‘Massing’ on Massachusetts Avenue is one thing, but Walden Street does not give same permission
The developers of a nine-story, 102-foot, affordable housing building proposed for 2072 Massachusetts Ave. have defended its towering height by saying that it “masses” on the avenue, a thoroughfare that seems to give permission for its size. But it doesn’t “mass” only there: Its frontage is equally extensive along Walden Street – 74 feet on the side along each road. Walden Street, made up mostly of modest two- and three-story houses, does not “give permission” for this “massing,” not in human nor in aesthetic terms. Nor do the structures abutting the proposed building and across Walden from it: the Russell Apartments, housing senior and disabled residents on Massachusetts Avenue, and the one-story commercial buildings just across the way.
Massachusetts Avenue should not be the only defining environment for the proposed building. Claiming that its height is commensurate with its surroundings insults the intelligence of the community. And parading distorting renderings minimizing the difference in height between the proposed building and Russell Apartments denies the enormous impact its “mass” (at 102 feet) will have on those vulnerable residents whose building is 58 feet high.
The developers are asking for waivers well beyond the Affordable Housing Overlay passed in October 2020: for example, the AHO allows for a maximum of 45 feet of building height in “Res B” zoning (a portion of the property along Walden Street) and a maximum of 70 feet in height in the zoning for the other portion of the property. The layers of regulations involved might permit six stories at 70 feet, assuming the property is completely in one zone, but the AHO would not permit nine stories and 102 feet.
Significant to the future of development, and the future of Cambridge’s neighborhoods, is the precedent such a “massive” building would set: do we really want that to be the future of this town?
Many neighbors and other Cambridge residents, supporting affordable housing, have signed a petition asking for reductions in height and density. The Board of Zoning Appeal also, months ago, asked the developers to come back with a lower version. Yet the nine stories remain in the proposal to be presented at the May 4 meeting of the Planning Board and at the May 20 meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeal.
It is time for more voices to be heard: the clock is running out. This project, and the future of Cambridge development, needs to respect the neighborhood and be in line with the recently adopted affordable housing laws. The masses are speaking.
Merry White, Cypress Street
To get a copy and sign the petition Merry mentions, please send an email to [email protected]
We don’t get to broad affordability unless we build more housing in Cambridge. I disagree about restricting Cambridge for the rich only and support this development. I live in the neighborhood and I am sure there will be some negative aspects from traffic. However, my selfish interests does not compare to the acute shortage in housing in Cambridge.
“do we really want that to be the future of this town?”
I mean, yes? The future of Cambridge, which is a city, not a town, should be one where we build lots of affordable housing. This building sets exactly the right precedent.
Where did this idea that the most important thing about any development is its “massing” come from? It genuinely baffles me.
Ms. White’s letter neglects to mention that the part of the building facing the Walden Street neighborhood will step down to 5 stories, one of several changes made in response to abutters’ concerns.
The BZA is being asked to approve a permit for this building under Chapter 40B of Mass. state law, not under the Cambridge AHO. Chapter 40B was passed more that 50 years ago to stop cities from doing exactly what Ms. White wants Cambridge to do now–make affordable housing proposals jump through one hoop after another, imposing costly delays until the housing is no longer affordable to those who need it most.
It’s been about nine months since the Trump administration abruptly canceled a rule implementing fair housing provisions in a 1968 Federal law, saying that people should “no longer be bothered…by having low income housing built in your neighborhood.” Federal housing policy and Cambridge attitudes toward discriminatory zoning are now changing. Let’s hope that this news soon reaches our neighbors on Walden Street.
Ms. White’s letter neglects to mention that the part of the building facing the Walden Street neighborhood will step down to 5 stories, one of several changes made in response to abutters’ concerns.
The BZA is being asked to approve a permit for this building under Chapter 40B of Mass. state law, not under the Cambridge AHO. Chapter 40B was passed more that 50 years ago to stop cities from doing exactly what Ms. White wants Cambridge to do now–make affordable housing proposals jump through one hoop after another, imposing costly delays until the housing is no longer affordable to those who need it most.
It’s been about nine months since the Trump administration abruptly canceled a rule implementing fair housing provisions in a 1968 Federal law, saying that people should “no longer be bothered…by having low income housing built in your neighborhood.” Federal housing policy and Cambridge attitudes toward discriminatory zoning are now changing. Let’s hope that this news soon reaches our neighbors on Walden Street.
No one is arguing the need for affordable housing in Cambridge.
But we need to do it in a smart and balanced way.
Anyone who lives near or commutes through that intersection knows how dangerous and congested it is. This is a terrible location to have one of the highest buildings in all of North Cambridge with no setbacks.
Also, there is lack of concern about the vulnerable abutters in affordable housing (seniors and people with disabilities) who live next door. This development completely ignores their needs — this building will block light to their only outdoor space. Their lives will be disrupted for 2 years while construction takes place (the building is only 3-4 feet from their building and it towers over them).
A compromise is needed and to say the developers have done anything to address abutters concerns is inaccurate at best.
Thank you Ms. White. I feel heard.
I have been writing to the city. The city manager, planning board, inspectors and developers have not passed muster with the 40B community outreach requirement(s), which is what the developers, manager and mayor need to satisfy in order to by-pass at least 18 zoning variances.
I live within a stone’s throw of this proposed Goliath and am very concerned; it will swallow up the corner at Mass Ave and Walden St, filling up the entire lot (no setbacks, unlike any other very tall building in Cambridge from Arlington to Boston); furthermore, how will it be staged? The traffic is already bad enough, but it will become a living nightmare not for only the neighbors but for commuters as well. It will snarl life here for years and years and no one is willing to talk about it.
Like Susan F wrote in her comment, I’m not at all against affordable housing, but a quick sniff test tells another story: this is mid-income and above for most of the units and very few will go to the neediest, so if the pros want to carry on about affordable housing i Cambridge (which has already reached it’s 10% saturation quota), they should lean-in on the city of Cambridge and ask it to use its vast resources and land and put the proverbial money where the proverbial mouth is: if Cambridge cared about those ‘who desperately need housing they can afford’ then the city would not subcontract these projects like 2072 Mass Ave to for-profit developers. This project has been continued twice for missteps and hubris among other reasons to long to list here–certainly there are non-profit developers who would be better that the city could hire instead? It ‘s time to reset and let this building find a site large enough to accommodate it.
Before I close, I must add how it’s demoralizing to watch the city’s forked tongues test the wind and give lip service wherever the money expedites the profits and make councilors, mayor and manager ‘politically correct’ amongst the misinformed–because misled– Cambridge citizenry who believe, falsely– but not their fault, that this and similar projects are about ‘affordable housing.’ What’s really going on here is something to the contrary. I heard, recently, someone say how ‘Cambridge feels more like a real-estate company than a city’ and I must agree, sadly; likewise, this Cambridge real-estate company has a whole set of Cambridge city brokers and realtors who are egregiously fast-tracking these projects in a breathless fashion.
I say “Slow down,”–neighborhood groups and tax payers have a right to weigh in and be heard and responded to, while the city and developers have a responsibility to listen and accommodate, or has Cambridge picked up the Trump play-book of Washington’s last four years and now feels entitled and emboldened to act with vulgar impunity and proceed in shortsightedness against the people? Enough! If this is to be done, and it should be, it should be done right and well and actually meet the needs of all the people who desperately need housing that is affordable, not the corporate level of developers and companies who stand in interest to make large commissions and sundry perks for their bottom line.
Could it be this development is too close to the ivory towers of Avon Hill? Definitely aren’t having any problems getting it done in the A4.
Hi Sam,
Actually, quite a few of the regulars who chime in in favor of this live on Avon Hill…if they lived closer about they’d change their tune. If this were truly affordable housing and commensurate in size and scale with the neighborhood, I would be all for it, and so would many I know who now oppose the present plan because of its design and size in relation to its lot and the surrounding neighborhood to which it should communicate.
And in response to James Zall’s comments – the Developers plan includes 17 feet of mass at 102feet in height where the is building intersects with the rear of the Russell apartments. This towering mass runs directly across from a Walden Street building. The “drop down” to 59 feet that runs yet another 40 feet into the Walden neighborhood. All of this wildly beyond AHO zoning standards. Interestingly, when the Developers mention responding to abutters it is only those across the street not the 55 seniors and disabled affordable residents just a few feet away – the closest abutters. A majority of us have signed a petition to ask for changes that will better protect our light, air, and privacy. These asks are to be considered when building to our own zoning guidelines.
This development trying to be built using the state 40B process does not pass muster