Check out our “diversity” below:
> From: "Kelley, Craig" <ckelley(a)cambridgema.gov>
> Date: April 6, 2019 at 6:18:06 PM EDT
> Subject: Affordable Housing Overlay District on Council's Monday agenda
>
> Hey Everyone:
>
> There will be a City Council Roundtable this coming Tuesday starting at 5:30 PM to talk about the proposed Affordable Housing Overlay District. Roundtables don't allow for public comment and no votes will be taken, but sometimes people like to watch them in person although you can also watch it on TV. The proposal, which has not yet been submitted as a formal zoning petition, is also the subject of a City Council Housing Subcommittee report that is on the Council's Monday night agenda. I have pasted the report below and the attachments for the report may be found here. The City has a webpage devoted to the Overlay District here in case you want to learn more about this issue.
>
>
>
> If you’d like to come talk about these Council issues at City Council, you can sign up by phone between 9 AM and 3 PM on Monday at 617-349-4280 or on line via this link and in person from 5-6 PM at the Sullivan Chambers at City Hall. Public comment, limited to three minutes per speaker, starts at 5:30(ish) and lasts at least until 6:00, though if there are enough speakers we often go later. At the end of public comment, people who missed the sign-in window are generally asked if they’d like to speak anyway. The entire Council may be emailed at Council(a)Cambridgema.gov.
>
> Also, the Manager sent out this note about updated neighborhood profiles and a housing event at the end of this month:
>
> Neighborhood Statistical Profile Released. The Community Development Department has released an updated Neighborhood Statistical Profile, which provides a statistical snapshot of each of Cambridge's 13 neighborhoods, as well as the city as a whole. The Profile is intended to inform the community of -- and pay homage to -- the distinctive characteristics of each neighborhood. In addition to updated data, the 2019 Profile includes a new diversity index, which provides an overall measure of neighborhood diversity.
> Fair and Affordable Housing Open House. The Cambridge Human Rights Commission (CHRC) in collaboration with the Community Development Department/Housing Division will hold the Third Annual Fair and Affordable Housing Open House for Saturday, Apr. 27, 2019 from 11 a.m. – 2 p.m., at the Community Art Center, located at 119 Windsor Street. This free event brings housing services providers, City housing staff, local non-profits that address housing-related needs, and local banks together to explore housing issues, including housing discrimination, in panel discussions and provides informational tabling about a range of housing supports. All are welcome.
>
> Thanks and have a great day.
>
> Craig
> All emails to and from this City address should be considered to be subject to Massachusetts’s Public Records laws. To be removed from this list, click here. Please feel free to forward this email to anyone you think may be interested in it. Also, I have scheduled office hours in Central Square on Monday’s from 1-3 PM and Thursdays from 9:30-11:30 AM, but please email CKelley(a)Cambridgema.gov before coming to confirm before showing up.
>
>
>
>
> HOUSING COMMITTEE MEMBERS Councillor E. Denise Simmons, Co-Chair Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui, Co-Chair Councillor Alanna M. Mallon Vice Mayor Jan Devereux Councillor Timothy J. Toomey Jr.
> In City Council April 8, 2019
>
>
>
> The Housing Committee held a public hearing on Tuesday, March 5, 2019 at 6: p.m. in the Sullivan Chamber to continue discussions on the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
>
> Present at the hearing were Councillor Simmons, Co-Chair, Councillor Siddiqui, Co-Chair, Vice Mayor Devereux, Councillor Mallon, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor McGovern, Louis DePasquale, City Manager, Lisa Peterson, Deputy City Manager, Iram Farooq, Assistant City Manager for Community Development, Khalil Mogassabi, Deputy Director of Community Planning and Chief Planner, Jeff Roberts, Director of Zoning and Development, Chris Cotter, Housing Director, Cassie Arnaud, Housing Project Planner, Community Development Department (CDD), Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor, Lee Gianetti, Director of Communications and Community Relations, Neal Alpert, Aide to Councillor Simmons, Sarah Stillman, Aide to Councillor Siddiqui, Afiyah Harrigan, Mayor’s Office, and Paula Crane, Deputy City Clerk.
>
> Also present were Peter Daly, Cheryl-Ann Pizza-Zeoli, William Tibbs, Members of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, Elaine DeRosa, Mike Johnston, Executive Director. Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA), Brad Bellows, Esther Hanig, Deborah Ruhe, Adriane Musgrave, E.C. Houghteling, Julia Holderness, David Sullivan, Charles Franklin, Elizabeth Gombosi, Fritz Donovan, Young Kim, Jeanne Fong, Larry Bluestone, Suzanne Blier, Stephen Kaiser, Edele Mulugeta, Teresa Cardosi, Trudi Goodman, Marilee Meyer, Peter Ciurczak, Neil McCullagh, Yanisa Techagumthorn, Mick Alexander, Rebecca Schofield, Tina Alu, Patrick Braga, Toby Hyde, Don Summerfield, Betsy Harper, Stuart Lesser, Elaine DeRosa, William Navarre, Mary Jo Clark, Carolyn Fuller, Bill McAvinney, Fred Meyer, Justin Holmes, Matthew West, Pawel Latawiec, Margaret Samp, Rebecca Pries, Sergey Petrov, Hannah Lodi, Jonathan Behrens, Sharone Small, Noam Tanner, Mersadie Jackson, Jessica Sheehan, Louisa Johnson, Amella Zejnullahu, Eleni Maoakis, Michael Prusak, Michael Thistle, Nicola Williams, Lee Farris, Feclex Cadet, Eileen Aronson, Susan Pitman Lowenthal, and Carol O’Hare.
>
> Councillor Simmons convened the hearing and read from a prepared written Opening Remarks (ATTACHMENT A).
>
> Councillor Siddiqui welcomed those present and read from prepared written Opening Remarks (ATTACHMENT B).
>
> Mayor McGovern apologized that he is unable to stay for the duration of the earing as he must chair the School Committee Meeting. He read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT C).
>
> Councillor Simmons noted that the information before the Committee is the framework, and not the ordinance. She introduced Ms. Farooq.
>
> Ms. Farooq said that CDD has been working on this issue for a very long time. She explained that handouts that have been distributed are background information in support of what will be discussed today. She explained that the blue sheets (ATTACHMENTS D & E) are information sheets that explain the basic concept of an Affordable Housing Zoning Overlay. Ms. Farooq noted that Mayor McGovern has asked what is affordable housing and is it affordable for a certain period of time or in perpetuity. She said that the way that affordable housing is defined is housing that is deed restricted and affordable in perpetuity and it is affordable to people who make up to 100% of area median income which is the middle-income bracket. She said that low and moderate income is 80% of the area median income and below. She said that the orange map (ATTACAHMENT F) shows the distribution of affordable housing units across the city as of today. She stated that there is also a map of the City’s zoning as it exists currently (ATTACHMENT G).
>
> Ms. Farooq said that Mayor McGovern has asked how this relates to Envision Cambridge. She said that as part of the Envision process, CDD went to the neighborhoods to talk about multiple housing scenarios. She said that CDD evaluated what growth might look like under each of the scenarios. She explained that one of those scenarios included a Citywide Affordable Housing Overlay District while another version examined increasing density for market rate projects that have larger components of affordable units than is currently required under inclusionary zoning. She said that is the scenario that reflected an increase of approximately 25% in the City’s population and is different than what we are talking about today. She said that as CDD looked at buildout and what the increase in population would be, looking at the overlay they did not envision any significant increase of population as a result of adoption of an Affordable Housing Overlay. She said that this is focusing on affordable housing projects that are 100% affordable, built by affordable housing providers who are focused on developing housing units for people who are low, moderate, and occasionally middle-income people.
>
> Ms. Farooq said that the idea of a citywide Affordable Housing Overlay did come up in discussions in 2014 and 2015. She said that CDD has been working on changes to the City’s regulations that impact and allow increase and support for affordable housing. She said that Mr. Cotter will set the stage as to some of the changes that have been adopted between 2015 to date. She said that this is part of a series of interventions. She said that we should not think of the Affordable Housing Overlay District as something that will solve every problem, it is one tool in addition to what has been being done and it is part of a continuum with more work to be done going forward in the coming years.
>
> Mr. Cotter and Mr. Roberts gave an overview of the PowerPoint presentation (ATTACHMENT H).
>
> Councillor Mallon said that there have been a lot of questions from the community and about this proposal. She said that in terms of the City’s goal of an overall percentage of affordable housing that we want to get to, what is the current affordable housing percentage of the housing stock currently. She asked what is the number that the City is trying to get to through this and the other measures that CDD has suggested previously. Mr. Cotter responded that the City is currently just under 15% when they consider all affordable units subject to deed restrictions. He said that this number has come down a little but has been relatively stable. He said that the goal that has been discussed through the Envision process is to create 3,125 affordable units by 2030. He said that counting for what they would expect to come from the market, it would be roughly 1,000 units for the City funding to create over that time. He said that if
> successful in creating that number of affordable units over that time, they would expect to see the ratio of affordable units in the city to rise from just under 15% to close to 16%.
>
> Councillor Mallon said that Mr. Cotter mentioned funding being limited. She said that this is an important component of this conversation. She said that there are many people in the community who feel that this proposal would create a whole lot of units and increase the density in their neighborhoods by an exponential amount. She said that FY19 funding was about $13.6 million for affordable housing and roughly it is around $540,000 to create one unit of affordable housing which is about 25 units. She said that over the past several years, the City has been averaging 50-60 units per year. She said that even with an additional $20 million dollars that the City Council has asked from the City Manager, that really only translates to another 40 units built per year. She asked Mr. Cotter to explain the funding for clarification. Mr. Cotter responded that it is expensive to produce housing in the City and we are working in a market where we would love the costs to be lower. He said that there is no housing that the City is producing with the affordable housing providers that does not require a significant amount of total subsidy and a very significant amount of local subsidy from the City and the Affordable Housing Trust. He said that developers will seek funding from sources at the State and other available sources where they are competing with affordable housing developers in Boston, Worcester or Somerville. He said that it is intense competition and oftentimes developers are forced to wait for that funding because it is so limited. He said that in some ways, that funding is more limited than the City funding. He said that the challenge that they have had has not been resources, it has been identifying sites where they can put the funding to work. He said that as it relates to development cost, some of that cost is covered by other funding sources. He said that we are likely talking about the range of $200,000 or so a unit of subsidy from the City. He said that looking back, the City has seen about 60 new affordable housing units built per year. He said that there are success stories such as the Concord Highlands development and the Frost Terrace project.
>
> As it relates to the Cambridge Highlands and Frost Terrace projects, Councillor Mallon noted that since 2007, the majority (over 60%) of the projects are in the Port neighborhood. She said that it is good to see projects moving into different parts of the city. She said that many people are concerned about the term “in perpetuity.” She asked Mr. Cotter to explain the mechanics of what this means. Mr. Cotter responded that when we are talking about the housing that the City of Cambridge is funding, they are putting in place long term, permanent affordability covenants that are signed by the owner and remain in place based on the funding that the City or the Affordable Housing Trust is putting into a development. He explained that it is not uncommon for projects to have multiple affordable housing restrictions held by different public agencies. He said that there may be private entities that also restrict them. He said that that is one class of restriction and they are putting that in place because the City is a lender to the project. The City is funding the project and working with the other funders to put restrictions in place. He said that these restrictions are designed to be permanent. He said that when talking about zoning would be better in terms of restrictions because the City would continue to have restrictions that would come from the funding but the City and would also look at the zoning requirements that would also require that all units be affordable and remain affordable. He said that these would likely look more like restrictions in the inclusionary program which are zoning based and notwithstanding what is happening with other funding, if there is ever a zoning violation it is enforceable by the City in addition to the deed restrictions s on record. He said that the City would be able to get a better restriction from both a zoning perspective and the financing perspective.
>
> Councillor Mallon asked about the Planning Board and how much community engagement there would be around the urban form. She asked for clarification as it relates to the process. Ms. Farooq said that the Planning Board conducts design review of Special Permit projects and also looks at affordable housing projects that are going to the BZA for comprehensive permits. They are reviewing the projects. She said that they have a public hearing to allow for opportunity of abutters or neighbors to present and express their concerns. She said that this feeds into the BZA’s evaluation of comprehensive permit requests and
> their final comments on a project. She said that the Planning Board can in this way express what they would like to see changed. She said that in a Special Permit project, they are the final decision makers for a discretionary permit. She noted that they often state what they want to see and CDD urban design staff continue to have design review. She stated that many conversations take place between staff and developers to keep refining the project based on what the Planning Board has expressed. She said that in instances where they are making comments that are going to another board such as the BZA, they put together a report and the final decision rests with the BZA. She said that there would be the same kind of public process in this instance where the community would have an opportunity to provide their input and the board would hear that, and based on their evaluation as well as what they hear from the public, they would then put together a series of recommendations which will be forwarded to the Affordable Housing Trust and to staff who would continue design discussions and refinements. She said that staff will work with the developers. She said that the concern that CDD has heard is where would there be the leverage. She said that all the projects that go through that are 100% affordable require funding from the Affordable Housing Trust. She said that the Affordable Housing Trust has an interest in good design outcomes. She said that they want to ensure a good fit with the rest of the community. She said that the Affordable Housing Trust has interest in making sure that the design outcomes are positive. Ms. Farooq said that this is done with every affordable housing project and will continue.
>
> Councillor Mallon said that the difference is that the discretionary approval process can be appealed legally, and the design review process cannot. She said that one thing missing from the conversation is the idea of middle-income. She said that this is part of the conversation that we need to have.
>
> Councillor Carlone said that he agrees with Councillor Mallon about expanding middle income. He said that any city that loses all its middle income families will fall apart. As it relates to new affordable housing having a budget of around $13 million, which is 2% of City budget, Councillor Carlone said that none of this additional housing construction will happen successfully until that expands appropriately. He said that everything relies on this additional funding. He said that a property between Harvard and Porter Squares was ready to be taken and the City did not act on it. He said that he has heard a vast improvement over what was thought to be the particulars. He said that on page 14 of the PowerPoint presentation it talks about existing buildings. He said that Mr. Roberts mentioned that conforming additions would be allowed after preserving existing structures. He said that at the higher density within existing buildings, you would still be allowed to add additions within the existing zoning. He said that he believed that there would be an increase in square footage that is allowed to be built. He asked if the FAR is increasing in this overlay. Mr. Roberts said that the general idea is that with a form-based approach they are not regulating based on density, they are regulating on the form of the building. Councillor Carlone said that this is the correct way to do this. He said that an earlier presentation showed the possibility of knocking down buildings in a neighborhood and building something significantly bigger. He asked if this is what is being proposed currently. Mr. Roberts said that the overlay proposal would allow preservation and would also allow new development. He explained that it could be an either/or depending on the condition of the site and the preservation character of that site. He said that it could be new construction, preservation, or the combination of the two. Councillor Carlone said that the house pictured on page 14 is a big house and he understood that 6 units will be put there instead of 3 within the same square footage and maybe a minor addition. He asked if we are now saying if the option exists, are we talking about doubling the FAR. Mr. Roberts said that the approach is not to have regulations based on FAR but based on the scale of the building. He said that in a particular zoning district, you would be allowed to preserve an existing building and/or construct buildings that are of a scale and height that would be allowed under the overlay district. He said that any new construction would have to conform to the allowed height and scale and dimensional standards. Councillor Carlone affirmed that we are talking about infill in back yards, but it would be in the scale of what is there with more square footage, not necessarily two stories higher. Mr. Roberts said that that would be one of the possibilities. He said that the challenge in this kind of zoning is that every scenario will be different, so the zoning will allow enough options so that an appropriate
> approach can be applied to the conditions of a given site. He explained that in terms of scale, the proposal is that in districts that currently allow development that could be 3 stories, this would allow up to 4 stories. He said that if it was an existing building of a larger scale, it could be converted. Councillor Carlone suggested that examples would be helpful so that everyone can understand and buy into this. As it relates to form-based approach, Councillor Carlone said that is right on the money.
>
> As it relates to suggestions on height and scale when in an existing neighborhood, Councillor Carlone said that even if it is a four-story building, if it is a sloped roof at the top, it will fit in better than a flat roof. He said that the quality of anything big must be better than what is being built now.
>
> As it relates to building and site design, Councillor Carlone said all the standards become even more critical. He said that he has been in the process too long to know that public process does not typically mean much. He said that affordable housing developers try to do a better job. He said that the most critical thing is that in many cases they will be in existing neighborhoods so the character is not Alewife, it is neighborhoods that want buildings to fit in. Lastly, Councillor Carlone said that the guidelines and design review process must be impeccable. He said that the Planning Board does not always think that way and this is part of the scare. He said that in commercial districts, it is critical for structures to be maintained. He said that vacant land needs to be on this list.
>
> As it relates to the amount of subsidy needed from the City for an affordable unit averaging about $200,000 and increasing City funding for affordable housing by $20 million per year, Vice Mayor Devereux asked if that is 100 units. She asked about the math. Mr. Cotter said that it would depend on how the funds would be deployed. He said that that the 200,000 per unit is looking at past performance, and could be different looking forward. He said that this will increase with higher cost projects and smaller projects will likely require more subsidy. He said that the $200,000 number would assume commitments from other funding sources from the State. He said that smaller projects that would not be eligible or competitive for State funding would be higher. Vice Mayor Devereux said that the numerator is what the City is contributing, apart from all of the other sources.
>
> Vice Mayor Devereux asked how scale is being interpreted. She said that when she looks at the map on page 16 of the PowerPoint presentation, scale to her is the density but we are seeing all residential neighborhoods essentially would have similar new height limits but their existing FAR is different. She said that this does not show her scale. She said that she is concerned that the new framework compared to what was shown to them several months ago is that we have basically eliminated FAR from the calculations. She said that in converting to a form-based approach, we are saying that FAR is not one of the standards anymore. She said that hypothetically, you could end up with some very large buildings on sites and saying that some existing building are non-compliant is not justification for allowing newer buildings to be so dramatically non-compliant. She said that in Res-B if there was a 7,000 square foot lot, under current zoning it would be allowed to have two units totaling 3,200 square feet and you would have to go to the BZA to get a dormer or something innocuous. She said that under the current version of the overlay framework, removing all of the FAR, the same parcel could theoretically have about 16,000 square feet on it. She said that we are not comparing apples to oranges. She said that we are focusing a lot on height which makes this look not as dramatic as an increase as it is when you compare FAR. She said that if you filled the lot with a building, you would be increasing the FAR over the current by 5.25 times. She said that this is a much larger building. She said that there would be design review, but she feels that this would tend to raise a lot of eyebrows. She said that we are looking at every lot the same and every lot is not the same. Vice Mayor Devereux said that there are a lot of questions about how form-based works. She said that it does not differentiate between a one-way, narrow side street or a two-way busy corridor. She said that is not about who is living in these units, it is about how the new buildings live with the other buildings around them. She said that it is not on objection to the new residents, it is the presence of a building that is dramatically different. She said that she would like more clarity in the next presentation
> about the actual size of the buildings that could be approved in the future. She noted that she shares Councillor Carlone’s questions about how existing buildings would be preserved and how the demolition delay ordinance would be invoked. She asked if any building would go to the Historical Commission or is there a more streamlined process.
>
> Councillor Simmons reminded the Committee that there are some participants that must leave the hearing at 8:00 p.m. and there are many people signed up for public comment. She stated that she and Councillor Siddiqui have decided that each person will be allowed to speak for two minutes. She said that any other questions that the Committee may have for CDD should be submitted to CDD so that they can come to the next hearing better prepared to answer questions. She stated that she and Councillor Siddiqui have decided that the next Housing Committee hearing will be, first and foremost, to receive public comment.
>
> Councillor Zondervan noted that he has questions about open space and setbacks. As it relates to open space, he asked how CDD envisions interaction with the Resilience Task Force. He said that if the Resilience Task Force comes back and says that they need 20% or 25% open space, would the zoning be adjusted? Mr. Roberts responded that it could be done. He said that it is difficult to foresee what the outcome of those conversations could be, but open space can be a bit more of a fluid issue. He said that open space can be dealt with in different ways based on what else is going on in the lot. He said that one of the big questions and tradeoffs is the question about parking. He said that in many cases, if the parking is reduced or waived, you can achieve a more significant amount of open space but that would have to be a conversation and a balance. He said that there could be an opportunity to take recommendations and decide what should be applied.
>
> As it relates to the page 19 of the PowerPoint presentation, Councillor Zondervan said that front yards can match surrounding buildings. He said that if we are in a situation where the setback is less than 10 feet, does this mean that that would be allowed, or would they have to setback 10 feet because that can create a very weird street front if most of the buildings are actually closer than 10 feet. Mr. Roberts said that the intent of that concept is to allow buildings to come forward in the situations where the buildings on either side are already built forward of what the typical district setback would be. He said that it is a provision that is currently in some zoning districts. He said that it is a contextual setback where the goal is creating a consistent pattern.
>
> Councillor Toomey said that he has received e-mails saying the Affordable Housing Overlay District is being rushed through. He reminded people that he has been talking about this as far back as 1991. He said that he has talked about equal distribution of affordable housing in all the neighborhoods throughout the city. He said that sponsored a Policy Order in 2014 for an Affordable Housing Overlay District throughout the city. He said that this is not something that arose from the Envision process and people have been talking about this since 1991. He said that keeping the city diverse and affordable has always been a priority of the City Council. He said that he welcomes the discussion. He said that it is important to remember that the goal is to keep Cambridge diverse and affordable for all. He said that the equal distribution of affordable housing is just not happening under our current conditions. He asked all people to respect one another and concluded that he looks forward to the conversation.
>
> Cheryl-Ann Pizza-Zeoli stated that she goes back to a remark from Mr. Roberts about the challenge in front of the City about zoning. She said that we are layering requirements over previous requirements. She said that there are a lot of strong feelings about this, but it is not about feelings, it is about the future of the City of Cambridge. She said that she finds this comical. She spoke from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT I).
>
> Peter Daly stated that he is happy to be at this point. He said that everyone in the City agrees that there is a need for more affordable housing. He said that 40B has helped a lot, but it can be appealed, which
> drives up the cost of affordable developments. He said that affordable developers like HRI need sites and money. He said that he is confident to work together to shape the plan for Cambridge.
>
> Mr. Tibbs said that he is supportive of the Affordable Housing Overlay. He noted that he is interested in the details that would allow for increased density while maintaining the character of the neighborhood.
>
> At this time, Councillor Simmons extended the time of the hearing. She reaffirmed that the next meeting on March 20, 2019 will be exclusively for public comment to ensure that everyone is heard.
>
> Brad Bellows, 87 Howard Street, said that he raised his family in the Riverside area. He said that desperate times call for desperate measures. He said that the diversity is slipping away. He said that there is a need to solve the affordability crisis. He said that zoning is a powerful tool to protect the valuable urban fabric of the City. He said that he is puzzled by two aspects of the current proposal. He said that the notion of the overlay that essentially deregulates and dismantles some really important zoning protections, he said that we want coherence and there is potential to grow and increase density in the City and he supports that. He said that the corridors are a logical place that could accommodate a huge increase in the housing supply. He said that the idea of unlocking random, high density development throughout the neighborhoods of the city feels crazy. He said that that this will cause more damage than benefit and should be rethought. He said that the premise of the zoning relief is not just for adding affordable units but for only buildings that are 100% affordable. He said that if what we value is diversity, why are we only promoting things that are not diverse. He said that income segregation should not be the goal of the housing that is produced.
>
> Esther Hanig, 136 Pine Street, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT J) regarding expressing her strong support for the Affordable Housing Overlay District proposal without the parking requirement. She stated her support for an additional $20 million in City funding for affordable housing for each of the next five years.
>
> Deborah Ruhe, Seven Pines Avenue, stated that she cares about the diversity, economic, ethnic, and racial diversity of the City. She said that affordable housing is critical to maintaining these things. She said that as an employer, Just-A-Start employs 45 people, with four living in the City of Cambridge. She said that a good portion of her workforce would qualify to live in this type of housing. She said that as a developer and owner of affordable housing in Cambridge, she constantly tries to find properties to acquire and the funds to go with them. She gave two examples of where this would have made a difference in the past year. She said that one parcel that they looked at in the Inman Square neighborhood was asking $5 million dollars. She explained that by right, they could have built 16 units at a cost of $312,000 per unit just to acquire the property. With this zoning, they could have gotten 40 units at a cost of $125,000 per unit. She said that the second property they looked at had a sales price of $7.1 million and by right they could have built 27 units. With this zoning, they could have gotten 55 units at a cost of $129,000 per unit. She said that this makes a significant difference in the feasibility of properties. She asked the Committee to move forward with this proposal.
>
> Adrian Musgrave stated that she is a resident of North Cambridge. She said that recently there was a project close to where she used to live that was less than 5 minutes from Massachusetts Avenue. She said that the market is just not developing. She said that she is excited for this overlay. She said that Cambridge is not getting the families that it wants and needs and this would be a great opportunity to do that. She said that when she last campaigned and spoke to residents about the overlay, the vast majority of people were supportive of this concept. She said that she hopes that the City can come together to make this overlay happen.
>
> Betsy Houghteling, 132 Brattle Street, stated that Cambridge is one of the densest cities in America and when looking at this proposal, she hopes that the City is considering all the services that go along with the housing. She said that the water system in Cambridge is also one of the oldest systems in the country. She said that she is concerned that schools, infrastructure and traffic must be taken into account. She said that she is concerned about why these changes must be by-right. She asked why the zoning laws cannot be amended but still give residents a chance to reflect on what they want for their own community.
>
> Julia Holderness, 130 Brattle Street, stated that Cambridge is a beautiful place and a historic place and progressive place. She said that she would like to second the remarks of Councillor Carlone and Vice Mayor Devereux. She said that she is interested in learning more about historic preservation. She said that there needs to be open space as well as increasing affordable housing.
>
> David Sullivan, Notre Dame Avenue, former member of the City Council, stated that he supports the Affordable Housing Overlay and the request for $20 million in additional dollars each year for the next five years. He noted that this is the first time he has spoken publicly since he left the City Council many years ago. He said that he has been advocating for affordable housing in the City for almost forty years. He said that this is the start in the right direction and an important tool in the toolbox. He said that it has been a long time coming. He stated that he disagrees with those who say it is coming too fast as action must be taken quickly. He said that the reason for “as of right” is that if this is not included in the new overlay district, then projects would all be appealable, and neighbors could then use these appeals as a tool to ultimately block many new projects from getting built, thus defeating the very purpose of this plan.
>
> Fritz Donovan, 42 Irving Street, stated that no one in the room is opposed to affordable housing. He said that Cambridge is 15% affordable and for the last two years has required all new substantial residential developments of 10,000 square feet or more to be at least 20% affordable. He asked why the vast majority of neighborhood groups in Cambridge are upset about the 100% Affordable Housing Overlay recommendations that has been circulated by Cambridge city staff. He said that the biggest culprit is the process. He said that Cambridge has 50% more affordable housing than the statewide goal and existing Cambridge ordinances required double the statewide goal. He said that developers have been given the primary role in solving the affordable housing crisis by shaping the current 100% overlay recommendations. He said that the citizens of Cambridge are largely being presented with the result. He said that the results have changed over the last couple of years.
>
> Larry Bluestone, 19 Centre Street, stated his strong support on the principles of the Affordable Housing Overlay District. He stated that he previously sent his comments (ATTACHMENT K) for the record.
>
> Suzanne Blier, 5 Fuller Place, read from a prepared written statement regarding her support for affordable housing but her opposition to the Affordable Housing Overlay District (ATTACHMENT L) stated that she supports affordable housing.
>
> Steve Kaiser, 191 Hamilton Street, stated that the public process has not disclosed the actual zoning language. He said that he would like to talk about the economics of this proposal. He said that he’s the landlord of a three-family in Cambridgeport. He said that the subdivision is ¼ of an acre with three houses, 8 housing units and 17 people. He said that under this proposal, he estimates that the build option would produce 30 units for the ¼ acre. He stated that to pay off the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and repairs, the landlords would incur costs that would have to be paid for by the new rents from the 30 units. He said that the average rent for those costs is $4,600 per month. He said that this is not affordable housing. He said that this plan is a flop.
>
> Theresa Cardosi, 7 Woodrow Wilson Court, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT M) asked for support of the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
> Trudy Goodman, 1221 Cambridge Street, stated that she is the face of affordable housing. She said that you should not say that you are in favor of affordable housing if you are not. She said that she is a professional actor. She said that she pays rent and taxes. She is a responsible citizen and has lived in the city for 40 years. She said that she wants to see real diversity. She said that zoning needs to be changed in a humane way for all neighborhoods. She said that she and her neighbors have a right to be in the City of Cambridge, even though they may not be affluent.
>
> Peter Ciurczak, 720 Massachusetts Avenue, stated that he would like to put some numbers down as one of his fascinations. He said that in the last ten years in Cambridge, we have lost 28% of households making $50,000. He said that we have lost 17% of households making $50,000-$100,000 but we have gained 16% of households making between $100,000-$200,000 and there was a 70% increase in households making over $200,000. He said that the Affordable Housing Overlay is a good way of maintaining the diversity of incomes and people in the City of Cambridge. He said that if we do nothing, we will not get anywhere. He spoke in support of the overlay.
>
> Yanisa Techagumthorn, 216 Norfolk Street, stated that she is a transportation planner and she supports the Affordable Housing Overlay District. She said that an overlay will help non-profit developers. She said that she believes in density as it relates to transit. She supports a reduction of parking requirements. She stated her support for form-based codes to preserve neighborhood character and allow for a controlled way to increase density. She said that bringing these measures into reality will allow for families, students and others to live and stay in the City of Cambridge.
>
> Rebecca Schofield, 77 Harriet Street, Brighton, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT N) in strong support of the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
>
> Tina Alu, 113 ½ Pleasant Street, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT O) in support of the Affordable Housing Overlay District and an increase in City funding of $20 million dollars a year for five years.
>
> Patrick Braga, 11 Everett Street, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT P) in support of the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
>
> Toby Hide, 11 Wendell Street, stated that he strongly supports the Affordable Housing Overlay District. He stated that the treatment of existing buildings is particularly elegant. He said that he wants to emphasize that it can be improved by eliminating parking requirements. He said that this is a flawed place to start because those buildings were built under existing conditions with higher parking minimums.
>
> Don Somerfield, 237 Franklin Street, stated that he has lived in public housing since 2004. He said that he has been disabled for 17 years. He said that when he moved into an affordable housing apartment, he got to control all decisions of his life. He said that being independent has increased his quality of life. He stated his support for the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
>
> Betsy Harper, 60 Stearns Street, stated that she would like the staff to do extensive and additional work under environmental standards green building requirements and its definition. She said that there is a huge conversation that is about reducing our carbon emission and those goals will only be met by reduction in the transportation and reduction of buildings. She said that there is no conversation about carbon emission or energy use.
>
> Stuart Lesser, 115 Lexington Avenue, stated that he supports affordable housing. He said that he does not support an Affordable Housing Overlay District. He said that the Envision report talks about increased
> density and traffic and the character of neighborhoods. He said that we must look at neighborhood by neighborhood. He said that this is the important task. He said that in some areas this will work but we have to do the hard work to make that determination. He said that the parking requirement is not necessarily reduced parking.
>
> Carolyn Fuller, 12 Douglass Street, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT Q) regarding her strong support for the Affordable Housing Overlay District with the exception that there should be a parking maximum not minimum.
>
> Bill MacAvinney, 12 Douglass Street, stated that he is a homeowner. He talked about the differentials of power. He said that on his street there are roughly 17 rental units and 3 homeowner units. He said that 16 of the 17 rentals units have been forced out by rising rents. He said that people who are using their homes do not have a right to sue. He stated his strong support for the Affordable Housing Overlay District and the $20 million dollar per year addition by the City. He said that this proposal will come closer to leveling the playing field between market rate developers and affordable housing developers.
>
> Fred Meyer, 83 Hammond Street, stated that he is concerned about the people who cannot afford the rents in Cambridge. He said that this zoning proposal does not address this issue. He said that zoning has no control over who lives there, it only controls setbacks, etc. He stated that he would like to see statistics of the privately done affordable housing developments that reveal affordable housing for whom. He asked how many of those units went to people who are deserving and how many went to the millions of people from all over the world who would like to live in Cambridge. He spoke about a large Victorian House across the street from his home that is a halfway house. He said that he encourages this use.
>
> Sergey Petrov, 10 Dana Street, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT R) regarding consultation services, consequences, and identifying the number of people living in Cambridge who support the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
>
> Sharone Small, 77 Hancock Street, stated her support for the Affordable Housing Overlay District and the request for an additional $20 million dollars each year over the next five years for affordable housing. She said that the lack of affordable housing has reached a crisis and the City needs to everything it can to promote the creation of new, affordable units.
>
> Noam Tanner, 47 Sacramento Street, stated that he is on the board of a religious prayer group and due to Sabbath restrictions, the entire community has to live within walking distance of the synagogue. He said that if housing prices continue to rise, it will be difficult to maintain his group. He said that this group has formed many beautiful social connections. He stated his support for the Affordable Housing Overlay District.
>
> Jessica Sheehan, 99 Norfolk Street, stated that she strongly supports the Affordable Housing Overlay District and additional $20 million per year for five years for affordable housing.
>
> Nicola Williams, 8 Brewer Street, stated that she is pleased about the discussion of affordable housing. She said that she supports more affordable housing policies, but the overlay should not be the end all/be all. She said that $20 million dollars in additional funding is not enough. She said that Cambridge is becoming a city of rich and poor. She said that this policy will not help a single person making less than $56,800. She asked the City Council to look at other policies as well. She said that true equity is about wealth creation which is about home ownership.
>
> Lee Farris, 269 Norfolk Street, read from a prepared written statement (ATTACHMENT S). She stated that she liked that stated goals of the overlay, the decision to focus on height rather than FAR, 20% of
> affordable housing being for middle-income people and the inclusion of specific setback amounts. She stated that more information is needed in several areas, including defining and requiring a strong community process and explaining how to protect existing trees, other buildings, and affordable rents for existing small, local retail.
>
> Public Comment closed at 8:49 p.m.
>
> Councillors Simmons and Siddiqui thanked all those present for their patience and perseverance and noted that the next Housing Committee hearings will take place on March 20, 2019 and March 28, 2019.
>
> Councillor Simmons and Councillor Siddiqui thanked all those present for their attendance.
>
> Note: 21 additional communications were received by the City Clerk’s Office (ATTACHMENTS T through ATTACHMENTS NN).
>
> The hearing adjourned at 8:49 p.m.
>
> For the Committee,
>
>
> ________________________________ Councillor E. Denise Simmons, Co-Chair Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui, Co-Chair Housing Committee
>
