The Cambridge City Council addresses a Linear Park Path closing and plans for a Business Improvement District in Porter Square, among other matters, at its meeting Monday. Here’s what to watch for.
Linear Park closing: On the same day the Linear Path is scheduled to close for renovations, the council begins addressing concerns about safe alternate routes.
The path, which has a contract for renovations lasting up to 14 months, is used by about 1,500 people daily. While the city has identified alternative routes nearby, including on Clifton Street, Whittemore Avenue, Dudley Street, Shea Road, Harvey Street and Cameron Avenue, residents worry about safety and the increase in traffic and called for safe, clearly marked, high-quality detours for pedestrians and cyclists, councillor Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler said.
His order asks the city manager to work with the Department of Transportation and others to address the concerns, including improving connectivity north of Rindge Avenue, considering measures such as traffic calming, neighborways, contraflow bike lanes, wayfinding and intersection safety upgrades and ensuring detours are safe and accessible throughout construction.
Porter Square Business Improvement District: A study of creating a business improvement district in Porter Square will start this fiscal year, said city manager Yi-An Huang and Melissa Peters, assistant city manager for community development.
The city applied for two state grants in June that are now approved – from the Massachusetts Downtown Initiative, which provides up to $30,000 in consultant services for a study; and the Massachusetts Vacant Storefront Program, which offers $50,000 in refundable tax credits to encourage businesses to occupy long-term empty spaces citywide.
The council previously unanimously approved $25,000 to pay for a study, which would look at a large stretch of Massachusetts Avenue where businesses and property owners lack a formal organization to advocate for them or coordinate on their behalf. A business improvement district could address quality of life issues raised by locals, such as cleanliness and safety concerns around shoplifting, drugs needles and homelessness.
Some have raised concerns that starting a business association would be the more appropriate first move. Bids bring financial obligations from property owners to pay for services rather than relying on voluntary membership dues. A majority of property owners must vote to approve a Bid.
Next steps includes finalizing state agreements, outreach for the tax credit and starting the study.
Taking back a curb cut: Councillor Patty Nolan urges fellow councillors to revoke a curb cut they granted at 177 Hancock St., Mid-Cambridge, citing procedural deficiencies and missing information in the application – a topic that got a thorough working over Monday, with Sobrinho-Wheeler injecting into the 45 minutes of discussion a reminder that “the majority of the council has said very clearly we do not want this power. We want city staff to decide on curb cuts.”
Still, power remains with the council, which Nolan said is the only body that considers the impacts of curb cuts on residents and neighborhoods; approvals effectively privatize public space and can reduce access to on-street parking for neighbors while increasing private property value, she said.
The integrity of the curb cut approval process was compromised because the applicant failed to include all required abutter notices and letters of support or opposition from neighboring property owners, Nolan said, and when abutter responses are missing, intentionally or unintentionally, the council has a basis to reconsider and potentially revoke an approval. She has now requested two votes: to reconsider the vote and revoke the Hancock Street approval.
One wrinkle: The property owners installed the curb cut. With a revocation, the sidewalk would have to be filled back in.
The council meets at 5:30 p.m. Monday at City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Ave., Central Square, Cambridge. Televised and watchable online and by Zoom videoconferencing.
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.
The headline here is strangely – perhaps deliberately? – misleading: Sobrinho-Wheeker is not proposing an “alternative” to the city administration’s damaging plan for Linear Park, but rather something more like “mitigation” for the disruption and detour. But where was Sobrinho-Wheeler when large numbers of residents along Linear Park along with many who (have tried to) enjoy walking there despite the speeding bicyclists, were lobbying and pleading for the unelected city administration to choose an “alternative” to their ill-considered and expensive plan?? Nowhere. Had he (and other councillors) listened to the majority of the community – and not just the most extreme of the dedicated bicycle lobby
[cont…] there would be no need for “posturing” about “mitigating” the disruption from this largely unwanted and unnecessary plan. In fact, opponents of the administration’s plan urged using Harvey Street as an “alternative,” not for any construction, but to widening the supposedly “multi-use” path through Linear Park to begin with, so there would be a better option for the worst of the bicyclists than racing through the purportedly “shared” path. But now its an “alternative” for Linear Park?? Go figure.