MINUTES OF PAST CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
1. Regular Meeting - Jun 21, 2021, 5:30pm
2. Regular Meeting - Jun 28, 2021, 5:30pm
3. Special Meeting - Aug 2, 2021, 5:30pm
4. Regular Meeting - Sep 13, 2021, 5:30pm
5. Regular Meeting - Sep 20, 2021, 5:30pm
6. Regular Meeting - Sep 27, 2021, 5:30pm
7. Regular Meeting - Oct 4, 2021, 5:30pm
8. Regular Meeting - Oct 18, 2021, 5:30pm
9. Regular Meeting - Oct 25, 2021, 5:30pm
10. Regular Meeting - Nov 1, 2021, 5:30pm
11. Regular Meeting - Nov 8, 2021, 5:30pm
12. Regular Meeting - Nov 15, 2021, 5:30pm
13. Special Meeting - Aug 1, 2022, 5:30pm
Minutes Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the recommendations of the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) for FY2023. [FY23 Project Recommendations] [Summary of CPAC process] (CM22#171)
Pulled by Nolan;
Vote 1A - Adopted 9-0;
Vote 1B1 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 1B2 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 1B3 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 1B4 - Adopted 9-0;
Vote 1C1 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 1C2 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 1C3 - Adopted 9-0;
Vote 2A - Adopted 9-0;
Vote 2B1 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 2B2 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 2B3 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 2B4 - Adopted 9-0
Vote 2C1 - Adopted 9-0
Vote 3A - Adopted 9-0; Vote 3B1 - Adopted 9-0; Vote 3C1 - Adopted 9-0
Vote 4A1 - Adopted 9-0

Sept 12, 2022
To the Honorable, the City Council:

Listed below are the recommendations of the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) for FY2023. For additional information, please see attachments from the CPA Committee Chair, David Kale, dated Sept 7, 2022.

The CPA process included a virtual public hearing held on June 29, 2022 to solicit proposals and ideas on CPA projects for FY2023. A hybrid public hearing was held on July 25, 2022 to solicit recommendations on the percentage of CPA funds allocated to each funding category: Affordable Housing, Historic Preservation, and Open Space. The CPAC also received several online submissions and emailed comments regarding potential CPA projects and the allocation percentages. The CPAC, on Sept 6, 2022, voted unanimously for an allocation of 80% for Affordable Housing, 10% for Historic Preservation projects and 10% for Open Space projects.

In accordance with the CPAC’s recommendations, I am requesting that the City Council appropriate a total of $19,710,000 in CPA funds raised by the City’s FY2023 CPA surcharge, the FY2022 state match funds received in FY2023 and a portion of the existing CPA Fund Balance.

For this appropriation, it is estimated that the net local receipts from the CPA surcharge for FY2023 will total $11,900,000, added to an anticipated FY2022 state match of $4,700,000 and an additional $3,100,000 from CPA Fund Balance. Additionally, $10,000 from CPA Fund Balance will go to the City’s annual membership in the Community Preservation Coalition.

On Sept 6, 2022 the CPAC made recommendations for allocation of these FY2023 funds. The CPAC recommended to the City Council, through the City Manager, that the CPA funds be allocated and appropriated as follows:

VOTE 1: Fiscal Year 2023 Local Funds ($11,900,000)

Vote 1A

80% of FY2023 CPA Local Fund revenues ($9,520,000) allocated to Affordable Housing and appropriated to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust

Vote 1B

10% of FY2023 CPA Local Fund revenues ($1,190,000) allocated to Historic Preservation as follows:

1. $45,000 appropriated to Digitization of Cambridge Room Collections

2. $500,000 appropriated to the Margaret Fuller House Renovation

3. $45,000 appropriated to the Old Burial Ground Restoration

4. $600,000 appropriated to Historic Preservation Grants

Vote 1C

10% of FY2023 CPA Local Fund revenues ($1,190,000) allocated to Open Space as follows:

1. $100,000 appropriated to Gore Street Park Paved Area Design

2. $940,000 appropriated to the Raymond Street (Corcoran) Park Partial Construction

3. $150,000 appropriated to the Watertown Cambridge Greenway

VOTE 2: Fiscal Year 2022 State Funds [received in FY2023] ($4,700,000)

Vote 2A

80% of FY2022 State Match revenues ($3,760,000) allocated to Affordable Housing and appropriated to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust

Vote 2B

10% of FY2022 State Match revenues ($470,000) allocated to Historic Preservation as follows:

1. $40,000 appropriated to 22-CityView Recorded Media Digitization

2. $300,000 appropriated to the 689 Massachusetts Ave. Roof Replacement

3. $100,000 appropriated to Historical Commission Compact Shelving and Archival Support

4. $30,000 appropriated to the Old Burial Ground Restoration

Vote 2C

10% of FY2022 State Match revenues ($470,000) allocated to Open Space as follows:

1. $470,000 appropriated to the Raymond Street (Corcoran) Park Partial Construction

VOTE 3: CPA Fund Balance ($3,100,000)

Vote 3A

80% of the Fund Balance ($2,480,000) allocated to Affordable Housing and appropriated to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust

Vote 3B

10% of the Fund Balance ($310,000) allocated to Historic Preservation as follows:

1. $310,000 appropriated to Historical Commission Compact Shelving and Archival Support

Vote 3C

10% of the Fund Balance ($310,000) allocated to Open Space as follows:

1. $310,000 appropriated to the Raymond Street (Corcoran) Park Partial Construction

VOTE 4: CPA Fund Balance - Administration ($10,000)

Vote 4A

1. $10,000 appropriated to Administrative Costs for Community Preservation Coalition membership dues

TABLE 1. Summary of FY2023 Recommended Appropriations by Expenditure Type

Affordable Housing	$15,760,000
Historic Preservation
22-CityView Recorded Media Digitization	$40,000
689 Mass. Ave. Roof Replacement	$300,000
Digitization of Cambridge Room Collections	$45,000
Historical Commission Compact Shelving and Archival Support	$410,000
Margaret Fuller House Renovation	$500,000
Old Burying Ground Restoration	$75,000
Historic Preservation Grants	$600,000
Subtotal (Historic Preservation)	$1,970,000
Open Space
Gore Street Park Paved Area Design	$100,000
Raymond Street (Corcoran) Park Partial Construction	$1,720,000
Watertown Cambridge Greenway	$150,000
Subtotal (Open Space)	$1,970,000
Administration/ Community Preservation Coalition	$10,000
Grand Total	$19,710,000

TABLE 2. Summary of Recommended Appropriations by Funding

	FY2023 Local Funds	FY2022 State Funds	CPA Fund Balance	FY2023 Total
Affordable Housing Trust	$9,520,000	$3,760,000	$2,480,000	$15,760,000
Historic Preservation Projects	$1,190,000	$470,000	$310,000	$1,970,000
Open Space Projects	$1,190,000	$470,000	$310,000	$1,970,000
Admin./Community Preservation Coalition Membership Dues			$10,000	$10,000
Total	$11,900,000	$4,700,000	$3,110,000	$19,710,000

I request the appropriation of funds recommended by the CPAC.

Very truly yours,
Yi-An Huang
City Manager

5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 22-47, regarding utilization of Code Red for text alerts regarding new polling locations for the primary election on Sept 6, 2022. (CM22#172)
Pulled by Mallon; Placed on File 9-0

To: Owen O’Riordan, Acting City Manager
From: Tanya Ford, Executive Director Election Commission; Christina Giacobbe, Director of Emergency Communications
Re: Policy Order #3, dated Aug 1, 2022
Date: Aug 31, 2022

In response to Council Order #3, dated Aug 1, 2022, we offer the following response regarding utilization of Code Red for text alerts regarding new polling locations for the primary election on Sept 6, 2022.

The City currently uses CodeRed to notify residents via telephone, SMS (text), and email of emergencies within the city, such as snow emergencies, large scale water outages, or other significant service disruptions. This system serves as our reverse 911 system that the City uses to keep the public informed of timely emergency information. Although the current CodeRed platform does allows residents to receive non-emergency automated calls and/or text messages for city-wide and neighborhood events and meetings, the system has not been marketed for this purpose and has not been utilized in this manner. The Cambridge Alert Network (CodeRed) alert system is currently marketed for emergency notifications.

The request for utilizing Code Red to notify residents of polling locations would require obtaining telephone numbers from registered voters. Currently, the voter registration information that is collected and maintained by the Election Commission does not include telephone numbers. As a result, we would not be able to ensure notification to these residents via text.

If the City wishes to utilize the system for these types of non-emergency messaging, it will be imperative moving forward with a pilot program for non-emergency messages that the City set clear expectations with voluntary subscribers as to the types and frequency of community notifications they may receive by opting into the general notification program. Additionally, because of voluntary subscribership, this determines who will be contacted, how they will be contacted (email, text, or phone) based on what the subscriber signs up for. This allows the subscriber to determine how they would like to be contacted and there would be no guarantee that if text messages were sent that all subscribers would receive such message as some subscribers only have their landlines included in their profile.

In terms of notification to residents of polling location changes, the Election Commission has taken the necessary steps to notify every Cambridge resident via mail during the week of July 26, 2022. Additionally, registered voters receive postcards at their residence prior to the election informing them of their specific polling location, including identifying the location on a map. The City has also updated this information on the website in July as well as highlighting those polling changes on the website. The City on behalf of the Election Commission will continue to provide polling information on the website and include this information in the Daily Update and through social media platforms through Sept 6, 2022.

We would be happy to discuss other options for consideration for these non-emergency notifications or how we may continue to support residents with voter information. Please let me know if you require any additional information or would like to discuss further.

6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-49 regarding Bristol and Cardinal Medeiros intersection improvements. [Traffic Department Response] (Note: This also responds to Awaiting Report Item Number 22-53.) (CM22#173)
Pulled by Zondervan; Placed on File 9-0

To: Yi-An Huang, City Manager
From: Joseph E. Barr, Director
Date: Sept 12, 2022
Subject: Awaiting Report 21-49 – Bristol and Cardinal Medeiros Intersection Improvements

This memorandum has been prepared in response to Awaiting Report 21-49 (Order 8 from the June 14, 2021 City Council meeting), as well as Policy Order/Resolution 2022 #143 from the Aug 1, 2022 City Council meeting. Both orders requested that we consider the potential for safety improvements at the intersection of Cardinal Medeiros Avenue with Binney Street and Bristol Street.

Existing Conditions

This intersection is currently controlled by STOP signs on the Bristol Street approach, which is one-way towards the intersection (eastbound) and on the Binney Street approach, which is two-way.

Existing buildings on both eastern corners of the intersection create limited sight distances for drivers attempting to turn right or left from Binney Street to Cardinal Medeiros Avenue. In response to a prior history of crashes at this location, staff from the Traffic, Department, and Transportation Department (TP+T) worked with the developer of the 399 Binney Street property (Alexandria Real Estate) to set back the ground floor of the new building on the northeast corner to allow for better sight distance looking to the right/north from Binney Street. Sight distance is still limited looking to the left/south due to the existing building on the southeast corner, which directly abuts the back of the sidewalk.

As a required mitigation item for the 399 Binney Street redevelopment project, Alexandria recently completed a traffic signal warrant analysis for this intersection. The analysis indicated that the conditions at the intersection do not meet any of the nine official warrants for installation of a new traffic signal under the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Based on that analysis we would not consider installing a traffic signal at this intersection.

Crash data obtained by TP+T for the past three years indicate that there were not any crashes between vehicles entering from Binney Street and through vehicles on Cardinal Medeiros Avenue. There was one crash involving a vehicle exiting Bristol Street colliding with a vehicle exiting Binney Street and two crashes involving vehicles exiting Bristol Street colliding with through vehicles on Cardinal Medeiros Avenue. There were no reported crashes involving cyclists or pedestrians.

Based on a review of the sight distance at the intersection, traffic volumes, and crash data, TP+T staff have identified two potential alternatives to improve safety at the intersection of Cardinal Medeiros Avenue with Bristol Street and Binney Street.

Alternative 1

Reverse the direction of Bristol Street between Webster Avenue and Cardinal Medeiros Avenue. This will remove the movement into the intersection that has caused all of the reported angle crashes. It may also reduce the volume of traffic cutting through the neighborhood, as Bristol Street would no longer provide a continuous connection between Hampshire Street and Cardinal Medeiros Avenue (and other destinations to the east).

Alternative 2

Install all-way STOP control for the intersection. This would involve adding new STOP signs and STOP bars on Cardinal Medeiros at the intersection. This would resolve the crash pattern by requiring all vehicles to stop entering the intersection, but could lead to an increase in rear end crashes on Cardinal Medeiros Avenue. This may also result in a small increase in traffic on Bristol Street, as it would improve access across to Binney Street.

Next Steps

In addition to the feedback we receive from the City Council from this memorandum, TP+T staff will provide residents of the neighborhood with opportunities to provide feedback on these two alternatives. Our goal is to identify the preferred option based on this feedback, and implement the proposed changes later this fall.

More generally, the City Council has asked that we develop a process for addressing other problematic intersections and corridors, particularly those that are not otherwise being looked at through capital and quick build projects. Although Cambridge has been pursuing a range of traffic safety improvements for many years, we recognize that there remain certain locations where further improvements may be warranted. Working with our internal Vision Zero partners, we are working to develop such a process, particularly focused on improvements that can occur within a relatively short time frame. We hope to be able to work out the details of such a program as part of the budget process for FY2024.

9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 22-22, regarding the feasibility of increasing the number of high school students who receive a MBTA M7 Card at no cost. [Manager’s Response] (CM22#176)
Pulled by Nolan; Placed on File 9-0

Sept 12, 2022
To the Honorable, the City Council:

In response to Awaiting Report Item Number 22-22, which requested a report on the feasibility of increasing the number of high school students who receive a MBTA M7 Card at no cost, Executive Director of the Family Policy Council, Nancy Tauber reports the following:

In response to the School Committee and City Council policy orders requesting that staff research the feasibility of increasing the number of high school students who receive a MBTA M7 Card at no cost, and also recognizing the advocacy of the Cambridge Youth Council who proposed that the program be expanded beyond high school students who qualified for free/reduced lunch to include all high school students who attend Cambridge Public Schools, the following is being implemented:

All Cambridge Rindge and Latin School (CRLS), High School Extension School (HSEP), Home-Schooled students, Community Charter School of Cambridge (CCSC) and Prospect Hill Academy receive a M7 card for the school year 2022-23.

• The M7 card allows students to ride the bus or T at no cost to the student throughout the school year.

• If a pass is active for the entire 10-month school year period, the annual per pass cost per CRLS student will be $290 (bulk rate) and CCSC and Prospect Hill Academy student will be $300.

• Summer - On July 1, the M7 card functions as an S card. Students can add money to the M7 card at any MBTA fare vending machine and receive a 50% discounted fare for each ride or purchase a monthly pass with the student discount rate ($30/month).

• M7 cards expire Aug 31st.

• CRLS, CCSC and Prospect Hill Academy staff will distribute and track how many students receive M7 cards.

• The MBTA does not track usage.

Budget

• If all students receive M7 cards and they are active for the full 10-month period, it will cost approximately $610,000.

• The City has approximately $250K budgeted for FY23 for the initial program which offered free passes to students eligible for free and reduced lunches. The additional cost of expanding the program to all CRLS, HSEP, Home-Schooled, CCSC and Prospect Hill Academy students will be charged to the $2M ARPA allocation for Transit initiatives.

Very truly yours,
Yi-An Huang
City Manager

12. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board report with negative recommendation on the Accessory Parking Requirements Zoning Petition. (CM22#179)
Pulled by Carlone; Refer to Petition (Zondervan) 9-0

Date: Sept 1, 2022
Subject: Accessory Parking Requirements Zoning Petition
Recommendation: The Planning Board does NOT RECOMMEND adoption.

To the Honorable, the City Council,

On Aug 16, 2022, the Planning Board (the “Board”) held a public hearing to discuss a Zoning Petition by the City Council to amend section 6.36, entitled “Schedule of Parking and Loading Requirements,” of Article 6.000, entitled “Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements and Nighttime Curfew on Large Commercial Through Trucks,” of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by inserting text that reads “Minimum accessory parking required for all uses shall be 0 parking spaces” and by inserting the numeral “0” in place of all current accessory parking requirements for all uses in all zoning districts. The Board heard a presentation from Councillor Zondervan and comments from Councillor McGovern, and received written materials from staff in the City’s Community Development Department (CDD).

Following the presentation, public comment, and discussion among Board members, the Planning Board voted to transmit an unfavorable recommendation on this Petition to the City Council. Board members had a wide range of views on the concept, but expressed a shared concern that more information and study is necessary to more fully understand the potential effects of this zoning change.

The following is a list of comments made by Board members during the discussion:

• Several Board members acknowledged that attitudes around parking largely depend on people’s individual travel habits and preferences. Some noted that the City does not require other types of amenities, and questioned whether it is in the public interest to require parking and whether it is fair given that 30-40% of residents do not own a car.

• Many Board members were unconvinced that not requiring parking would have a meaningful impact on overall housing costs, because demand for housing in Cambridge tends to be high regardless of parking availability. However, it was noted that there could be other benefits to not requiring parking, such as allowing space for more housing units and green space.

• A primary concern was the potential impact in neighborhoods that already have little off-street parking and very high demand for on-street parking, particularly in the eastern half of the city. In those areas, additional development with less off-street parking could result in increased competition for on-street parking, affecting existing residents who rely on that parking. A specific concern was additional stress on longtime residents who are feeling displaced by economic pressures.

• Board members suggested that the City could consider more nuanced approaches. For example, changes could be focused on areas that are closer to transit, or areas where there is less demand for on-street parking. Another suggestion was to remove requirements in smaller cases – such as when small numbers of housing units are created – but require more scrutiny of larger developments, where there might be greater impact because there is more likely to be a greater total parking demand.

• There was interest in hearing more about other cities that have made similar changes and what the results have been. However, there was some concern about comparing these examples to Cambridge, because Cambridge has particularly dense, historic patterns of development with relatively little off-street parking to begin with. Many of the communities that have stopped requiring parking are less densely developed and have more off-street parking as an existing condition.

• There was also interest in seeing the results of the parking study being undertaken to review the City’s parking regulations more holistically and make recommendations after hearing community input. This study may not answer every question, but it will be helpful when moving forward to have as much information as possible.

• Several Board members noted that the zoning text needs clarification, including a thorough review of other sections of the Zoning Ordinance that may be affected. For example, the intent expressed by Councillors that the change would not affect parking maximums should be resolved and made clear in the text. Potential ambiguity with other sections of zoning, such as the requirements for reduced parking under the Affordable Housing Overlay and special permit provisions related to parking, should also be addressed. The text should also clearly state how existing required accessory parking will be treated and whether owners can eliminate those spaces in favor of other land uses, such as new buildable area or open space.

The Planning Board voted with 7 members in favor transmitting the above recommendation. One member was absent.

Respectfully submitted for the Planning Board,
Catherine Preston Connolly, Chair.

CHARTER RIGHT
1. 105 Windsor Community Process. [Charter Right – Zondervan; Aug 1, 2022] (PO22#142)
Order Adopted as Amended (Simmons) 9-0

O-11     Aug 1, 2022  Tabled - Zondervan; Adopted as Amended (Simmons) 9-0
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR CARLONE
WHEREAS: The City-owned property at 105 Windsor Street has a more than 200 year history of being used for active community purposes including as a school, a recreation center, a health clinic, a veterans hall, a branch library, and for elder care; and
WHEREAS: The City’s proposal to renovate this historic building is an important opportunity to address some of the unique and long-unmet needs of the Port neighborhood; and
WHEREAS: The design process should be guided by an inclusive, City-led community process to hear from as many diverse voices as possible in an effort to build consensus; and
WHEREAS: Such a City-led community process should engage a wide range of stakeholders, neighborhood residents, and neighborhood organizations and be led by an independent consultant who shall be tasked with bringing an unbiased eye in leading the community toward a consesnsus including (but not limited to) residents of affordable housing, all residents of The Port, Margaret Fuller House, Community Art Center, Cambridge Health Alliance, Cambridge Housing Authority, local small businesses, faith communities, Fletcher-Maynard Academy community, Cambridge NAACP, My Brother’s Keeper, The Black Response, and the Port Organizing Group; and
WHEREAS: The newly-acquired building located at 689 Mass Ave is proposed to be used for city offices without any input from the community, and a similar outcome must be avoided at 105 Windsor Street; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with the appropriate departments to begin a thorough and open community process that will determine the future use of 105 Windsor Street, including (but not limited to) a series of events, some offered virtually and some in person at key neighborhood sites like the Community Art Center and the Pisani Center in an effort to engage as many diverse voices as possible and build consensus; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the Council on the nature and timeline of the planned community process as soon as possible and ahead of commencing the outreach.

4. An application was received from Andy Layman representing Tasty Burger, requesting permission for three (3) projecting signs at the premises numbered 353 Prospect Street. approval has been received from Inspectional Services, Department of Public Works, Community Development Department and abutter. [Tabled Aug 1, 2022; updated address and proof of mailing appended] (AP22#37)
Removed from Table 9-0; Placed Back on Table 6-3 (BA, MM, PT - NO)

  
proposed projecting blade signs for Tasty Burger

glorious neon signage directly across the street

2. Resolution on the death of Peter Valentine.   Councillor Simmons

R-2     Sept 12, 2022

COUNCILLOR SIMMONS

WHEREAS: The City Council was deeply saddened to learn of the passing of legendary Cambridge resident Peter Valentine on August 9, 2022 at the age of 80; and

WHEREAS: Peter Zak Valentine was born in Boston on February 14, 1942, and he would go on to lead a life as colorful and creative as the vibrant clothing and the one-of-a-kind home he made for himself on the corner of Brookline Street and Franklin Street in the heart of Cambridge; and

WHEREAS: Peter Valentine was already a well-known figure in Central Square by the 1980s, when, according to his online obituary, “…MIT was preparing to build University Park [and] plans called for demolishing the house Peter was living in,” yet he refused to leave, citing that his life’s work “… existed within the walls of the house where he had developed an electromagnetic psychic defense system” and, amazingly, one decade later “…MIT relented, giving Peter the three story house, and moving it a block over,” allowing him to remain in his home and only adding to his legend; and

WHEREAS: In the decades since that time, Peter Valentine became ever-more well-known around and beyond Central Square, sporting his unique fashion sense, regularly speaking at City Council meetings about his desire to protect Cambridge and the United States from all manner of peril and darkness, dispensing what can only be described as his “Valentinian” sayings and wisdom via the most colorful fencing and housing exterior to be found anywhere in Cambridge, extolling the virtues of “Electromagnetic Kung-Fu,” and becoming a beloved part of the cultural fabric that has made Cambridge the warm, eclectic community we all cherish; and

WHEREAS: Peter Valentine is predeceased by his parents Simon and Trudy Stavis, by his brother, Lee Stavis, he leaves behind his sister and brother-in-love, Adi Bemak and Rob Okun of Amherst, his nieces Amber Bemak (Rosalia Ramírez) of Dallas, Texas, and Lani Bemak (John James Tourville), of Asheville, NC, his step-niece Aviva Emmons (Laney Emmons) of Durham, NC, his step-nephew Jonah Okun (Kate Okun) of Brooklyn, NY, several great nephews and nieces, and the entire Cambridge community, and his memory shall be forever cherished by all who were fortunate enough to know him; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record extending its deepest condolences to the family, friends, and community of Peter Valentine for their loss; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to the family of Peter Valentine on behalf of the entire City Council.

3. Resolution on the death of Monica Strauss.   Councillor Toner

R-3     Sept 12, 2022

COUNCILLOR TONER

WHEREAS: The City Council was deeply saddened at learning of the death of Monica Strauss in June 2022; and

WHEREAS: Monica was a lifelong Cambridge resident, animal lover, and passionate advocate for off-leash dog parks; and

WHEREAS: Monica’s passing will leave a void in the lives of her husband, Mark Vangel, and all her surviving family; and

WHEREAS: Monica will be sorely missed by all she touched and loved; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record extending its deepest sympathy for the family of Monica Strauss at this time of such personal loss; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to the Strauss family on behalf of the entire City Council.

11. Congratulations to The Dance Complex on the occasion of its 30 year anniversary in Central Square.   Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern

R-11     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
VICE MAYOR MALLON
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN

WHEREAS: The Dance Complex, a dance education and performance center in the heart of Central Square, is celebrating its 30th anniversary as a home to movers and dancers from the greater Boston area and around the world; and

WHEREAS: This unique arts center has contributed greatly to the arts scene over the last 30 years by offering programs that help strengthen technical, choreographic, performance and production skills in a welcoming and accessible space in the historic Old Fellow’s Hall building at 536 Massachusetts Avenue and in other Cambridge venues; and

WHEREAS: The Dance Complex supports and honors hardworking local artists by creating a platform for micro-businesses for teachers, dancemakers and performing artists, and enables creative and economic growth for the whole of Central Square and Cambridge businesses and citizenry; and

WHEREAS: Programs created by The Dance Complex, including seasonal festivals, performance series, community engaging discussions and mind/body wellness have become a vital part of integrating the value of movement in the lives of everyone; and

WHEREAS: The wide range of artists, classes and performances from around the world at the Dance Complex reflects the Cambridge community’s diversity; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record congratulating The Dance Complex for 30 years of contributing to the arts and culture of movement as a valued necessity and right of all in the Cambridge community and beyond; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to the staff at The Dance Complex on behalf of the entire City Council.

23. Happy 100th Birthday wishes to Ned Handy.   Mayor Siddiqui

R-23     Sept 12, 2022

MAYOR SIDDIQUI

WHEREAS: Longevity of life is a blessing for an individual and for a community that benefits from the knowledge, creativity, and experiences this individual has; and

WHEREAS: Mr. Ned Handy, a long-time Cambridge resident born Sept 29, 1922, should be honored for 100 years on this earth; and

WHEREAS: Mr. Handy is a World War II veteran and was one of 4,300 American fliers who became prisoners of war at Stalag 17, one of Germany’s most notorious prison camps; and

WHEREAS: Mr. Handy, upon returning from war, attended MIT and then worked as a city planner for Cambridge for many years; and

WHEREAS: Mr. Handy published a memoir in 2004,”The Flame Keepers: The True Story of an American Soldier’s Survival Inside Stalag 17,” recounting the harrowing experiences he and his fellow soldiers faced while serving in WWII; and

WHEREAS: The City Council is grateful to Mr. Handy for his service to both the United States for serving in WWII and to Cambridge for his long-time work as a city planner; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record thanking Mr. Handy for all his services, congratulating him on his one hundredth birthday, and wishing him continued years of happiness and good health; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to Ned Handy on behalf of the entire City Council.

6. The Ordinance Committee held a public meeting on Sept 7, 2022 to continue the discussion around Ordinance # 2022-14, Section 11.202(b) of Article 11.000 Special Regulations Linkage Fee, proposal to amend by substitution, raising linkage fee rates. [Text of Committee Report]
Present: Azeem, Carlone, Mallon, McGovern, Nolan, Simmons, Toner, Zondervan, Siddiqui
Absent: None
pulled early by Zondervan; Petition amended as below* 8-1 (Zondervan - NO); Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0; Referred to Petition 9-0

* Chair McGovern made a motion to amend the initial petition to change 11.202, by deleting “twenty dollars and ten cents ($20.10)” and adding “thirty three dollars and thirty four cents ($33.34)” and by adding “, excluding the first 30,000 sq ft.,” after “Gross Floor Area”.
Yes: Azeem, Carlone, Mallon, McGovern, Nolan, Simmons, Toner
No: Zondervan, Siddiqui
Yes-7, No-2. Motion to accept the amendment passed.

Chair McGovern made a motion to amend the initial petition to change Article 2 – Definitions, by adding “Notwithstanding the foregoing, this definition shall not apply to existing floor area that is demolished and subsequently rebuilt as part of a building project.”
Yes: Azeem, Carlone, Mallon, McGovern, Nolan, Simmons, Toner
No: Zondervan, Siddiqui
Yes-7, No-2. Motion to accept the amendment passed.

Councillor Zondervan made a motion to forward zoning amendment 2022-14 as amended to the Full City Council with a favorable recommendation to ordain the ordinance.
Yes: Azeem, Carlone, Mallon, McGovern, Nolan, Simmons, Toner, Zondervan, Siddiqui
Yes-9, No-0. Motion to forward zoning amendment 2022-14 as amended to the City Council with a favorable recommendation to ordain the ordinance, passed.

Order A. Section 11.202(b) of Article 11.000 Special Regulations linkage fee., be amended by substitution. (Ordinance #2022-14)   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern [Tabled May 9, 2022] (PO22#84)

Comm B. A communication was received from Councillor Azeem, transmitting two Linkage Fee amendments. (COF2022#102)
Petition amended as below 8-1 (Zondervan - NO)

* 11.202
Housing Contribution Rate. The Housing Contribution Rate effective upon ordination shall be twenty dollars and ten cents ($20.10) thirty three dollars and thirty four cents ($33.34) per square foot of Gross Floor Area, excluding the first 30,000 sq ft., devoted to the uses that qualify the new development as an Incentive Project. The effective rate shall be subject to annual escalation equal to annual percentage increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) Housing Index for Boston-Brockton-Nashua, MA-NH-ME-CT or similar index to reflect changes in dollar values over time; however, annual decreases in CPI shall not cause the contribution rate to be decreased. The table below is intended to administratively track changes to the Housing Contribution Rate as it is adjusted over time.

Article 2 - Definitions

Incentive Project. Any new development that consists of at least thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of Gross Floor Area devoted to one or more of the following uses listed in Section 4.30 of the Zoning Ordinance: Sections 4.31 i-2 (Hotel or motel), 4.32 f (Radio and television studio), 4.33 b-5 (College or University not exempt by statute, specifically including those uses and facilities listed in Subsection 4.56 c-4, c-5, and c-6), 4.33 c (Noncommercial Research Facility), 4.33 d (Health Care Facilities), 4.33 e (Social Service Facilities), 4.34 (Office and Laboratory Use), 4.35 (Retail or Consumer Service Establishments), 4.36 (Outdoor Retail or Consumer Service Establishments), 4.37 (Light Industry, Wholesale Business and Storage), and 4.38 (Heavy Industry). For the purpose of this definition, new development shall mean (1) construction of new buildings or additions to existing buildings to accommodate uses in the above list, (2) substantial rehabilitation of buildings to accommodate uses in the above list for which the buildings were not originally used, or (3) Gross Floor Area whose use is changed from a use not included in the above list to a use included in the above list. In no case shall Gross Floor Area devoted to a Municipal Service Facility or Other Government Facility be considered an Incentive Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this definition shall not apply to existing floor area that is demolished and subsequently rebuilt as part of a building project.

---

Proposed Amendment (Mallon) - to be filed soon as a separate zoning petition
11.202
(d) Reevaluation of Housing Contribution Rate. The City shall initiate a reevaluation of the Housing Contribution Rate and any other aspect of these Incentive Zoning Provisions at an interval of no less than three (3) years from the time the rate was last amended by the City Council of the previous reevaluation. Such reevaluation shall include a report provided to the City Council reviewing economic factors including but not limited to development activity, commercial rents per square foot, employment growth, housing trends measured in terms of, but not limited to, vacancy rates, production statistics, and prices for dwelling units, and the nexus between Incentive Projects and housing.

4. A communication was received from Councillor Zondervan, clarifying his proposed amendment to the Linkage Fee Petition. (COF22#109)
Referred to Petition 9-0

To my colleagues:

I wanted to provide additional clarification in writing around my further amendment to the Linkage Fee Petition, including a table showing a more complete picture of the city's smaller project commercial development pipeline.

1. The development pipeline for commercial buildings between 30,000 and 100,000 square feet is at this point much more substantial than it has been in the past. Several hotel and biotech proposals in this range have recently come forward as a result of zoning changes in Central Square (2017) and Harvard Square (2018). Most of the recent projects would not have been allowed under the previous zoning. This relative boom has occurred despite steadily rising linkage fees.

2. The petition as currently amended leaves $1 million on the table for each commercial project above 30,000 square feet that goes forward, as compared to the originally proposed flat $33.34 increase (because 30,000 sqft x $33.34 = $1 ,000,200). This adds up quickly and would easily translate to a lost $20-30 million in a short amount of time, potentially even meaning one fewer affordable housing project for our city.

3. Projects smaller than 80,000 square feet would enjoy a reduced linkage fee contribution as compared to what is currently on the books. Biotech, hotels, and other commercial use projects in this range should be held accountable for their impact on the housing market, and failing to do so potentially undermines the entire legal framework of the linkage fee in the incentive zoning ordinance! There is no reason to backslide from what developers are currently expecting to pay.

4. Nobody has rationalized this version of Incentive Zoning through the lens of a Nexus Study, creating further potential legal exposure that could be exploited to undermine the entire program, thereby endangering a critical source of funding for our affordable housing programs.

5. My further compromise amendment leaves less money on the table per future project ($367,200) and mitigates the risk of legal exposure to the argument that our Incentive Zoning Ordinance is an illegal tax, all while continuing to accomplish the council's intent of easing the impact on smaller projects as compared to the original proposal.

The following table shows recently completed projects and the upcoming development pipeline for buildings under 100,000 square feet, in addition to a few representative examples of larger projects. While almost all of these projects would not be subject to the amended ordinance or even the current linkage fee of $21.02, it is useful to consider them as representative examples of the type of commercial development that occurs in our city over a relatively short period of time.

Building	Description	Status	Square footage	Current ($21.02)	Amended (30K@ 0.00)	Proposed (30K @ 21.02)
907 Main	Hotel/nightlife	Operational	29,860	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
10 North Point	Education	Operational	40,573	$856,090.30	$352,503.82	$985,503.82
711 Mass Ave	Hotel/retail	Permitted	41,895	$883,984.50	$396,579.30	$1,029,579.30
600 Mass Ave	Mixed use	Permitted	46,476	$980,643.60	$549,309.84	$1,182,309.84
Middle East	Hotel/nightlife	Conceptual	53,847	$1,136,171.70	$795,058.98	$1,428,058.98
121 First	Office/retail	Operational	57,000	$1 ,202,700.00	$900,180.00	$1,533,180.00
180 Fawcett	Biotech	Permitted	58,456	$1,233,421.60	$948,723.04	$1,581,723.04
Abbot Building	Mixed use	Operational	75,762	$1,598,578.20	$1,525,705.08	$2,158,705.08
The Garage	Biotech	Permitted	87,494	$1,846,123.40	$1,916,849.96	$2,549,849.96
Ragon Institute	medical research	Construction	185,810	$3,920,591.00	$5,194,705.40	$5,827,705.40
15 Wilson	Biotech	Lab	280,046	$5,908,970.60	$8,336,533.64	$8,969,533.64
585 Third	Biotech and arts center	Permitted	500,000	$10,550,000.00	$15,669,800.00	$16,302,800.00
IQHQ	Biotech	Permitted	735,000	$15,508,500.00	$23,504,700.00	$24,137,700.00
Volpe PUD	Mixed use	Permitted	1,589,587	$33,540,285.70	$51,996,630.58	$52,629,630.58

Sincerely,
Quinton Y. Zondervan
Cambridge City Councillor

TEXT OF ORDERS
O-1     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
COUNCILLOR TONER
WHEREAS: Cambridge has a rich history of residents who have accomplished great things for the world, the City, and their neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS: The City often honors these individuals by placing signs on various corners; and
WHEREAS: To have one of these dedications approved, a great deal of information must be provided to the Dedication Committee; and
WHEREAS: Other than the names and possible military service of the individuals, these signs provide only limited information on the rich history of the honorees; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with the Cambridge Historical Commission, DPW, the Dedication Committee, and any other relevant City departments to create a system to document the histories of those honored, and to make those histories available to the public, including but not limited to a website on the City’s web page or a QR code on each sign.

O-2     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
WHEREAS: The MBTA has recently announced a dramatic reconfiguration and consolidation of a number of its bus lines in the Greater Boston Area, which has been ascribed as being due to the changing needs of commuters throughout the region, as well as due to staffing issues within the MBTA; and
WHEREAS: Among those lines being significantly altered is the 47 bus line, which is being consolidated with other existing bus line routes that head into Boston and which will dramatically alter the timing, frequency, and location of bus stops that so many in Cambridge have come to depend upon for decades; and
WHEREAS: More alarming, the 47 bus line serves some of those Cantabrigians who are most reliant upon public transportation in our community, including seniors and those on limited or fixed incomes, who do not necessarily have access to other transportation options, and who are most vulnerable to being at the mercy of MBTA service disruptions; and
WHEREAS: The issues plaguing the MBTA undeniably extend well beyond the bus driver shortages impacting Cambridge, as evidenced by recent safety issues impacting the Orange Line and the Green Line, and these must be resolved in as expeditiously a way as possible, yet they mustn’t be done on the backs of those who most rely upon the MBTA’s service; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Council go on record urging the MBTA to reverse its decision to reconfigure and reduce service along the 47 Bus Line and take whatever steps are necessary to return it to its previous level of service; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Council go on record echoing and amplifying the recent appeal from Boston Mayor Michelle Wu to Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg to provide whatever federal assistance can be granted to reverse MBTA service cuts to lines – including the 47 bus line – that run throughout Cambridge and Greater Boston; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward suitably engrossed copies of this order to MBTA General Manager Steve Poftak, Governor Charles D. Baker, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Edward Markey, and Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg on behalf of the entire City Council.

O-3     Sept 12, 2022  Amended
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR TONER
WHEREAS: The City of Cambridge has long worked to demonstrate its commitment to treating all of its employees with dignity, fairness, and equality, as was demonstrated in 2011 when the City worked to ensure that employees in same-sex marriages would be offered the same tax relief on healthcare benefits as those employees in heterosexual marriages; and
WHEREAS: At that time, it was noted that under existing federal tax code, the healthcare benefits provided by the City for same-sex married employees was counted as taxable income, whereas those same benefits were not counted as taxable income for heterosexual couples, and this was rightfully called out as unfair and discriminatory; and
WHEREAS: In response to this discriminatory practice, the City Council called for the establishment of a fund that would reimburse City employees in same-sex marriages an amount equal to what they were being taxed on these healthcare benefits at the federal level, resolving the issue locally until same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide in 2015 and the issue became moot; and
WHEREAS: In 2022, a similar situation has come to light in which some Cambridge employees in same-sex marriages are not being offered the same healthcare coverage when seeking to engage the services of a surrogate to begin or expand their family – benefits that are currently offered to women and heterosexual employees who seek out such services; and
WHEREAS: In the spirit of treating all City employees equally and fairly, and applying the same framework as was used in 2011, it would be prudent and just for the City to establish a fund that would assist employees in same-sex marriages in paying for surrogacy services in those cases where the City’s health insurance providers are failing to offer them the same coverage that is offered to the City’s female employees and those in heterosexual marriages; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct the appropriate City staff to establish a fund designed to assist those City employees in same-sex marriages with paying for surrogacy services in instances where the City’s health insurance providers fail to provide the same coverage afforded to the City’s female employees and those in heterosexual marriages; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter within 30 days.

O-4     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
WHEREAS: It has recently come to the attention of the City Council that the turf on Greene-Rose Heritage Park has once again fallen into disrepair, with large patches of dead grass blemishing the area; and
WHEREAS: How a city maintains its parks, streets, and other public areas communicates a message about the value of the people in those neighborhoods to the city at large, and it is therefore important that Cambridge strive to keep all our city parks clean and well-maintained; and
WHEREAS: At least two policy orders have been filed in the past three years urging the City to pay greater attention to the maintenance and upkeep of this particular park, suggesting that a longer-term plan of action is required to ensure that the City does not continually neglect this area; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct the Public Works Department to repair the grass at Greene-Rose Heritage Park, and to establish a long-term plan of action to ensure that the park is well-maintained in perpetuity; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter in a timely manner.

O-5     Sept 12, 2022
VICE MAYOR MALLON
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
WHEREAS: The City provides opportunities to close streets in our block party and newly announced play streets programs with the express purpose of gathering with neighbors and creating community, which is critical to neighborhood resiliency; and
WHEREAS: The current City block party and play streets policy asks residents looking to close their street to gather affirmative signatures from “75% of the households or organizations on the block that is being closed,” yet the policy does not explain whether or not the street which is being closed will suffice for signatures, or the entire impacted block and surrounding neighborhood; and
WHEREAS: Requiring 75% of signatures from residents and businesses unfairly advantages low-density streets and neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS: Petitioning three-quarters of a street or block is a sizeable feat for a block party or play streets event that will only last a few hours on one single day; and
WHEREAS: The time constraint of 30 days also unfairly prohibits those seeking a block party or play streets permit and should be shortened to allow applications to more seamlessly be processed; and
WHEREAS: If the City wants to promote community building, the process for closing one’s street should not be so cumbersome that applicants cannot succeed within the current parameters; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with the Department of Public Works, the Traffic, Parking & Transportation Department, and other relevant departments to revise the City block party and play streets signature requirements to a more reasonable threshold, and shorten the timeline between application and event date, and provide more guidance to residents seeking a permit; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager report back on this matter within a timely manner.

O-6     Sept 12, 2022
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
VICE MAYOR MALLON
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
COUNCILLOR CARLONE
WHEREAS: Suicide Prevention Month is a national observance held every September to raise awareness and spread hope and share vital information to people affected by suicide; and
WHEREAS: Suicide Prevention Month can affect anyone regardless of age, gender or background; and
WHEREAS: The City of Cambridge and the Cambridge Public Health Department are in full support of Suicide Prevention Month and believe in the importance of mental health; and
WHEREAS: The City of Cambridge continues to raise awareness about mental health and physical health while also providing solutions; now therefore be it
RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record recognizing September 2022 as Suicide Prevention Month in the City of Cambridge; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to light up City Hall purple for the week of September 19th, in honor of Suicide Prevention Month.

O-7     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
VICE MAYOR MALLON
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
WHEREAS: Peter Valentine was an important member of the Cambridge community who brought art, passion, fashion and his wonder of the universe to our city; and
WHEREAS: The passing of Peter has left a void in the Cambridge cosmos; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the Dedication Committee hold a special meeting to expedite the process of naming the corner of Brookline Street and Franklin Street in honor of Peter Valentine as soon as possible.

O-8     Sept 12, 2022  Amended (Toner)
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
VICE MAYOR MALLON
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
WHEREAS: Per- and Poly-fluoroalkyls, known more commonly as PFAS, a group of human-made chemicals not found naturally in the environment are linked to a variety of diseases and health conditions; and due to the longevity of the chemicals and difficulty of eliminating them are often referred to as “forever” chemicals; and
WHEREAS: Studies have linked the chemicals to causing adverse health effects such as low infant birth weights, asthma, cancer and thyroid hormone disruptions. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s 2018 toxicological profile of PFAS also indicates that high levels of the chemicals in the blood may decrease how well the body responds to vaccines; and
WHEREAS: Recent research into the impact of PFAS chemicals is confirming their toxicity has increased the concern at every level of government and in the public, and led the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to set levels for water supply of 20 ppt and the federal EPA to consider declaring two of the chemicals as hazardous substances; and
WHEREAS: Measures of PFAS levels in the city’s water supply showed levels just below the state’s standard until recently, when levels above the 20 ppt were detected leading to a decision to switch to water supplied by MWRA whose PFAS levels are negligible; and
WHEREAS: The city is trying to reduce PFAS by implementing a granular activated carbon filtration system in the hope of reducing the levels of PFAS below the state limit, which system is expected to be operational by year end; and
WHEREAS: Over the years many users of Cambridge water have expressed concern about quality of the water, including high chloride levels, the lack of identification of the source of the PFAS contamination, and whether MWRA water should become a permanent source of water; and
WHEREAS: Drinking water safety and quality is of utmost importance to all who live and work in Cambridge and the City Council seeks to ensure that the community can hear from staff and others on water quality and can hear about steps being taken to address concerns about our water supply and the quality of water in Cambridge; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the Health and Environment Committee of the City Council hold a public hearing to discuss the issue of PFAS, and overall water quality, cost of operating our own water department, cost of MWRA versus Cambridge Water Department and other appropriate factors to be considered and work with the City Manager, the Water Board, and relevant city staff to set up the meeting; and be it further
ORDERED: That a first meeting on this topic be held this fall.

O-9     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
VICE MAYOR MALLON
WHEREAS: Cambridge Health Alliance’s popular Cambridge Birth Center has been closed since early in the pandemic; and
WHEREAS: The best available evidence, health outcomes research, and good public health policy points to the availability of out-of-hospital birthing options for healthy women with uncomplicated births as important part of a comprehensive health care system; and
WHEREAS: Birth centers help avoid infection, free up hospital beds, reduce unnecessary obstetrical interventions, increase breastfeeding rates, produce cost savings, and lead to long term mental health positive outcomes; and
WHEREAS: Local health care advocates including Judy Ann Bigby, MD, and former Secretary of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and Judy Norsigian, Co-founder of Our Bodies Ourselves, and have publicly highlighted the need for more freestanding birth centers and urged Cambridge Health Alliance to reopen the Cambridge Birth Center; and
WHEREAS: Birth centers are an essential resource for communities, including women of color who face a disproportionate risk of maternal mortality and morbidity; and
WHEREAS: Care in birth center and planned home birth settings that is led by Black, Indigenous, People of Color is a crucial approach for meeting the needs of communities affected by structural racism and other forms of discrimination; and
WHEREAS: Cambridge Hospital could meet with community members and those experienced with freestanding birth centers to address any obstacles to reopening this critical community resource as soon as possible; now therefore be it
RESOLVED: The City Council go on record supporting the protection of existing birth centers and the creation of new birth centers in Cambridge; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to communicate to the Cambridge Health Alliance the City Council’s support for the reopening of the Cambridge Birth Center for deliveries as soon as possible; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter in a timely manner.

O-10     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
WHEREAS: Cambridge is proud to be the innovation capital of the East Coast but a discussion is needed about where future lab growth is appropriate and where it could significantly impede other priorities, including the emergency need for more housing and the desire to have vibrant, active business districts and squares; and
WHEREAS: The attached zoning amendments propose a technical definition of the lab use that is aligned with how other cities in the region have defined the use, allowing the use to be separately regulated from the general office use; and
WHEREAS: The attached zoning amendments propose a restriction on new instances of the lab use in fragile districts including Central Square, Harvard Square, and Cambridge Street; and
WHEREAS: The attached zoning amendments propose explicitly allowing any and all existing lab uses to continue in all districts without any barriers; and
WHEREAS: There is plenty of room for discussion around which districts should and should not be included, but without a proactive conversation and something on the table it is conceivable that the lab use could take over in areas where it is unwanted; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Council refer the attached zoning petition to the Ordinance Committee and Planning Board for a hearing and report.

1. Define Lab use
Insert into Article 2.000 - Definitions the following language:

ARTICLE 2.000 - DEFINITIONS
…
Technical office for research and development, laboratory & research facility. Any laboratory engaged in research, experimental and testing, including but not limited to the fields of biology, chemistry, electronics, engineering, geology, medicine, and physics, including activities that requires additional air exchanges over and above a regular office use, or requires the use of chemical hoods, biosafety cabinets, regulated chemicals, or dangerous substances. This definition does not include innovation spaces, maker spaces, or other similar uses, or any purely software based activities.

2. Restrict the lab use in the following districts
Amend the table of uses in Section 4.30 as follows:

4.30 - TABLE OF USE REGULATION [Text of Order w/Table]

3. Explicitly allow existing lab use to continue in all districts Insert footnotes 62 and 63 into Section 4.40 as follows:
4.40 - FOOTNOTES TO THE TABLE OF USE REGULATIONS
…
62. Any pre-existing technical office for research and development, laboratory & research facility permitted prior to January 1, 2023 in a Business or Office District shall be considered a conforming use for the purposes of making modifications to the building, until January 1, 2050.

63. The technical office for research and development, laboratory & research facility use shall be allowed in any PUD, AOD, SD, MXD or other special zoning district that already effectively allowed this use prior to January 1, 2023, notwithstanding the base zoning restrictions. Specifically, this base zoning restriction shall not apply to any existing PUD, AOD, SD, MXD or other existing special zoning districts in or near Kendall Square, Alewife or Cambridge Port, but will apply in regular overlay districts including Harvard Square and Central Square.

O-11     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
WHEREAS: The existing preference period for Economic Empowerment applicants established in the Cannabis Business Permitting Ordinance expires on Sept 23, 2022; and
WHEREAS: Due to various factors including supply chain disruptions and other effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the complex, arduous and expensive application process, and the inevitable delays in construction, a total of two Economic Empowerment retail establishment have opened and only recently did so, while five additional Economic Empowerment retail establishments are now under construction and four additional Priority A applicants have executed Host Community Agreements; and
WHEREAS: Extending the preference period for Priority A applicants is necessary to accomplish the goal of giving these applicants an opportunity to establish their business; and
WHEREAS: That the City Council finds that the adoption of the amendment to Cambridge Municipal Code Chapter 5.50 entitled Cannabis Business Permitting to extend and amend the provisions relating to the permitting preference period in Section 5.50.040 is an emergency involving the health and safety of the people of Cambridge or their property, pursuant to G.L. c.43, §20; and
WHEREAS: The City Council in recognition of the emergency waives the advertising provisions of Section 1.12.030 (b) of the Ordinances of the City of Cambridge; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Council hereby declares that there is an emergency involving the health and safety of the people of Cambridge or their property, pursuant to G.L. c.43, §20 that necessitates the passages through all stages of ordination on this day; and be it further
ORDERED: That the ordinances of the City of Cambridge be amended as follows:

5.50.040 Permitting Preferences for Priority Applicants

The City shall issue a Cannabis Business Permit pursuant to this Chapter only to Priority Applicants. For the first five three years after the Effective Date of this Chapter as stated in section 5.50.100 below,. the City shall issue a Cannabis Business Permit to operate a Cannabis Retail Store only to Group A Priority Applicants. The effect of this provision is to extend the preference period for Economic Empowerment Applicants from three two years to five three years, and to provide a three one year preference period for all other Group A Priority Applicants to run concurrently with the third, fourth and fifth third years of the preference period for Economic Empowerment Applicants.

O-12     Sept 12, 2022
VICE MAYOR MALLON
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
COUNCILLOR CARLONE
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR TONER
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
ORDERED: That the City Manager direct the Community Development Department to provide an analysis of how the various proposals to amend the proposed linkage fee rate increases would affect future contributions to the Affordable Housing Trust, as well as a similar analysis for the amendment regarding substantial renovations; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager direct the City Solicitor answer any legal questions that came up during the discussion that occurred during the regular City Council meeting on September 12th; and be it further
ORDERED: That this report is provided to the City Council by the regular City Council meeting on Monday, October 3rd.

O-13     Sept 12, 2022
COUNCILLOR TONER
ORDERED: Request that the City Manager ask the City Solicitor to prepare a legal opinion on the following questions regarding Policy Order #11.

1. Does this qualify as an “emergency involving the health and safety of the people of Cambridge or their property”?
2. Are we able to forgo following the normal ordination process and notification process?
3. How quickly could we amend the ordinance to extend the moratorium if we followed the normal “non-emergency” process?
4. If we follow the normal ordinance procedure and we do not meet the current September 23rd expiration date, is there any danger of any none EE or SE cannabis candidates getting permitted in the brief interim it would take for us to follow the normal process?
5. Does this extension of the moratorium violate the state cannabis law in anyway?
6. Does such an extension put the City in jeopardy of legal action by other parties?
7. If yes to question 6, what is the potential liability to the city if such parties are successful in their legal challenge?