Cambridge’s Board of Zoning Appeal unanimously rejected a challenge Thursday to a building permit for a 10-unit residential development at 90 Lexington Ave., clearing a major hurdle for the project.
All five board members voted against an appeal filed by four neighboring property owners, who argued that the proposed expansion of an existing three-family home violates city rules governing setbacks, bicycle parking, open space, affordable housing, stormwater drainage and tree protection.
The project would renovate the existing building and construct a three-story rear addition, adding seven residential units under Cambridge’s multifamily housing zoning ordinance adopted in February 2025.
The ordinance eliminated single- and two-family-only zoning across the city, allowing more housing to be built in previously restricted residential neighborhoods.
A first challenge
According to the appellants, their challenge was the first appeal of a building permit issued under the new zoning rules, which have since become the subject of proposed amendments before the City Council.
The property was purchased in September by Trio Development for $3.2 million, after a previous developer, Avenue Capital Partners, purchased it for $2.6 million in October 2025 and began renovations. Trio acquired the property with an approved building permit.
Tom Pounds, a resident of 102 Lexington Ave. who presented the neighbors’ case, argued that the building is too large for the property to accommodate required infrastructure, emergency access and drainage systems.
“First, the yards are too small to hold what the ordinance and the codes require,” Pounds told the board. “Second, the roof of the addition is too large to drain on this site, which has both high groundwater and impervious clay soil.”
The neighbors argued that extensive renovations to the existing building should cause its three apartments to count toward Cambridge’s 10-unit threshold for affordable housing requirements.
The board’s reasoning
Ilya Fuchs, an attorney and partner at Trio Development, dismissed that interpretation as “nonsense,” arguing that renovating an existing home does not erase its status as an existing building.
Board members largely concluded that some alleged violations fell outside their jurisdiction, while others could be addressed through subsequent revisions to the plans.
“My confidence is with ISD and our city’s departments when they review an application,” board chair Steven Ng said, referring to the Inspectional Services Department.
Fear of long lines?
In a Friday interview, Pounds accused the board of abdicating its responsibility to scrutinize the permit, suggesting members were reluctant to overturn it because doing so could invite similar challenges to developments across Cambridge.
“If they found in our favor, they could anticipate a long, long line of people at their door making appeals on exactly this issue,” Pounds said. He warned that rejecting the appeal sets an equally troubling precedent, effectively telling developers, “Don’t worry about the ordinance being enforced.”
Fuchs defended the project, citing seven months of review by city departments. He characterized the opposition as “typical NIMBY — not in my backyard” in a Friday interview.
“They don’t want this type of development on their street,” Fuchs said. “The issue is not with the developer. The issue should be with the city who enacted this type of ordinance allowing for this type of construction.”
Pounds rejected that characterization, saying the neighbors support additional housing but want the city to enforce its own laws.
“We like the density of Lexington Avenue. We like that it’s a multifamily street,” he said. “All we’re asking for is enforcement of the ordinance and all of its elements.”
During the hearing, Fuchs offered eight measures to address neighbors’ concerns, including changes to bicycle parking, drainage documentation and tree protection. Fuchs said Friday that Trio remained willing to work with neighbors.
“If it’s reasonable, we’ll do it,” Fuchs said. “But we don’t want a gun to our heads, either, to do things that are either not required by the ordinances or just are not reasonable.”
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.