Audio Version

Meeting Minutes: Cambridge Planning Board

Meeting Date: August 5, 2025 Governing Body: Cambridge Planning Board Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting

Attendees: * Planning Board Members: Mary Flynn (Chair), H. Theodore Cohen, Mary Lydecker, Diego Macias, Tom Sieniewicz, Ashley Tan, Carolyn Zern * Associate Planning Board Members: Dan Anderson, Joy Jackson * City Staff: Jeff Roberts (Community Development, Director of Zoning and Development), Evans Petrini (Community Development, Senior Manager for Zoning and Development), Brian Gregory (Community Planning and Design, Urban Design), Elliot Veloso (Law Department, Deputy City Solicitor), Sydney Wright (Law Department), Peter McLaughlin (Inspectional Services, Commissioner), James D'Angelo (Inspectional Services Department), Cassie Arnault (Housing Department), Christine Yu (Housing Department)

Executive Summary: The Cambridge Planning Board convened to address two primary agenda items: a public hearing on a City Council zoning petition to amend Section 4.60 regarding short-term rentals, and an advisory design consultation for the HRI 30 Wendell LLC affordable housing overlay project. The Board unanimously recommended the adoption of the short-term rental zoning amendments, emphasizing the need for enhanced enforcement tools for Inspectional Services. For the 28-30 Wendell Street project, the Board provided advisory comments on design, massing, and landscaping, requesting further contextual renderings and material samples for the next consultation session.

I. Community Development Department Update

• Upcoming Planning Board Meetings:
  • August 19th Meeting:
    • Public hearing and minor amendment related to the reallocation of bicycle parking along Ames Street (part of the Kendall Square mixed-use development).
    • Design update on the Center Plaza and East-West Connector Roads in Kendall Square.
  • No meeting scheduled for the following week.
  • Further meetings are anticipated in September.
• City Council Recap (Summer Meeting):
  • Marisol et al. Zoning Petition (Religious Uses):
    • Adopted by City Council with minor tweaks.
    • Planning Board had sent a report with no positive or negative recommendation.
    • Tweaks included continued requirement for neighbor notification (similar to residential uses) and maintenance of open space requirements.
  • Biomed Realty Zoning Petition (320 Charles Street):
    • Adopted by City Council with a letter of commitment outlining public benefits.
    • Next step: A development proposal requiring a Planning Board special permit will be submitted in the future.
  • New Zoning Petition: A new zoning petition was referred at the last City Council meeting and will be reviewed by the Planning Board.
• Board Member Questions:
  • Ted Cohen clarified the next Planning Board meeting date, confirming it is August 19th (in two weeks), not next week.

II. Public Hearing: Zoning Petition to Amend Section 4.60 (Short-Term Rentals)

• Petition Overview: A City Council zoning petition to amend Section 4.60 of the Zoning Ordinance.
  • Redefine "short-term rental": Change from "less than 30 nights" to "less than 28 nights" to align with surrounding municipalities (e.g., Somerville, Boston).
  • Add definitions: "Operator-occupied short-term rental," "owner-adjacent short-term rental," and "booking agent."
  • Add conditions of authorized uses: Compliance with State Building Code, Fire Code, Sanitary Code, and all other state and local habitability requirements.
  • Add requirements: Provide booking information and other documentation to the city upon request.
  • Add enforcement mechanisms: For violations of the ordinance or state regulations.
• City Staff Presentation (James D'Angelo, Inspectional Services Department):
  • Current Situation:
    • City uses Granicus Host Compliance to monitor short-term rentals.
    • As of July 14th, approximately 635 short-term rentals in the city.
    • Only 175 registered units, leaving approximately 460 unregistered units.
    • Difficulty in identifying addresses from booking websites (e.g., Airbnb, Vrbo) until after booking.
    • Host Compliance identifies about 66% of listings.
    • 480 violation letters sent to date, resulting in some units becoming compliant or delisting.
    • Seasonal variances, with highest numbers in summer and during graduation season.
  • Breakdown of Registered Units:
    • 63% are operator-occupied.
    • 37% are owner-adjacent.
    • Majority (approx. 100 of 175) are in single and two-family houses.
    • 98% of registered units use Airbnb; 14% use Vrbo.
  • Proposed Changes:
    • Definition of Short-Term Rental: Changed to "less than 28 nights" for clarity and consistency with other cities.
    • Operator-Occupied Short-Term Rental: If the operator is away for any period, the unit must be rented as a whole to one party (previously 7 consecutive days). Individual bedrooms can only be rented if the operator is present.
    • Compliance: All short-term rentals must comply with building, sanitary, fire, and all other state/local occupancy codes.
    • Transaction Records: Ability to request transaction records for all units (previously only owner-adjacent).
    • Booking Agent Fines: Booking agents or persons accepting fees for ineligible short-term rentals can be fined $300 per day, with each day constituting a separate violation.
    • Injunctions: Inspectional Services can seek court injunctions to prohibit offering short-term rentals.
    • Revocation/Prohibition: ISD can revoke or prohibit registration for building, zoning, sanitary, or fire code violations.
  • Rationale: These changes aim to enhance enforcement capabilities, clarify language, and ensure safety, drawing inspiration from ordinances in Somerville, Boston, Springfield, Quincy, New York City, East Providence, and Key West.
• Public Comment:
  • No public comments were received at the meeting.
  • Written comments received by 5 p.m. yesterday were from Rachel Plummer, Sarah Block, Maria Fontelio, Ethan Frank, Itamar Turner Trowering, Ben Wergaft, John Frank, Peter Nonberg, Theodora Liv, Brian McNebo, Kathleen Higgins, David Harris, Matt Begedodo, and Joel Bard.
• Board Discussion:
  • Tom Sieniewicz: Asked about the problem the petition is trying to solve, citing concerns about overuse of short-term rentals in other cities.
    • Peter McLaughlin (ISD Commissioner): Emphasized safety concerns (egress, smoke/carbon monoxide detectors) in unregistered units and community impact (parties, noise). Stated current lack of mechanisms to address problematic short-term rentals.
    • James D'Angelo (ISD): Added that fining booking agents would disincentivize posting unregistered units and highlighted the integrity of neighborhoods and safety concerns.
  • Dan Anderson: Questioned if this is a zoning issue or if state-level regulations exist, and the scope of the problem.
    • Elliot Veloso (Law Department): Explained the disconnect between listed and registered units, and that the amendments provide more enforcement options to encourage registration and compliance with safety codes.
  • Ashley Tan: Asked if other cities regulate short-term rentals via zoning or a licensing commission.
    • Elliot Veloso: Confirmed Cambridge regulates through zoning, and this is a common approach in other municipalities (e.g., Quincy, Boston) where Inspectional Services is the appropriate department for code enforcement and safety evaluations.
    • Peter McLaughlin: Added that state building code mandates periodic inspection of short-term rentals, placing it under building code jurisdiction.
  • Joy Jackson: Asked if there's a prerequisite for registration before listing on websites.
    • James D'Angelo: Stated no cross-verification exists; Airbnb might ask for a registration number but doesn't verify it.
    • Elliot Veloso: The proposed amendments aim to enable the city to gather information for verification and compliance.
  • Joy Jackson: Asked if any proposed changes are unique to Cambridge.
    • Peter McLaughlin: Stated no, the changes reflect best practices from other communities.
    • Elliot Veloso: Confirmed a close analysis of other communities to ensure legal soundness and avoid challenges.
  • Dan Anderson: Asked about city liability if an incident occurred in a registered, inspected unit.
    • Elliot Veloso: Stated that while the city ensures code enforcement, liability for injuries would likely fall on the property owner and potentially the booking platform, not the city.
  • Ted Cohen: Strongly recommended adoption, noting the petition clarifies registration requirements and provides enforcement mechanisms. Highlighted neighbor concerns about transient occupants.
  • Tom Sieniewicz: Strongly endorsed the petition, urging quick action to provide ISD with necessary enforcement tools.
  • Ashley Tan: Expressed initial concern about granular detail in zoning but supported it if ISD is willing to take it on. Suggested other regulatory bodies (e.g., License Commission) could be considered if ISD resources become an issue.
• Motion: To recommend that the City Council adopt the zoning petition to amend Section 4.60 regarding short-term rentals.
  • Moved by: Tom Sieniewicz
  • Seconded by: Ted Cohen
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Ted Cohen: Yes
    • Mary Lydecker: Yes
    • Diego Macias: Yes
    • Tom Sieniewicz: Yes
    • Ashley Tan: Yes
    • Carolyn Zern: Yes
    • Mary Flynn: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed (7-0).

III. Advisory Design Consultation: Case AHO-8 (28-30 Wendell Street)

• Project: Affordable Housing Overlay project proposed by HRI 30 Wendell LLC.
• Proposal: Construct a new eight-story building with 95 affordable rental units and amenities, 77 long-term and 8 short-term bicycle parking spaces, and a gross floor area of 110,803 square feet.
• CDD Staff Introduction (Evan Petrini):
  • First of two required Planning Board advisory consultation sessions for an AHO project.
  • This process now applies to all residential developments at least 50,000 square feet.
  • AHO projects under 50,000 square feet no longer require two sessions, but those exceeding base zoning height require one session.
  • Purpose: Provide advisory comments on design and conformance with city urban design objectives/guidelines.
  • Planning Board will issue an initial report; applicant will return for a second session with an updated design.
• Applicant Presentation (Eleni Makrakis, HRI; Gabby Aitchison, Icon Architecture):
  • Project Goals: Affordability (100% affordable, exploring deeper subsidies), streetscape activation (engaging design, expanded sidewalk space, welcoming facade), and sustainability (all-electric, Enterprise Green Community certified, Passive House building).
  • Project Overview:
    • Fully income-restricted affordable rental community for individuals and families.
    • 95 apartments: 40 age-restricted one-bedroom units for older adults, 55 family homes (high percentage of two and three-bedroom units).
    • Community hub for resident and neighborhood use.
  • Community Process:
    • Over 15 meetings with city staff (housing, urban design, transportation, zoning, sustainability, DPW, fire department).
    • On-site and small group meetings with neighbors (Spring 2024).
    • Website launched for project information and feedback.
    • Presentations to Baldwin Neighborhood Council and Porter Square Neighborhood Association (Fall 2024, Spring 2025).
    • Three AHO hybrid community meetings, including an open house format for feedback on design elements (cornice, facade, windows, plantings, programming). Community voted on preferred brick, siding, and stone-look materials.
  • Ground Floor Design:
    • Operational Spaces: Parking for staff, management office (full-time property manager), maintenance office (full-time superintendent), large bike room (77 indoor spots with separate entrance).
    • Residential Community Spaces: Large community room overlooking courtyard, sunroom (lounge space for older adults), two quiet rooms for study/meetings.
    • Community Engagement Staff: Meeting room at front, larger resident services room. Full-time community engagement coordinator and part-time services coordinator for older adults.
    • Community Hub: Available for larger community use (afterschool, dance, cooking, wellness, financial education, crafting, computer classes, neighborhood gatherings). Separate entrance from Wendell Street, classroom-sized space, smaller meeting room, separate bathrooms, storage.
    • Little Free Library: Outdoor lending library to continue tradition.
  • Building Design Evolution (Gabby Aitchison):
    • June 2024 (First Community Meeting): Nine-story main mass, seven stories on either side. Established core goals: massing breakdown, brick use, window grouping.
    • November 2024 (Second Community Meeting): Reduced to eight-story main mass, six stories on either side (final height). Increased brick, simplified entry trellis, explored traditional base-middle-top design, warmer colors, window groupings. Positive feedback on brick.
    • March 2025 (Third Community Meeting): Pivot to full-height brick bookends (six stories) to relate to neighborhood masonry buildings. Enhanced brick detailing (datums, softened edges). Subtle base-middle-top with central portion accents. Ground floor exterior focus, updated entry canopy.
    • August 2025 (First Planning Board Meeting - Current Design): Refined rhythm with vertical siding sections and varying window widths. Soldier coursing at first/second floor. Cornice at top of brick reinforces six-story datum.
  • Exterior Details:
    • Elevations: Front elevation shows brick bookends wrapping corners. Side/rear elevations show five-story bays wrapping to rear and courtyard.
    • Materials: Variety of complementary colors and textures for depth. Community preferred brick and stone-look siding at base. Open to exploring other siding colors/textures.
    • Energy Efficiency: High continuous insulation, windows recede for shadow lines. Dark bronze frame color. Operable windows in each residential space.
    • Window Grouping: Stacked bond brick between windows to unite them; stone lintel above. Transparent middle between siding windows.
    • Brick Detailing: Stacked bond, soldier coursing at levels 1-2, corner detailing (modern coining).
    • Entries: Two distinct entries on Wendell Street (hub and main residential). Distinct but complementary, with residential entry purposefully larger. Distinguished by landscaping and site design.
  • Pedestrian Experience:
    • Oxford/Wendell Corner: Brick bookends relate to brick building across the street.
    • Wendell Street (South): Details create depth.
    • In front of Hub: High ground floor transparency for inviting feel. Variation in setbacks, wider sidewalks at entries.
    • Wendell Street (North): Adjacent to Little Free Library, playful brick detailing. Entry canopy and signage.
  • Rear Facade: Lighter color palette towards top.
  • Site Plan:
    • Building shape/orientation allows south-facing courtyard for primary outdoor gathering, excellent daylight, and minimal street shadows.
    • North side outdoor spaces activate streetscape (seating, bike racks, Little Free Library).
    • Plantings, hardscape, furniture define spaces. Plantings create separation (front: seating/sidewalk; rear: parcel/parking).
    • Wendell Street Outdoor Areas:
      • West side (Little Free Library): Playful concrete seating on permeable surface.
      • Residential Entry: Bench under canopy, sculptural seating, movable furniture, plants separating from sidewalk. Six bike parking spaces.
      • Outside Hub: Seat wall steps, geometric plaza. Four bike parking spaces.
    • Courtyard: Range of activities, spaces defined by trellis, furniture, nature play seating. Accessible permeable surface. Variety of seating materials/sizes. Exploring shade options (trellis).
    • Plantings: Native, drought-tolerant, shade-tolerant trees, shrubs, low plantings.
  • Next Steps: Refine design (front canopies, cornice), explore material variations, submitted Article 22, submitted for Passive House pre-certification, coordinate with engineers.
• Public Comment:
  • Kathy Higgins (345 Norfolk Street): Strong support for 95 affordable homes, vibrant design. Attended community meetings, noted support for the plan despite opposition. Highlighted need for affordable housing (workers sleeping in cars, 2,700 applications for 98 units). Commended HRI's responsiveness.
  • Teresa Cardosi (7 Woodrow Wilson Court): Praised HRI's responsiveness to community input, including redesigning for intergenerational housing (40 elderly, 55 family units) and reducing height from 9 to 8 stories (resulting in 15 lost homes). Noted HRI's voluntary setbacks.
  • Benjamin Wergaft (35 Wendell Street): Expressed "deep disquiet" about the project's scale, calling it a "colossus" that changes street character. Criticized HRI's handling of neighborhood feedback, alleging suppression of resistance. Requested Planning Board recommend amendments on height, mass, and scale.
  • Theodore Live (17 Wendell Street): Stated HRI's impression of neighborhood support is "misplaced," with most feeling the building is out of proportion. Compared it to a "fine building on its own, but wrong location." Noted insufficient setbacks compared to surrounding Victorian homes.
  • Sean Hart: Strong support for the project, commending developers' efforts. Emphasized the need for housing and that this project aligns with upzoning goals.
  • Matt Begadano (118 Oxford Street): Expressed concern about cost overruns, suggesting mass timber (cross-laminated timber) as an alternative. Raised issues with infrastructure, parking (unrealistic to assume no cars), electrical service, and problematic sewers. Suspected the building would be scaled back due to cost.
  • Gabe Malseptic (31 Wendell Street): Delighted by affordable housing but found the 90-foot building "monolithic" and dominating the area. Criticized HRI's "selective" community engagement. Concerned about density without parking, impact on first responder routes, and potential commercial/service depot use. Advocated for a "more reasonable six-story scale."
  • Jim Stockard (141 Oxford Street): Enthusiastic support for the development, emphasizing the need for affordable homes for families and elderly residents. Praised the multi-generational aspect and proximity to schools/services. Prioritized the need for safe, permanent housing over building height/setback.
  • Justin Saif (259 Harley Street): Strong support for the proposed building, finding the design fits the neighborhood and relates to nearby buildings. Noted its location on a "thickening corridor" aligns with city goals. Highlighted the difficulty of building affordable housing and the project's environmental benefits (reduced parking, green building).
  • James Zoll (203 Pemberton Street): Pleased with the result, finding it a "great building" that adds to the neighborhood. Impressed by efforts for seniors and families. Thanked the city for the AHO. Regretted the loss of 15 homes and the "worst in people" aspect of community meetings.
  • Lou Wergeft (35 Wendell Street): As an abutter, concerned about shadows on his garden. Stated neighborhood welcomes affordable housing but opposes the scale. Criticized HRI for ignoring growing neighborhood sentiment and "cunningly eliminated open public comment" at the third meeting.
  • Zannie Alter (35 Pemberton Street): Expressed appreciation and gratitude for the project, commending HRI for listening to the community. Emphasized the importance of housing for low-income students and families in Cambridge. Found the design "beautiful" and supported HRI's work.
  • Joel Bard (51 Wendell Street): Stated the neighborhood welcomes affordable housing but the concern is scale. Criticized the presentation for not showing the building in context with smaller, wood-framed structures. Urged the Planning Board to consider context and scale.
  • Rachel Plummer (10 Wendell Street): Wholehearted support for the proposed development. Appreciated HRI's process despite "extreme tensions" and found the third meeting format necessary for more voices. Acknowledged potential discomfort (parking, larger structure) but deemed it necessary given housing needs.
  • Esther Hainig (136 Pine Street): Strong support for the project, praising the diverse neighborhood and intergenerational aspect. Applauded 95 new affordable homes and HRI's resident services. Commended the "well-designed building" for its aesthetics, recessed height, and attractive streetscape.
  • Lucy Angles (47 Wendell Street): Strong support for the project, acknowledging neighbor concerns about scale but emphasizing the importance of providing opportunities for more families to live in the Baldwin neighborhood.
• Board Discussion and Recommendations:
  • Diego Macias: Asked if a narrower, stepping massing (higher in the center) was considered to blend with the neighborhood context.
    • Eleni Makrakis: Explained that large family units restrict floor plate design, and efficiency/cost considerations for higher buildings were factors.
    • Gabby Aitchison: Added that AHO provisions limited height when schematic design began.
  • Ashley Tan: Asked about transportation demand measures, especially for elderly residents, given distance to train. Inquired about paratransit parking.
    • Eleni Makrakis: Noted bus lines on Mass Ave. Robust bike room. Small garage/driveway for pick-ups. Working with city on TDM, including move-in Charlie cards and connecting residents to low-income programs via on-site services.
  • Ted Cohen: Asked to see material samples and about the aesthetics of the garage door.
    • Eleni Makrakis: Showed brick, main body color (willow gray, reads green), granite base, and accent colors. Offered to schedule in-person viewing.
    • Gabby Aitchison: Garage door is at current curb cut, limited width. Still specifying exact door, currently paint-matched to brick. Open to comments on aesthetics.
  • Dan Anderson:
    • Asked if the "bookends" were always six stories when the building was nine stories (i.e., a five-story base with four stories above).
      • Gabby Aitchison: Bookends were always two stories below the top (seven stories when building was nine, now six stories). No discussion of keeping bookends shorter with a more setback, taller central portion due to structural system and unit layouts.
    • Asked about increasing front yard setback and decreasing rear yard setback.
      • Eleni Makrakis: Forecourt is 19 feet, aligning with other Wendell Street properties. Rear setback is 15 feet (previous AHO stipulation), allowing usable space and concealing condensers.
    • Requested sun shadow study and more robust contextual renderings/site plans for next meeting.
  • Carolyn Zern:
    • Appreciated dedication to affordable housing, Passive House, and soldier coursing. Suggested playing with window sills/lintels on first/second stories.
    • Questioned if transformer and fire command center (currently on Wendell Street) could be relocated or if the space could be activated.
      • Gabby Aitchison: Transformer requires a three-hour vault and street access. Fire command center requires direct exterior access per Fire Department request.
    • Asked about unused roof space for additional sustainability efforts.
      • Eleni Makrakis: Planning for PV solar on the roof.
    • Asked city staff if Cambridge Fire Department reviews all large-scale developments.
      • Jeff Roberts: Confirmed Fire Department reviews all building permits and is involved early in the process.
  • Tom Sieniewicz:
    • Commended HRI for not building to maximum height. Asked why eight stories was chosen.
      • Eleni Makrakis: Mandate for affordable units, mission as a nonprofit, unique opportunity for significant units in accessible neighborhood. Financial feasibility, high land costs. Intergenerational mix (40 older adult units) reduces car demand. Eight stories is the "sweet spot."
      • Kate Gilmore: Added that on-site management and maintenance offices (critical for successful community) are enabled by the scale.
    • Asked for a physical or digital model in context for the next meeting.
      • Gabby Aitchison: Uses city's digital model and can share more.
    • Questioned the timing of the review, noting design is far along.
      • Eleni Makrakis: Difficult to time for all groups. Wanted to present a confident, proud design. Still space for changes (cornices, materials).
    • Critiqued "storefront" feel of first floor on Wendell Street, suggesting it doesn't fit residential character.
    • Suggested re-evaluating cornice placement to mitigate perceived height/bulk, perhaps dropping it down.
    • Emphasized "playful" library is actually a "sincere and real" community asset. Suggested incorporating details recognizing local history (Lesley University's contributions).
    • Praised use of real brick and encouraged thoughtful detailing.
  • Mary Flynn (Chair):
    • Commended public input and applicant's engagement.
    • Echoed need for earlier Planning Board input on massing.
    • Felt the design had become "solid facade with two bookends," losing the "base of the building." Suggested consistent patterning/texture across the base.
    • Questioned corner brick detailing.
    • Concerned about the "gray" tone of the rear facade.
    • Landscape design felt "piecemeal" and needed improvement, especially the "low walkable planting" and lack of vegetation in the courtyard.
    • Suggested opening up common rooms to the courtyard.
    • Recommended more detail on fence selection to create a "beautiful edge condition."
    • Felt the building looked "flat," "dull," and "dorm-like," not residential.
    • Agreed on the importance of seeing the building in broader context, especially looking down Wendell Street towards Mass Ave.
    • Regretted the late stage of the design review.
  • Dan Anderson (second round):
    • Echoed Mary and Tom's comments.
    • Suggested more landscape in the rear, less in the front, or hardscape to create breathing room on Wendell Street.
    • Suggested different character for storefront material/glazing, more appropriate to taller portion.
    • Suggested integrating the community hub more internally with residential spaces.
    • Skeptical of vestibule location, suggested shifting it one bay east.
    • Courtyard felt "tight"; suggested common room/sunroom opening directly to activate space.
    • Requested sun shadow study and more robust contextual renderings.
  • Ashley Tan (second round):
    • Appreciated senior and family housing.
    • Loved sunroom and community rooms.
    • Agreed on opening up south-facing open space to sunroom/resident room.
    • Suggested more variation in color/texture to break down building bulk.
    • Liked urban design memo comment about cornice line on A4 to de-emphasize height.
  • Ted Cohen (second round):
    • Liked the building and 95 affordable units, replacing "undistinguished building and awful tennis court."
    • Acknowledged need for taller buildings.
    • Liked brick and cornice lines, but agreed with colleagues on exploring different cornice uses.
    • Concerned about "gray" appearance and color scheme.
    • Urged more thought on garage door aesthetics.
  • Diego Macias (second round):
    • Liked the design, intergenerational components, and "quirks" like the Little Free Library.
    • Agreed with other board members' points.
    • Suggested wider bike storage spots for cargo bikes.
    • Requested a digital 3D model for orbiting.
• Motion: To conclude the design consultation session and submit an initial report with comments to the developer.
  • Moved by: Ted Cohen
  • Seconded by: Tom Sieniewicz
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Ted Cohen: Yes
    • Mary Lydecker: Yes
    • Diego Macias: Yes
    • Tom Sieniewicz: Yes
    • Ashley Tan: Yes
    • Carolyn Zern: Yes
    • Mary Flynn: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed (7-0).

IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned.