“They’ll only let me have an 18-story building!”
TEN PAINFUL TRUTHS ABOUT THE CDD’S CENTRAL SQUARE RE-ZONING
Let me start with a disclaimer. Each of us will find his or her own discomfort (or comfort) level with the Community Development Department’s (CDD) recommendations for re-zoning Central Square. This list represents what I find most disquieting and unnerving about their recommended overlay district which attempts to throw an up-zoning blanket over the entire Central Square district, extending to Green Street on the Cambridgeport side, and Bishop Allen Drive to the north.
I am not a planning engineer or an architect, so my basic understanding is just that—very basic. Working with a commonly accepted formula of 10 feet of height for every story, I attempted to cull whatever information I could from the CDD’s extensive and highly confusing recommendations. Which, thus, led to my list of the TERRIBLE TEN.
- TOWERS ON THE HORIZON: The CDD, breaking with the long-held tradition of maintaining a buffer zone to curtain off Central Square’s noise and chaotic activity, now wants to allow towers both in Central Square and on those streets once protecting the neighborhood. The recommendations would allow 14- and 16-story towers, with an additional 2 stories allowable under a transferable development right bonus. That means the potential for 18-story towers with an additional 20-30 foot penthouses on top. Take a walk over to Bishop Allen Drive and see what a blue sky looks like while you still have the chance.
2. NOW, WE’RE GETTING REALLY DENSE. The CDD would bring 2-1/2 times the present density to the overlay district with no concern for outdated and maxed-out transportation facilities. Think of sardine-like packed trains at rush hour on the T.
3. CHRISTMAS FOR DEVELOPERS. This new overlay district would be a blatant giveaway to developers. I’m not sure what we would get back except large numbers of expensive condos and high-rent apartments, plus a small percentage of inclusionary housing units.
4. WHERE’S THE PLAN? The CDD recommendations are made in absence of any citywide plan.
5. UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. The CDD’s recommendations give no thought to the unintended consequences of new towers in the neighborhood: congestion, crowded roadways, diminished parking, neighborhood shadows, loss of sky views.
6. WHO COULD AFFORD TO LIVE HERE? Cambridge residents won’t be able to afford rising rents, nor retailers as well. High-rise market-rate housing drives prices up, not down.
7. WE’LL BE THE ONES WHO SUFFER. Bringing in towers of new people will impact the quality of life for those of us already living here. We’ll be asked to accept increased congestion on our streets and more stress on our roadways and infrastructure.
8. WHOSE IDEA WAS THIS ANYWAY? The members of the Cambridge Square Advisory Committee were appointed by our retiring City Manager and led by a CDD not answerable to the public. Many committee members were non-Cambridge residents with local business interests. Anyone who followed the workings of the committee could easily see the group was being led from the get-go toward its eventual recommendations for massive up-zoning.
9. IT WAS A ONE-TRICK PONY. No one seemed to consider any alternatives to this massive up-zoned overlay district. The committee was never presented with a menu of competing or stepped options, only CDD’s recommendations, which they could accept or modify.
10. THEY KEPT THEIR EYES ON THE PRIZE. From the start, it was clear the C2 study was targeting city-owned parking lots on Green Street and Bishop Allen Drive. Nobody seemed concerned about the assets these targeted lots represent: the open spaces, unhindered sky views, artistic murals and the buffer function of the tree-lined lots. I personally find Lot #5 on Bishop Allen Drive quite attractive, with its David Fichter mural and flowering trees; it quite welcomingly serves as the gateway to Area 4.
Lastly, before I’m accused of being a NIMBY (a Not-In-My-Backyard-er), which is an easy way to minimize someone whose point of view doesn’t necessarily align with the marketplace realities of skyrocketing land values and rising tax base pressures, I would maintain that I, and the Cambridge Residents Alliance, of which I am a member, are not so much concerned with what happens in our backyard as we are with what happens on our watch!