Cambridge City
MA

Committee Report
CRT 2019 #78

A report from Councillor Dennis J. Carlone and Councillor Craig A. Kelley, Co-Chairs of the Ordinance Committee, for a public hearing held on September 26, 2019 and November 14, 2019 to discuss the petition by Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of Cambridgeside Galleria Associates Trust, to amend the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by adding a Section 13.100 that creates a new PUD-8 District and to amend the Zoning Map of the City of Cambridge by adding the new PUD-8 District, which District would include the property located at 100 Cambridgeside Place (currently zoned in the Business A and PUD-4 Districts)

Information

Department:City Clerk's OfficeSponsors:
Category:Ordinance Committee

Attachments

  1. Printout

Body

 

The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on September 26, 2019 and November 14, 2019 to discuss the petition by Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of Cambridgeside Galleria Associates Trust, to amend the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by adding a Section 13.100 that creates a new PUD-8 District and to amend the Zoning Map of the City of Cambridge by adding the new PUD-8 District, which District would include the property located at 100 Cambridgeside Place (currently zoned in the Business A and PUD-4 Districts) in the Sullivan Chamber.

                                                                     

 

 

On September 26, 2019, Councillor Kelley called the meeting to order at 5:34 PM and opened the floor to the petitioner.

Attendee Name

Present

Absent

Late

Arrived

Dennis J. Carlone

þ

¨

¨

 

Jan Devereux

þ

¨

¨

 

Craig A. Kelley

þ

¨

¨

 

Alanna Mallon

þ

¨

¨

 

Marc C. McGovern

þ

¨

¨

 

E. Denise Simmons

¨

¨

þ

5:50 PM

Sumbul Siddiqui

¨

þ

¨

 

Timothy J. Toomey

¨

¨

þ

5:50 PM

Quinton Zondervan

þ

¨

¨

 

 

 

Richard McKinnon, Development Consultant, 1 Leighton Street, spoke in support of the petition.  He explained that the petitioner has been before the planning board earlier in the week.  He explained that the presentation will explain why this petition is very different from the previous petition filed in February.

 

John Twohig, from New England Development, explained a chart highlighting changes between this petition and the petition filed in February.  He explained that they have decreased commercial space and increased housing space.  The new petition maintains ground level retail.  The petition has more affordable units and more workforce units. He stated that the petitioner would beginning building residential units when they start construction on the second building. This petition lowered the height at the end of the project by 30 feet. 

 

David Manfredi, Manfredi Architects, explained how this petition incorporated ideas from the 1970 East Cambridge Riverfront plan.  He explained that the Cambridgeside Galleria has contributed to the creation of a network of public spaces in Cambridge.  He explained how this proposal will bring office space and housing to the area.  Mr. Manfredi stated that they will build on top of the existing infrastructure. The proposal will improve the bridge to make it safer and more pleasant to walk through.  He stated that one of the purposes of the development is to get more people to the river.

 

Mr. Manfredi explained how this project will address climate and heat vulnerability.  He stated the project will increase green space and add new plantings to increase shade.  He explained how the project will increase sustainability by divert storm water for reuse. collected rain water. reduce carbon emissions.  He explained that the building will be net-zero ready through the use of local renewable. 

 

Mr. Twohig explained that the petitioner is very comfortable with the recommendations from the Planning Board.  He explained that the petitioner will continue to offer parking during snow emergency.  He explained that explained that the petitioner has committed funding to the Cambride public schools, an East Cambridge scholarship program.  Mr. Twohig further explained the project will cause this site to increase its tax contribution from $4 million to $7 million.

 

Mr. Twohig explained some of the items will appear in the formal commitment letter.

 

Jeff Roberts, from the Community Development Department, explained that the Planning Board was be generally supportive of the proposal.  The general consensus was that the proposal should have as much housing as possible.  The Planning Board wanted more details about the petitioners commitments to determine is the public benefits outweigh negatives.

 

Councillor Carlone clarified that the 575,000 square feet listed in the petition does not include the garage.  He stated that the garage could be another 240,000 square feet of commercial space.  In response, Mr. Roberts stated that Councillor Carlone's assessment as mostly correct. 

 

In response to a question from Councillor Carlone, Mr. Roberts stated that if the petitioner demolished the existing garage then they would need to modify the zoning or a reallocation of space.  He further explained that the existing legal size of the galleria is 600,000 square feet. 

 

Iram Farooq, Director of the Community Development Department, explained that the Planning Board saw two different ways of looking at the numbers; one is the physical form of the building and the other way is the impact of the development.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Carlone, Mr. Roberts stated that the current height limit is 85 feet.

 

Councillor Toomey confirmed that New England Development does not own Sears Roebuck building.  In response to a question from Councillor Toomey, Mr. Twohig stated that the petitioner defines local retailers as retailers from Cambridge and its environs. 

 

In response to a question from Vice Mayor Devereux, Mr.Twohig explained that there is a strong demand for office but they do not know if there would lab uses as well.  Mr. Karp explained that they residential could be in the same building with retail and office uses.  Mr. Karp explained that 1,700 parking spaces will continue in operation.  Mr. Twohig explained that parking demand has been steadily decreasing over time.

 

Mr. Twohig agreed to provide the Ordinance committee with a copy of the traffic memorandum that the petitioner gave to City staff.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Mallon, Mr. Roberts explained that the "residential trigger" is intending to require residential construction after the completion of a commercial building.  The Planning Board had questions about the clarity of the language.

 

Councillor Mallon stated that she does not want to wait 8 to 10 years from for residential housing to be built.

 

In response to s question from Councillor Zondervan, Mr. Roberts stated that the height limit under the current zoning is 85 feet. The maximum height proposed by the petition is 185 feet.

 

Councillor Zondervan stated that he believed that the Net-Zero language was vague. 

 

In response to a question from Councillor Zondervan, Mr. Twohig stated that the commitment letter should be available in 10 days. 

 

Councillor Zondervan stated that he was concerned about adding additional load to the grid.

 

Councillor Carlone confirmed that the site is 8 and a half acres.

 

Public comment opened at 6:54 pm.

 

Russell Cushman, 100 Cambridgeside, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Sharon Zimmer, 99 Bishop Allen, Executive Director of Cambridge Camping Association, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Jeff Martin, 10 Holworth, President of Carpenters 138, spoke in support of the petition.

 

David Boris, 9 Hollis Street, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Michael Burns, 1157 Adams Street, Dorchester MA, spoke in support.

 

Leroy Ward, 8 Marvin Place, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Tom Joyce, 270 Third Street, spoke in support.  He was happy to see that the heights have been reduced.

 

Cilia Moran Cruz, 14 Chestnut Park, Malrose, MA, spoke in support. 

 

Pamela Putnam, 4 Canal Park, spoke in opposition to the petition.

 

Steve Bennett, 29 Cogswell Avenue, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Anderson Lima, 566 Windsor Street, spoke in support of the petition.

 

James Williamson, 100 Jackson Place, spoke about issues taking public transportation to the Galleria.  He encouraged the council to be skeptical about promises from the petitioner.

 

Marlene Lundberg, 4 canal Park, stated that there was not enough information to make a decision on this petition. She asked the council to require Pro Forma from the petitioner.

 

Saundra Vrejan, 4 Canal Park, spoke in opposition to the petition.

 

Ilan Levy, 148 Spring Street, spoke about negotiating actively to extract as much as possible from the petitioner for public benefits.  He stated that the ECPT has not come to a decision on this petition.

 

7:28 PM Motion from Mayor McGovern to suspend rules to extend the meeting.

 

Stephanie Couch, 10 Rogers Street, spoke in favor of the petition.

 

Cynthia Livingston, 10 Rogers Street, generally spoke in support of the petition with certain concerns.

 

Lee Farris, 269 Norfolk Street, spoke in opposition to the petition.  She opposed any upzoning until the Eversource sitting issue is resolved.

 

Xavier Vivar, 14 Chestnut Park, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Tristine Thong, 287 Broadway, reada letter in support of the petition.

 

John Rafferty, 4 Canal Park, spoke in opposition to the petition.  He believed that a lot could be done under current zoning.

 

Anika Watler, 224 Norfolk Street, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Pauline Phillip-Borde, from Fall River, spoke in support of the petition.

 

Chris Matthews, 26 Sixth Street, spoke in support of the project.  He read a letter from ECPT.

 

David Ellis, 6 Canel Park, stated that there are several attractive things in the proposal but he had several questions.  He was worried about changes to the character of the neighborhood and traffic.

 

Matthew Connely, 13 Cornelius Way,  asked the council not to approve any upzoning petitions until the issues with the proposed Eversource substation on Fulkerson Street is resolved.

 

Public comment closed at 7:51 PM.

 

Councillor Zondervan stated that he would like to have the city complete a pro forma on the petition.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Mallon, Mr. Roberts explained that the Planning Board would resume its hearing on the petition on October 29th.

 

Councillor Toomey moved to recess the meeting. 

 

Vice Mayor Devereux suggested that the petitioner make changes to their presentation.

 

Councillor Carlone suggested that the city prepare a report on the petition.

 

Councillor Toomey withdrew his motion.

 

Councillor Carlone expressed his concerns about the density.  He also wants to see a financial analysis.

 

Mayor McGovern stated that it is important to maximize family sized units and he wanted to see more information about the quantity of those units.

 

Councillor Simmons requested that councillors send questions to the clerk to send to petitioner.

 

Councillor Mallon asked to meet after the planning board meeting on this topic.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Kelley, Ms. Farooq stated that city does not have anyone on staff to conduct a Pro Forma review.

 

Move to recess by Councillor Simmons. Motion passed by voice vote.

 

The hearing recessed at 8:08 PM.

 

The following documents were received at the hearing:

1.              A revised Petition Has been received from Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of Cambridge Side Galeria Associates trust to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance by adding a new Section 13.100 to Article 13.00 of the Zoning Ordinance  and to amend the Zoning Map to add a new PUD-8 District overlay that certain area (which includes  parcels and portions of ways and streets) labeled as "PUD-8 district".

2.              A communication was received from Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of Cambridge Side Galeria Associates trust, regarding a presentation to the Ordinance Committee on September 26, 2019 on the revised Petition to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance by adding a new Section 13.100 to Article 13.00

3.              A communication was received from Marlene Lundberg, 4 Canal Park, regarding the Cambridgeside Zoning Petition.

RESULT:              NO ACTION TAKEN

4.              A communication was received from the Community Development Department regarding the CambridgeSide Galleria Associates Trust Zoning Petition

RESULT:              NO ACTION TAKEN

 

 

These documents may be viewed here:

http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=2503

 

 

On November 14, 2019 Councillor Carlone called this reconvened hearing to order at 5:02 PM.

Attendee Name

Present

Absent

Late

Arrived

Dennis J. Carlone

þ

¨

¨

 

Jan Devereux

þ

¨

¨

 

Craig A. Kelley

¨

þ

¨

 

Alanna Mallon

þ

¨

¨

 

Marc C. McGovern

þ

¨

¨

 

E. Denise Simmons

þ

¨

¨

 

Sumbul Siddiqui

þ

¨

¨

 

Timothy J. Toomey

þ

¨

¨

 

Quinton Zondervan

þ

¨

¨

 

 

Councillor Carlone explained that this is a reconvened hearing from a meeting held on September 26, 2019.  He further explained that Councillor Simmons would participate in the meeting remotely via teleconference.  Councillor Carlone confirmed that Councillor Simmons was audible to the chamber.  Councillor Simmons confirmed that the meeting was audible to her.

 

Richard McKinnon, representing the Petitioner, introduced the individuals who would be making a presentation on behalf of the petitioner: John Twohig from New England Development, Stephen Karp from New England Development and David Manfredi from Elkus Manfredi Architects. The presentation is attached to these minutes.

 

Mr. Twohig explained that the petitioner has submitted a memorandum that included a revised zoning text and commitment letter.  The memorandum is attached to these minutes.  He summarized some of the conversation at the Planning Board and how the Petitioner has responded to those concerns.  Mr. Twohig explained how the petition has evolved in response to concerns from the Council and the Planning Board.

 

Mr. Manfredi explained the difference between the current proposal and past versions relative to planning and design.  He explained the significant reduction in height.  The petitioner has added guidelines for massing.  This petition expands public realm. He stated that all building will be LEED gold and there is a clear path to net zero. Mr. Manfredi stated that this petition has reduced commercial density and height relative to prior versions.  He stated that residential space has increased by 50,000 square feet and the Petitioner will commit 50% of residential space to low and middle income units.

 

Mr. Twohig stated that the Petitioner will pay the City $50 million dollars in mitigation funding.  He further explained that the Petitioner agreed to pro forma so that the City can accurately account for all of the financial benefits of the project.

 

Mr. Manfredi stated that the core mall building will remain the same size.

 

Mr. Twohig explained that the zone change makes further development at the property financeable, the project will create an opportunity for mixed use. He explained the high cost associated with operating a mall.  Mr. Twohig explained that this is an $800 million project.  He explained that the petitioner supported the financial review because a majority of the financial benefits go to the City.

 

Councillor Carlone opened the floor to the Council for questions of the Petitioner.

 

In response to questions from Mayor McGovern, Mr. Twohig stated that the Petitioner would have to make the following required payments: approximately $10 million in linkage fees, $8-$10 million in INI and Building review fees and another $20 million in fees.

 

Councillor Carlone stated that the Volpe discussion was the first time the Council realized the cost for improvements should result in concrete improvements to the City.

 

Councillor Mallon stated that she would like to question independent financial consultant hired by the City. Iram Farooq, Assistant City Manager for Community Development, explained that the City hired Robert Reardon to examine the financial information from the Petitioner.

 

Councillor Carlone stated that the committee will hear from Mr. Reardon after every councillor had the opportunity to question the Petitioner.

 

In response to questions from Vice Mayor Devereux, Mr. Twohig explained that ultimately, at full build out, there will be some loss of retail space. However, the increased office and commercial space will lead to more jobs.  Mr. Karp stated that there will be approximately 325,000 square feet of retail.  

 

In response to comments from Councillor Toomey, Mr Twohig stated that the restoration of the boathouse would have cost about $5 million but the petitioner was willing to divert that money to more community-based programs.

 

In response to questions from Vice Mayor Devereux, Mr. Twohig explained that the connectivity and landscaping under and around the bridge would happen even if the Petitioner did not renovate the boathouse. Vice Mayor Devereux stated that she would like to hear from the staff on this issue.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Mallon, Mr. Twohig explained that the cost to improve the riverfront, independent of the of the DCR boathouse, is approximately $7 million.  Mr. Twohig stated that if the Petitioner renovated the boathouse, for the community's benefit, then the Petitioner would be responsible for maintenance for a number of years.

 

Councillor Carlone stated that the City would provide the Council with a report on the value of the "up-zoning".

 

Councillor Carlone opened the floor to questions of City staff.

 

Jeffrey Roberts summarized the discussion at the Planning Board.  The report and recommendation of the Planning Board is attached to these minutes.  He stated that a majority of the Planning Board expressed support for the proposal overall.  Mr. Roberts explained that Planning Board members were not sure if the current proposal was the best that could be achieved in terms of housing.  The Planning board wanted a clearer statement about the number of family sized units.  The Planning board recommended specific improvements to the text.  Mr. Roberts stated that the revised text submitted in the Petitioner's memorandum addressed many of the Planning Board's concerns.

 

Mr. Roberts stated that there are a number of outstanding textual changes that City Staff would like to make, including:

13.102.3 paragraph "c", needs additional information about the parking plan;

13.102.4 paragraph "g", the Planning Board asked that the language be made clearer;

13.102.7 and 13.102.8, the Planning Board asked for Law Department review;

13.104.1(D), needs more information about the amount, timing and number of family size units;

13.107.4, needs more clarification about sustainability;

13.107.5, may need further improvements.

 

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor, stated that the staff has some suggested language for the Council that could improve the proposal.  The language clarifies what will happen if a development parcel is divided in the future.  Also, City staff recommended certain language about the timing of phased development.

 

Councillor Carlone stated that he would like more specificity about the package of design guidelines.  Councillor Carlone suggested replacing the word "diversity" with "richness".

 

In response to a question from Councillor Carlone, Mr. Roberts explained that the consensus of the Planning Board was that the heights and massing in the proposal were appropriate.  Many on the Planning Board felt that the step-back provisions were important.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Mallon, Mr Roberts stated that Planning Board wanted the proposal to achieve as much housing as is reasonably possible. Councillor Mallon stated that she felt that 30% housing was low.  She stated that she wanted the Petitioner to create more 3 bedroom units. 

 

Ms. Farooq agreed that the need for family-size units in Cambridge is great.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Toomey, Ms. Farooq explained that middle income rental units in other developments take a long time to fill relative to other types of units.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Carlone, Mr. Reardon explained that the City Manager has asked him to review the Pro Forma submitted by the Petitioner.  He has been completing a line by line audit of the document, including asking questions of the Petitioner.  Mr Reardon stated that he intended to have a report to the Council in about two weeks.  Mr. Reardon discussed some of the challenges in operating a mall and the specific challenges for this project. 

 

Councillor Carlone stated that he wants to know if this "up zoning" is necessary for the success of the property.  He does not believe that this "up zoning" is necessary.

 

Mayor McGovern stated that he wanted to know what would happen to the proposed community benefits if the Petitioner decided to proceed under their current zoning. 

 

Councillor Mallon stated that she felt that the height and massing could be appropriate depending on the community benefits.  She stated that she is concerned about the timeline that the council has to act.

 

Councillor Simmons shared concerns about the timeline.  She stated that she would like to see this item move forward.  Councillor Simmons explained that the Developer has worked to address the concerns of the community.  She expressed her concern with the challenges associated with providing middle income housing in Cambridge.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Carlone, Ms. Farooq explained that the Zoning Ordinance does not allow City staff flexibility regarding the proportion of middle-income units to "low-mod".  Solicitor Glowa stated that proportion of middle income to low and moderate income units must be specified in the Zoning legislation.  Ms. Farooq clarified that the total square footage must be written into the language, the staff has some discretion with how that is broken down by size.  The Council must be specific and precise as to what is allowed.  Mr. Roberts suggested broadening the range for middle income units.

 

Mayor McGovern clarified that not moving this item out of committee on November 14th will make it more difficult to pass this item in the allotted time.

 

Councillor Zondervan spoke against moving the item out of committee.

 

In response to a question from Vice Mayor Devereux, Mr. Reardon stated that he could have his report ready by November 26th.

 

Councillor Simmons spoke in favor of moving the item out of committee.

 

Councillor Toomey spoke in favor of moving the item out of committee.

 

Mayor McGovern suggested moving this item out of committee and he stated that he would call a special meeting of the full City Council on November 26th on this petition.

 

Councillor Simmons moved to refer the petition to the City Council with a favorable recommendation.

 

Solicitor Glowa and City Clerk Wilson answered questions from several councillors related to the timeline for the council to act on the petition.  They clarified that if the petition was referred out of this meeting then the council could pass it to a second reading on November 25th, then the item could be ordained on December 16th.  

 

Councillor Simmons moved to end debate and call the question.  The motion passed by the following roll call vote:

Vice Mayor Devereux                            Nay

Councillor Kelley                            Absent

Cnuncillor Mallon                            Yea

Mayor McGovern                            Yea

Councillor Siddiqui                            Yea

Councillor Simmons                            Yea

Councillor Toomey                            Yea

Councillor Zondervan                            Yea

Councillor Carlone                            Nay

 

The motion failed by the following roll call vote:

Vice Mayor Devereux                            Nay

Councillor Kelley                            Absent

Cnuncillor Mallon                            Yea

Mayor McGovern                            Yea

Councillor Siddiqui                            Nay

Councillor Simmons                            Yea

Councillor Toomey                            Yea

Councillor Zondervan                            Nay

Councillor Carlone                            Nay

 

Mayor McGovern moved to refer the petition to the City Council with no recommendation.

 

The motion passed by the following roll call vote:

Vice Mayor Devereux                            Nay

Councillor Kelley                            Absent

Cnuncillor Mallon                            Yea

Mayor McGovern                            Yea

Councillor Siddiqui                            Yea

Councillor Simmons                            Yea

Councillor Toomey                            Yea

Councillor Zondervan                            Nay

Councillor Carlone                            Nay

 

 

The meeting adjourned at 7:11 PM.

 

The following documents were presented to the Committee.

1.              A revised Petition Has been received from Stephen R. Karp, Trustee of Cambridge Side Galeria Associates trust to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance by adding a new Section 13.100 to Article 13.00 of the Zoning Ordinance  and to amend the Zoning Map to add a new PUD-8 District overlay that certain area (which includes  parcels and portions of ways and streets) labeled as "PUD-8 district".

2.              A communication was received from the City Manager's office, transmitting Planning Board recommendation on the CambridgeSide Galleria Zoning Petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

3.              A communication was received from Susan Johansen, 150 Cambridge Street, in support of CambridgeSide petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

4.              A communication was received from Joe Capalbo, Area Director of Hotel Operations of Kimpton Hotels of New England, in support of the proposed CambridgeSide rezoning.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

5.              A communication was received from Tom Powell, 1 Earhart Street, in support of the Cambridgeside Galeria upzoning.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

6.              A communication was received from Ian McMullen, 15 Salem Street, regarding in support of the CambridgeSide Redevelopment petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

7.              A communication was received from Michael V. Burns from Sheet Metal Workers Local Union No. 17 in support of the Cambridge Side petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

8.              A communication was received from Dr. James Spencer in support of the Cambridge Side petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

9.              A communication was received from Mounir Laouar in support of the Cambridge Side petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

10.              A communication was received from Lee Swislow President of the Board of Cambridge Camping in support of the Cambridge Side petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

11.              A communication was received from David Borrus, 9 Hollis Street, in support of Cambridge Side petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

12.              A communication was received from StacyJonh Thomas from Beacon Hill Property Management in support of the Cambridge Side petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

13.              A communication was received from Michael Hess from Local 7 Ironworkers in support of Cambridge Side Petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

14.              A communication was received from Marlene Lundberg, East Cambridge, regarding upzoning at the CambridgeSide mall

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

15.              A communication was received from New England Development regarding a Response to Recent Questions and Topics of Interest regarding the Proposed PUD-8 District

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

16.              A presentation was received from New England Development for the November 14, 2019 Ordinance Committee hearing on the proposed CambridgeSide Zone Change

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

17.              A communication was received from George N.J. Sommer, III, 29 Otis Street, regarding CambridgeSide Development - City Ordnance Committee Meeting - November 14m 2019

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

18.              A communication was received from Russell Cushman, Charles Riverboat Company, in support of the proposed CambridgeSide zoning amendment.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

19.              A communication was received from Allen Boyer, Laborer's Local 151, in support of the Cambridge Side Petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

20.              A communication was received from Marlene Lundberg regarding the proposed CambridgeSide zoning amendment

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

21.              A communication was received from Phil Rinehart, 17 Otis Street, in support of Karp's PUD8 Zoning Amendment Petition.

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

22.              A communication was received from Eamonn Saunders regarding the CambridgeSide zoning petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

23.              A communication was received from Michael J. Delia, East End House, Inc., regarding the CambridgeSide PUD-8 Zoning Petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

24.              A communication was received from Kelly Dolan, Upland Road, regarding the CambridgeSide zoning petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

25.              A communication was received from Marlene Lundberg regarding the CambridgeSide zoning petition

RESULT:              PLACED ON FILE

 

There documents may be viewed here:

http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=2563

 

 

                                                        For the Committee,

 

 

                                                        __________________________________

                                                        Councillor Dennis J. Carlone, Co-Chair

                                                        Ordinance Committee

Page 2 of 2

 

Meeting History

Nov 25, 2019 5:30 PM Video City Council Regular Meeting
draft Draft

TO SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON NOVEMBER 26, 2019

RESULT:REFERRED