Without moratorium, it could soon be ‘crush hour’ in Cambridge
Silly season is almost upon us. The Cambridge City Council is about to return from its shortened summer vacation and the usual suspects — council members, pro-development forces and residents — are about to resume a crucial debate about the future of our city. Much has been said to define or denigrate the Cambridge Residents Alliance, which is calling for a year’s moratorium on upzoning approvals. This alliance was a spontaneous response by area residents to two proposed developments: one that threatened to eviscerate Newtowne Court, a low-income housing community, the other that proposed a 14-story tower in a public park.
The Cambridge Residents Alliance is not a knee-jerk nimby organization. We’re not saying “No!” to any and all developments in Cambridge, as one writer recently charged in a Boston Globe oped. But we are saying “Stop and think!”
Stop trading away zoning protections, stop approving oversized or inappropriate projects (such as a bio lab in Central Square) in exchange for money and a few paltry low-income apartments. In other words, let’s stop acting like Cambridge is for sale and start thinking about the consequences of our actions.
“A virtual tsunami of development”
In all the arguments supporting continued upzoning, no one brings up the fact Cambridge faces a virtual tsunami of development — more than 18 million square feet of office, lab and living space that, if approved, would bring an additional 65,000 cars onto Cambridge’s already congested streets.
This is not incidental or organic growth and these are not inflated estimates. This is a massive overload dumped onto our streets and transportation systems.
And don’t expect the red line to pick up the slack anytime soon. These anticipated projects would result in an additional 66,000 public transit trips on a system that is already maxed out, according to a recent study by the Urban Land Institute.
Forget the term “rush hour.” Start thinking “crush hour.”
Nobody mentions the Land Institute’s prediction of people-packed red line trains eerily passing through local stations without stopping.
Nor does anyone in Cambridge even seem aware that something momentous is happening, something that will permanently alter the fabric of our community — not the council, the Planning Board and especially not the Community Development Department, which at times appears to work more for developers than the city. Not one of these civic bodies appears to have the vision or the courage to serve as the gatekeepers and cautious stewards our city needs. It seems like the house is on fire and they’re still setting the table for dinner.
Pro-development data?
True, there have been neighborhood advisory groups appointed to make recommendations for the future of Central and Kendall squares. Attend one of their open meetings and you’ll see they’re being spoon-fed cherry-picked data that support the pro-development agenda in City Hall. Worse still, they are working in silos, never seeing the broader landscape, as if development elsewhere in Cambridge should have no impact on their thinking. How can you consider roadway traffic in Central Square when nobody tells you there are 65,000 more cars on the way? Or when the CDD tells you the red line still has (a non-existent) 40 percent additional capacity?
What worried those of us who took a closer look at this oncoming train wreck was that nobody appeared to be analyzing the impact on Cambridge’s residents, neighborhoods and quality of life in light of all this aggregated activity. Each project was being considered individually, on the basis of its own merits, totally ignoring the impact from all other projects. The mindset in City Hall seems directed toward maximizing the give-back from developers rather than ensuring the protection and viability of the fabric of our community.
It’s not anybody’s fault, just a frightening example of how the power of money and the weight of traditional political behavior is moving us ever closer to the disappearance of all that makes Cambridge livable and worth living in.
And so it remained for the citizens of Cambridge — those most affected by thoughtless, piecemeal development — to step into the vacuum and demand a more thoughtful approach to planning our city’s future. No matter what statistics the CCD or developers throw around, we know what it’s like to live in Cambridge. We know there’s already more density on our roads than we can handle. We know the intersections that get blocked up on a daily basis. We know the cars on the red line are packed to capacity. We know we don’t want the steel and glass boxes of Kendall Square traveling down Massachusetts Avenue toward Central Square.
So, yes, the Cambridge Residents Alliance is calling for a one-year moratorium on upzoning. We believe Cambridge needs full-scale, citywide planning before we allow full-scale citywide upzoning and development. We think someone should weigh the impact of 65,000 additional cars on our roadways — and on the air we breathe — before we disembowel our zoning regulations to let those cars in. And we would also like to analyze the impact of these developments on housing costs, school populations, community diversity, open space and our access to sun and sky before we run headlong and recklessly into the future. We owe that much to ourselves and to the future generations whose lives will be greatly affected by the decisions we make today.
Paul Steven Stone is a novelist and essayist living in Cambridge. He can be reached at [email protected]. And, contrary to some flippant opinions, he is not hoping to downzone Cambridge back into farmland.
I take issue with only one thing you said. There is no desire on the part of city government to “maximiz[e] the give-back from developers”. The desire is to maximize giveaways to developers; as a general rule, giveback on any appreciable scale happens only when residents turn out in large numbers to demand it, and much of city government is perfectly happy to divert as much as possible of so-called mitigation away from the affected neighborhood (apparently dictionaries are in short supply in City Hall). You had only to listen to last night’s discussion of this issue to get a clear view of where at least some councillors stand. Nothing will change in this regard until voters start showing up in the odd years to vote out the councillors whose devotion to neighborhoods ends at lip service paid right before they enthusiastically vote for yet another upzoning filed by a developer who just couldn’t make enough of a killing under the zoning that was in place when it bought the property.
We get new open space only when it is temporarily lent to us by a developer in exchange for more density somewhere nearby. As soon as it becomes more convenient to build on that open space, out come the upzoning petitions and councillors’ convenient amnesia about how that open space got there. Open space, lower building heights and other such hard-won concessions to neighborhoods just allow developers to landbank at lower tax rates until they feel like taking it all back and building higher and bigger.
Last night, there was the most galling, hypocritical resolution I have ever seen: “Congratulating The Cambridge Center Rooftop Garden on receiving the ‘Best Secret Garden Award’ by Boston Magazine.” I thanked the seven councillors who voted to ensure that that award would never be repeated by preventing any discussion that might have accidentally resulted in a better outcome for everybody, Boston Properties, Google, the greater Kendall Square neighborhood (including other BP tenants who love that garden) and the rest of the city.
My hat is off to the Cambridge Residents Alliance. I hope you are up for the hard work of organizing and educating that it will take to figure out how to make Cambridge a viable city that we all still want to and can live in.
Heather, you bring up a good point, that the city council or its representatives never seem interested in negotiating to improve givebacks unless the public is standing by. I personally witnessed Forest City going back to their vaults and drawing board everytime they were challenged by an enraged citizenry, putting far more into the pot than the city council would have ever dared asked for.
I am quite concerned about the Community Development Department’s involvement in all of this, as they appear to work as advocates for the developers, and have an emotional stake in this whole upzoning adventure. If you study their mindset, they’ve already joined in mind and spirit with Goody Clancey in selling off the parking lots (read: ‘open spaces’) that serve as a buffer between Central Square and the adjoining residential neighborhood. I’ve already suggested changing their name and their mission to the Community Development and Protection Department, with the hopes of enlisting their considerable talents for protecting all that we have to lose to unchecked development.
As for the Cambridge Residents Alliance, we’re pretty firmly set on preparing for the long battle this kind of philosophical and financial contretemps requires. For more information, or to sign onboard, contact us at CambridgeResidentsAlliance.org