TEXT OF COMMITTEE REPORTS
Committee Report #1
The Ordinance Committee, comprised of the entire membership of the City Council, held a public hearing on Tues, Nov 21, 2017 at 5:33pm in the Sullivan Chamber.

The purpose of the hearing was to discuss a zoning petition filed by Peter Kroon, et al., to amend Section 20.50 of the Zoning Ordinance “Harvard Square Overlay District.”

Present at the hearing were Councillor Cheung and Councillor Carlone, Co-Chairs of the Committee; Councillor Devereux; Councillor Kelley; Vice Mayor McGovern; Iram Farooq, Assistant City Manager for Community Development Department; Jeff Roberts, Senior Manager for Zoning and Development, CDD; Arthur Goldberg, Deputy City Solicitor; and Donna P. Lopez, City Clerk.

Also present were Francis Donovan, 42 Irving Street; Ruth Ryals, 115 Upland Road; Brad Bellows, 87 Howard Street; Abra Berkowitz, 253½ Broadway; Carol O’Hare, 172 Magazine Street; Marilee Meyer, 10 Dana Street; Frank Kramer, 7 Avon Street; Tim Shaw, 147 Mt. Auburn Street; Tom Brush, 21 Brattle Street; Laura Donohue, 30 Brattle Street; Denise Jillson, 18 Brattle Street; James Williamson, 1000 Jackson Place; Rosalind Michahekes, 6 Hurlbut Street; Dominick Jones, 6 Hurlbut Street; Lee Farris 269 Norfolk Street; Susan Labandibar, 8 Brewer Street; Gordon and Charlotte Moore, 9 Rutland Street; and Jon Wahely, 54 Wendell Street.

Councillor Carlone convened the hearing and stated the purpose. He announced that the hearing is being audio and video recorded. He explained the format of the hearing as follows: petitioner, staff, public comment and then the City Council will discuss the petition. At the conclusion of the hearing a recommendation will be made on how to proceed with the petition. Councillor Carlone announced that Councillor Cheung is scheduled to chair this hearing and will assume the chair when he arrives.

Councillor Carlone welcomed the petitioner, Peter Kroon to come forward.

Mr. Kroon gave a PowerPoint presentation (ATTACHMENT A). He gave a history of the petition. He stated that 1/3 of $1 billion in real estate in Cambridge is changing hands. He stated that the new owners are non-local. He spoke about the problems. He stated that retailers are being forced out. The Regency is proposing to take out a third floor and fill in the bargain basement so that it can put a 9,500-square foot restaurant on the roof. They are requesting a 66.5 height which requires a special permit. All the tenants will be pushed out and there will be a two-year construction zone in the center of the City. He noted that the average resident has no way to stay on top of this matter. He stated that retailer is already affected by what is happening. He stated that taxes have gone up 23% in four years. He stated the impact on one store is an increase of $8,300 in two years. This is paid by the tenant. The tax increase for a small retailer is a burden. He spoke about the tourist who visit Harvard Square and the public restrooms available. He stated that there is an opportunity for a Tourist Information Center, there is a homeless problem and the City is not getting the good stores. He commented on “brand equity” and how the meaning differs and creates a disagreement. He stated that the neighborhood has a different point of view.

At 5:41 PM Councillor Cheung assumed the chair. Mr. Kroon stated that the neighborhood perspective is that of a sprawling university with a village in the center. He highlighted the neighborhood goals for Harvard Square and that the Harvard Square Advisory Committee ((HSAC) be comprised to full neighborhood representation. He stated that the zoning petition has eight planks consisting of five zoning proposals and three governance improvements.

Mr. Kroon spoke about the three governance improvements, their goals and requested changes. The first goal is to fix the HSAC. He described the requested changes. He wanted the HSAC to be made up of twelve members with six members being residents with two business owners, one architect and urban planner and one representative of commercial real estate. The terms be limited and the chair to rotate.

The second is to fix the Harvard Square Improvement Fund. He claimed that there was no transparency on this fund. He noted that no funding was spent on parking, the #1 priority. He wanted to know the end balance in the account at the end of the year and wanted the language to read that the funding can only be used for short-term parking solutions. The third was to set an explicit policy goal. He noted that the Harvard Square Development Guidelines is being updated and will take eighteen months. There are two big projects that are coming in the pipe-line. He requested that a second criteria be added to preserve and enhance the pedestrian window-shopping experience, the extent and density of contiguous storefront openings and the pedestrian streetscape vitality generally. He explained that the Historical Commission does not discuss use or streetscapes. The goal is to protect the rich eco-system; not to protect individual shops or businesses that may be declining or falling out of favor.

Mr. Kroon spoke about the five zoning planks that are tougher. The first was to mandate smaller store spaces. Developers are coming and clearing everyone out and it is unknown what will be put into these buildings. There is dead space in front of banks. He wanted to improve signage and lighting. He recommended three points from the Retail Strategy Final report. He spoke about items from Professor Shapiro’s presentation. He noted that this zoning petition find a way to ensure small frontage store spaces 1,250 square feet or less. If left up to the market to dictate there may be no small stores. He noted that the dead zones due to over-wide banks need to be reclaimed. He stated that to prevent dead zones and preserve street vitality the petition proposes to limit banks to 25 linear feet for store frontage to be waived by special permit. He spoke about encouraging retail density. He suggested talking about lighting buildings in Harvard Square. The signage and lighting need to be amplified to strengthen the character of the area. He suggested that the GFA above 60 feet be used for residential. He summarized the eight planks. He felt the first three may be finalized by Feb 19, 2018. He spoke about the objectives. He stated that clearer guidance for developers will result in better development. He acknowledged that there are errors in the petition. He listed the reasons not to hold off on this petition. He stated that the Harvard Square Business Association is opposed to this and dominated by real estate developers.

Councillor Cheung requested City staff to come forward. Ms. Farooq and Mr. Roberts came forward.

Mr. Roberts stated that the petition was reviewed and a memo was presented to the Planning Board that goes over the details of the zoning proposal (ATTACHMENT B). He stated that the Planning Board hearing was held on Nov 14, 2017 and concluded without recommendations and would continue to discuss this topic. The Planning Board felt that this should be discussed on retail, retailers based on the changes in the retail landscape. The Planning Board acknowledged that there have been a broad range of issues suggested by this petition. He stated that the Planning Board welcomed City Council input on this subject and wanted to hear from all property owners and those who objected to the specific proposal welcomed opportunities to include them in the conversation. There are aspects of the petition that he may not have interpreted as intended. This will be sorted out as this moves forward.

On motion of Councillor Cheung public comment began at 6:07pm.

Francis Donovan, 42 Irvin Street, stated that he has an office in Harvard Square. He stated that Harvard Square is blessed with the most colorful history and the best intellectual talent in the United States. He stated that it is the second largest tourist magnet in Massachusetts. He stated that this should result in a thriving, colorful and profitable, pleasant neighborhood for all, but is short on these categories. He stated that the quirky shops that made Harvard Square unique are extent. He stated that Cambridge is devoid of small startups. He spoke of the dead zones and vacant store fronts. This Harvard Square Tourist Mecca has almost no public restrooms and the ones it does have are in deplorable condition. Harvard Square’s colorful history is all but silent. He stated that the guidelines referred to by Mr. Kroon are a good place to start. He stated that two huge tracts of Harvard Square real estate have been purchased for $100 million each. The Brattle Building Block has gone on the market for $100 million. He stated that the City is in for a huge phase of development in the next 5-10 years. He urged consideration of the Kroon petition. He submitted his comments (ATTACHMENT C).

Ruth Ryals, 115 Upland Road, stated that she is President of PSNA and founding member of the Massachusetts Avenue Improvement Committee and currently serve on the Envision Cambridge. She addressed Plank Two in the Harvard Square zoning petition. She stated that Harvard Square stores define Cambridge and the store owners are neighbors. This petition is not meant to stop progress but to help the square and save the soul of the square. The survey shows that unique shops is what customers want with personal care and quirky items. There is a need in the square for community meetings, performances, musicians and arts to be made and shown. She spoke about preserving the character of Harvard Square. She asked the City Council to review other cities who have done this. She submitted her comments (ATTACHMENT D).

Brad Bellows, 87 Howard Street, spoke about changes in Harvard Square. There has been a decline in the richness and diversity in the square’s retail ecosystem. There has been a displacement of small businesses and this erosion has occurred while preserving the character of the square. He submitted his comments (ATTACHMENT E). He stated that provisions can be refined in the petition. He encouraged the City Council to support the Kroon petition.

Abra Berkowitz, 253½ Broadway, stated that she is a member of the Harvard Square Neighborhood Association. He noted that Harvard Square has been a place to be and to hang out. It has been a place of possibility and freedom. She stated that her friends currently feel that there is nothing in Harvard Square. She stated that Harvard Square is losing its identity and function due to a lack of regulations. She supported the Kroon petition and stated that it is not radical at all. It is enabling and not restrictive. She submitted her comments (ATTACHMENT F). This is a means for the City to assess the needs. There are 220 supporters of the Kroon petition.

Carol O’Hare submitted her comments (ATTACHMENT G). She did not want to give the Planning Board special permit over signage in Harvard Square. She listed all the departments and agencies that approve signage. She noted that the approval process for signs is over kill. She stated that Special Permits are discretionary and unpredictable because the approval standards are so flexible. She suggested that the Historical Commission is given jurisdiction over the Planning Board. She suggested restoring the signage limitation to the Zoning Board and then let Historical Commission review over signs that are on top of the zoning restrictions. She is not a formula business person. She stated that the lighting ordinance needs to be rewritten.

Marilee Meyer, 10 Dana Street, supported the Kroon petition. She supported term limits for members on influential boards and stated that preservation and development are not mutually exclusively. She stated that the Conservation District Study committee is revisiting the CHC Guidelines. Harvard Square is more than a historic place; it is brick and mortar and basic needs to not trickle down and other services are lacking in the square. She spoke about newspapers increasing and eBooks decline. There has not been a stronger preservation stance and stated that height and setback restrictions could be required on the Abbott building. She stated that the demand is for either a good project or not. She stated that scale, balance and esthetics matter. She stated that the Kroon petition which compliments the Conservation District study should move forward to help to identify development perimeters. She submitted her comments (ATTACHMENT H).

Fred Kramer, 7 Avon Street, stated that he was the former owner of Harvard Book Store. He stated that he was on the Harvard Square Advisory Committee for seventeen years and co-founder of Cambridge Local First and a member of the Harvard Square Business Association. He supported the Kroon petition and that he had supporting signatures from eleven business owners on Brattle Street and Massachusetts Avenue (ATTACHMENT I). He spoke about the huge increases in rents charged for retail space in Harvard Square. He noted that Harvard Square is a magnet for globally recognized retailer seeking to promote their brand. He stated that retailers have been forced out. He stated that he is in favor of formula businesses. He spoke about development control. He stated that developers should be encouraged to support locally independent entrepreneurs. He spoke about in support of the Kroon petition. He submitted his comments (ATTACHMENT J).

Tim Shaw, 147 Mount Auburn Street, supported the Kroon petition. He has seen many changes in Harvard Square over forty years. He stated that the Kroon petition addresses the dead zones and regulates influx of chain stores. This is a good petition and a benefit to Harvard Square and urged support. He submitted his comments (ATTACHMENT K).

Tom Brush business owner for fourteen years. He stated that Harvard Square is a dynastic environment and has been richly rewarding for him and his partners. He supported the Kroon petition. He has been a member of the Harvard Square Business Association. He noted that the composition of the Harvard Square Business Association, because it is largely land owners, it is difficult to help direct the development in Harvard Square. He requested that the City Council vote on the petition to help direct the direction of Harvard Square.

Laura Donahue, 90 Putnam Avenue, owner of Bob Slate, stated her support for the Kroon petition because she supports a thorough and comprehensive conversation about the Harvard Square ecosystem where a substantial amount of commercial property is changing ownership. She stated that Historical Commission constructs the language for the physical place, meaning and relevance but zoning is primary guidance for use. She spoke about property ownership changes and stability threatened. She stated that small businesses with strong business model are successful because of the large property owners. She spoke about the turnover of large properties and how the ecosystem has changed. She stated that development without context can go wrong. The idea of this petition is to strengthen zoning language and strengthen Harvard Square. She submitted her comments (ATTACHMENT L).

Denise Jillson, Executive Director, Harvard Square Business Association, stated that there have been submitted 15 letters of opposition from Harvard Square property owners (ATTACHMENTS M-1 - M-16). She stated that petition is fundamentally flawed and poorly timed. She stated that the City Council asked for a review of the Harvard Square Guidelines. She stated that the City Manager vetted volunteers from the community and the committee has held two meetings. She stated that there are two items in the petition that are interesting and requires more discussion. One item is eliminating basement space from FAR and basement space should be encouraged to be used as back up space. She stated that the second item is how to disperse the parking fund; it should be expended. She spoke about the Harvard Square Advisory Board and stated that the HSAB advices the Planning Board and the BZA; both consist of residents. She stated that it is important that the HSAB should be made up of business people. Harvard Square is a business district and not a neighborhood. She explained that for One Brattle Square there is a proposal is coming to divide the space and this proposal will provide vibrancy to the Eliot Street side of the square. She provided clarification about the Bank of America and the sign that reads “under construction.” She stated that the sign has not been there for years. She further stated that Regency Center announced that Curious George has signed a long-term lease contract. She stated that it has been requested that Regency consider the tenants that are in the building and Regency has provided assurance that this will be looked at. She spoke about mitigating any harm to abutters during the construction process. She stated that a zoning petition is not needed to change Harvard Square Advisory Committee, to review the improvement fund or to create policies to preserve and enhance the ecosystem. She explained that the Harvard Square Neighborhood Association endeavors to maintain Harvard Square as a safe, welcoming, clean and memorable place for 8-10 million visitors who patronize businesses of which 70% of the businesses in Harvard Square are locally-owned independent businesses and more are needed because there is much competition. Police presence and trash containers are need in Harvard Square.

Lee Farris, 269 Norfolk Street, Vice President, Cambridge Residence Alliance, supported the Kroon petition for its goals for Harvard Square. She stated that the alliance collaborated with others to write and push forward the passage of the Central Square Restoration zoning petition which gave priority for new construction for residential rather than commercial preference. She stated that Harvard Square needs more full-time residents. She asked that the petition be clarified or improved to state that hotels and student residences do not count as residential dwelling units. This, she stated, would produce more affordable units. She stated that the Alliance supported controlled development that will restrict occupancies by formula businesses and financial institutions and agree with the intention to incentivize local retail spaces and changes to signage as suggested by Ms. O’Hare. She urged that the Ordinance Committee support this petition and forward it to the full City Council.

James Williamson, 1000 Jackson Place, stated that the City cannot get the tools to get the goals. He noted that the City needs to get the right tools for the job and implement the tools. He stated that the City is against global capital and how is this dealt with. On the tools, the zoning is important tool. The parking improvement fund, he suggested an audit on the fund on what has been done with the money. He spoke about protecting the Brattle Building. The CVS sign is an atrocity. He asked why the City cannot get regulations for signage that is needed. He added that tour busses should be managed better and locally owned and operated businesses need to be supported. He spoke about revisiting transfer development rights for affordable locally-owned, owner-operated businesses. He stated that there is need for reform on the Harvard Square Advisory Committee. He stated that loading zones need to be controlled.

Susan Labandibar, 8 Brewer Street, spoke about maintaining a balance in Harvard Square to maintain the vibrancy in Harvard Square. She stated that it is not uncommon for formula businesses to arrive in an area in mass and escalates rents that leads to a transformation of a business district. To maintain diversity taking action is needed. She stated that zoning policies, soaring real estate costs and increased rents are making it hard for local businesses. She listed the action needed. She spoke about San Francisco formula businesses. She stated that Nantucket has prohibited formula businesses. She submitted her comments (ATTACHMENT N).

Councillor Carlone moved to close public comment at 6:56pm.

At this time Councillor Cheung proceeded with comments from the City Council.

Vice Mayor McGovern asked Mr. Kroon if he has discussed this petition with the Harvard Square Advisory Committee and others to make this work.

Ms. Farooq spoke about the various efforts underway in Harvard Square. The Historical Commission is working on updating the guidelines for the Conservation District which guide the Planning Board and the Harvard Square Advisory Committee on the projects they review. This will impact the physical form and facades of building and does not affect uses. The Harvard Square Kiosk and Plaza Working Group is looking at the public realm in the heart of the square and is specific for this space and not the broader Harvard Square. She stated that there are things in Envision Cambridge that are being studied and will have city-wide implications. She stated that the recommendations to update land use table in support of retail that came from the Retail Strategy report are being reviewed. There are components not addressed and will be addressed in other avenues. This petition is worthy of looking at on its merits. She spoke about the City Council looking at citywide perimeters supersede what is being adopted now in Harvard Square. Vice Mayor McGovern asked what is the status of an order passed in September for Harvard Square submitted by Mayor Simmons; where is this in this conversation. Ms. Farooq stated that she was unsure of the status of this; it was a multi-departmental level response. She would get back to City Council on this. Mr. Kroon stated that the Harvard Square Kiosk and Plaza Working Group is a limited viewpoint and use has not been included in petition. He stated that the Retail Strategy is there something in the works, he was unsure of what the next steps are. Vice Mayor McGovern spoke about chain restaurants and the different type of chain stores that are local owners. He added that chain stores offer cheaper alternatives. He spoke about the difference in those who use Dunkin Donuts and Starbucks. He stated that he did want to see continuity around signage in Harvard Square. He likes activating store fronts and the housing components in the petition. He urged caution and spoke about the differences in Harvard Square for different aged users. He stated that Harvard Square evolves over time. He wanted a large range of voices, including teenagers. Mr. Kroon spoke about dead zones in front of certain buildings. He stated that when 7-8 tenants are blown out and it is rebuilt and is more expensive and new tenants may not be what is wanted in Harvard Square. Vice Mayor McGovern stated that depending on who you ask there will be a different view of Harvard Square. There are good aspects of the petition. He stated that it is prudent to keep the petition in committee. This should be discussed more. He asked Mr. Kroon what he is looking for. Mr. Kroon stated that the Planning Board wanted to re-advertise the petition because of the communication misunderstanding and urged him not to withdraw the petition. He stated that there are some parts of the petition that can be moved forward.

Councillor Devereux stated that she supports the goals in the petition. She stated that Harvard Square needs an intervention. She stated that she had lunch at Cardullo’s and marveled at the amount of inventory in the small space. She shops in Harvard Square and shops being displaced when the block is redevelopment is troubling. She spoke about the value of Curious George and the development going forward. She stated that this petition is necessary and it is not overlapping with the ongoing work. She stated that much needs to be thrown at the problem. She stated that zoning is the tool that the City Council has against the issue. She stated that the Planning Board should be more active in development in Harvard Square rather than reactive. She stated that there are more stores needed in Harvard Square. She noted that Harvard Square does not have an appeal for her children or to the millennials. She stated that the vacant stores are a huge drain. She stated that it may be kept in Committee and more work done on the petition.

Councillor Carlone stated that he was impressed with the outreach done by the petitioner. There is no conflict with the Harvard Square Business Association for safety or clean up. He stated that there is no conflict with Historical Conservation District. He stated that anytime you try to correct or redefine a district there will be input from many different agencies and all the issues need to be worked on together. He stated that this petition is dealing with what can be done by the City Council. The urban design in the petition is common sense. The public domain is not just public space or facade it is all the publicly accessible spaces adjoining the public space. This needs to be managed. He spoke about what are the desired program of uses. What would the City Council like to see in this area? He stated that urban design in this petition makes sense. The 50-foot rule in retail states that if there is active retail frontage this must be maintained without a 50-foot break. When the break occurs, people stop walking along this frontage. A retail expert stated that local retail is needed to maintain the activity with 50% frontage. He stated that he is impressed with what was presented. He wanted urban design guidelines that further define new construction that will tie into zoning being discussed. This has to work for everyone. The main reasons to keep in committee is that the Planning Board is going to study the petition further and enrich the petition.

Councillor Cheung stated that the petition encapsulates the opportunities and challenges to have Harvard Square maintain a local focus and appealing to all people. He stated that Harvard Square has competition with Assembly Row and Davis Square. Harvard Square has had good stewardship and strong leadership to keep it active and vital. Harvard Square has done well because of the leadership involved to make it a great place. All are interested in Harvard Square; it is important to the core of Cambridge and is affected by outside pressures. The studies underway do not have conflict or overlap. Cambridge wants to make sure all voices are heard but it is the job of the City Council to make decisions and to move on. He spoke about dialogue on Harvard Square. He spoke about Harvard Square businesses that are stating that there are things in this petition that are needed in Harvard Square. He stated that going forward the City Council needs to hear from the Planning Board on this petition. He sees this moving forward and encourages the Harvard Square Business Association and property owners to talk with local business owners and Mr. Kroon to reach consensus on items that can be moved forward. There is time to reach consensus on the merits of the petition. There are good things in this petition and there is consensus on the City Council to see this happen.

At this time Councillor Carlone moved to leave the matter in committee. This motion carried on a voice vote of three members.

The following communication was received from Paula Turnbull expressing concerns about the Kroon petition (ATTACHMENT O).

Councillor Cheung and Councillor Carlone thanked all those present for their attendance.

The hearing adjourned at 7:34pm.

For the Committee,
Councillor Leland Cheung, Co-Chair
Councillor Dennis J. Carlone, Co-Chair