acknowledge the substantial community concerns raised at the Listening Sessions. As a result, it is not clear that the City is indeed listening to residents’ concerns. Can the City Manager, TPT, and the City Council please indicate whether any aspects of the project will be reconsidered, and when?

Nomenclature and word choice matter. The name “Garden Street Safety Project” does not communicate the nature of the project clearly or effectively. This project is exclusively driven by the Cycling Safety Ordinance, and while there have been some mentions of pedestrian safety in TPT presentations, they are clearly secondary. It is MORE challenging now than before October 28, 2022, to be a pedestrian on Walker Street, Raymond Street, Shepard Street, and Garden Street, because cars AND bicycles travel too fast, do not heed traffic light signals, stop or yield signs. Ironically, the 2023 parking permits for the City include a sticker for car owners to place on side view mirrors about checking for bikes, but there is no such sticker about checking for pedestrians. Sadly, in the most recent year, approximately 10 times as many pedestrians died in car-related accidents than cyclists in our state (99 and 10, respectively). As long as this project continues, can the City consider renaming this project to indicate what it is – a protected bicycle lane project – rather than (mis)representing it as creating safety for all, which it is not?

The majority of bicyclists and scooterists are using the lanes as intended. Unfortunately, those who do not risk endangering themselves as well as pedestrians, other cyclists, and drivers when traveling outside the designated lanes whether in the street or on sidewalks, in the wrong direction, and when ignoring traffic signs. We have had to jump out of harm’s way too many times to count when using crosswalks or “Walk” signs on Mass Ave, Garden, Shepard, Raymond, Linnaean, and Follen Streets, because cyclists/scooterists neither stop nor yield. What are the City’s plans for communicating with bicyclists and scooterists about respecting pedestrian safety and heeding traffic signs?

Notably, only a handful of City Councillors have attended some of the in-person “listening sessions,” and our City Manager has not; it is not possible to discern who attends the Zoom sessions as a listener. The recent TPT report includes a statement to residents from City Manager Yi-An Huang, including the following:

The reality is that many people feel unheard, and there is a broader challenge about how we make decisions when people disagree….For the City’s part, I recognize that there is work to do to improve our communication, transparency, and responsiveness, and this is a priority for me.

Can the City Manager, in particular, describe his efforts to improve communication, transparency, and responsiveness about the Garden Street Safety Project?

  • The City’s commitment to the CSO and the Vision Zero initiatives are laudable, yet the City’s decisions to proceed have not all been transparent nor have been shared in a manner that invites public participation in decision-making. Cambridge residents have not voted directly on either of these initiatives, for example, but instead have voted for City Council candidates who share their broad philosophies and vision for the City. Can the City use a process like a ballot question or the Participatory Budgeting to ask residents about their priorities with respect to these two initiatives? In the most recent round of Participatory Budgeting, for example, we find it telling that none of the selected projects was focused on bicycle safety but instead on other priorities for residents.

Data collection/analysis

  • The recent TPT report indicates the TPT Department recognizes that the process could have been improved. It also indicates that the City will continue to collect data about implementation. Because so much of the city population adheres to an academic calendar, data collection from mid-December through the end of January is unlikely to be sufficient to provide a clear understanding of the impacts of the traffic changes. Can the City describe the planned data collection for the future? Will the City ensure that sufficient data are collected – on a range of days, times of day and times of year – to demonstrate to residents that their lived experiences of the effects of these changes are represented validly and reliably? We live on an affected street and are out-and-about several times a day most days of the year. There is great variation over time that does not appear to have been captured by the measurements to date.
  • The report presented information about average speeds on affected streets. However, information about averages alone is not sufficient – the distribution is also important to know because averages mask variation. The major speed issue isn’t about “average speed,” it’s about the faster speeds that many motorists – and frankly cyclists/scooterists, especially those with motorized devices – are achieving. As you consider expanding the amount of data collection over multiple days and times of day, please collect information on the entire distribution of speeds.
  • Selection of independent third-party urban planning/traffic management organization to collect/analyze data given talent in Cambridge. Governments are wise to contract with independent consultants to evaluate the effects of policy changes. Having the same people who implement the policy evaluate its effects does not provide the level of arms-length assessment needed given the felt impacts of these changes on residents. Will the city commit to a quality independent assessment of the impact of these changes?

Beth Gamse, bethgamse@gmail.com, 617-448-4860
Judith D. Singer, Judith_singer@harvard.edu, 617-999-4701
14 Walker St, Cambridge, MA 02138

January 17, 2023

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 575-576: January 17, 2023

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Cambridge InsideOut,Central Square,City Council,covid,Deaths — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:40 pm

Episode 575 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 17, 2023 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Jan 17, 2023 at 6:00pm. Topics: Fatal police-involved shooting in Cambridgeport; few answers, plenty of activism; leadership vs. opportunism; test for City Manager, Mayor, Police Commissioner; alternatives. Hosts: Patrick Barrett, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 576 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 17, 2023 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Jan 17, 2023 at 6:30pm. Topics: Covid updates and optimism; status of lab ban proposals and analysis – wrong conversations and false dichotomies; BEUDO, proposed stretch energy codes, lack of public outreach and disclosure; wanting to be first not the same as leadership; changing the narrative to push the agenda. Hosts: Patrick Barrett, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress