Roundtable/Working Meeting City Council Meeting

It's 3 p.m. everyone. We're going to get started. We have a quorum of the City Council present, so we'll go ahead. I wanted to call this afternoon's April 6th, 2026 roundtable working meeting of the Cambridge City Council to order. The call of the meeting is to discuss the best future uses of city-owned properties and associated redevelopment processes. The first order of business is a roll call of members present.

Councilor Al-Zubi. Yes. Present. Vice Mayor Azeem. Absent. Councilor Flaherty. Present. Councilor McGovern. Nolan, Simmons, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz, Sieniewicz,

Per Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, adopted by Massachusetts General Court and approved by the Governor, the City is authorized to use remote participation at meetings of the Cambridge City Council. You can also view the meeting via the city's open meeting portal or on the city's cable channel 22. Please note that the City of Cambridge Audio and video reports this meeting and makes it available for the public for future viewing. In addition, third parties may also be audio and video recording this meeting. We'll be having a discussion in this meeting. There is no public comment because it is a roundtable. We'll start with opening and introductions. We'll have a presentation from the city. And then we'll have a discussion with the city council

and then we will have a we will go ahead and adjourn in our packet today is a communication from deputy city manager Kathy Watkins transmitting a presentation regarding city-owned property so Everyone should have a copy of that. So with that, first we'll go to city staff to introduce themselves. We all know each other in this room, so we don't have to do that. This is just for context. This was a policy order that had been submitted requests that had been put in to ask the city to really look at all our city-owned properties and here we are now and so I'll pass it to the city staff.

I don't know if you have any opening.

Do we want to do introductions?

I think you guys can introduce yourselves.

Yeah, okay, great. Ian Huang, city manager.

Kathy Watkins, deputy city manager. Melissa Peters, Assistant City Manager for Community Development John Nadone, Commissioner of Public Works Brendan Roy, Director of Capital Building Projects

Great. And I think just to very briefly open, looking forward to this conversation and thank you to the City Council for the policy order. I think I want to recognize that it's an important conversation. Thank you very much. We would see this as maybe the beginning of a longer conversation and we're pretty excited over the course of this term to both identify properties that have more near-term Thank you very much.

to have an open conversation with the city council and also be open with the community about how we're making these decisions and then to try to put a lot of our property to good use. So looking forward to this first discussion. and I know there will be many more to come. So I'll turn it over to Deputy City Manager Watkins to kick us off.

Thank you. So we're going to have a little bit of a tag team between Melissa and I on the presentation. Naomi, you can go ahead to the agenda. and this is really just sort of outlining what the city manager laid out in terms of today's discussion. So with that, we'll go on to the next slide and I will turn it over to Melissa.

Great, thanks Kathy. So again, excited to be here today and talk about a short list of properties for future use. Before we dive into that, really wanted to frame it into how do we meet city priorities using our own assets. and we really bucketed into two categories. So the first being city operations. What do we need to do our services? So that could be anything from employee office space to public facing locations to deliver our services, DPW facility needs often comes up, and we'll talk a lot about that tonight, land that's needed to provide for infrastructure improvements. And then on the community goal side, things such as affordable housing, using land for nonprofit space, public open space, public parking, and things of those nature. Next slide.

And as we think about all of those, we certainly want to incorporate what are the community needs and the city operational needs, but also have to put it in the context of what are the physical limitations of the sites, what could be built on those sites. Thank you. and then certainly all of this in context of our bottom line and what the impact is on the budget and economic feasibility and what we're really trying to think about is not only The development costs, but the long-term operation and maintenance costs and how can we manage a more efficient, streamlined portfolio, especially as we start to think about meeting future regulatory requirements such as Butoh. Next slide.

And so the focus on today's discussion is going to be on six sites. We're going to bucket it again with those that have a short-term use for city operations, so things like 135 Sherman Street, Alewife DPW, and 333 Webster. and then sites that have identified use for achieving community goals. So 185 Larch Road, 25 Lowell Street, and 139 Bishop Allen Drive, the former Vail Court. And again, really the focus here is to give an update to Council on some near-term projects, and also to tee up some key decisions that will help us move sites forward. So in some cases, on 333 Webster Ave.

The long-term use of that site is affordable housing, but we need it for DPW operations in the short term before we can move forward with that longer-term vision. need to move forward on 135 Sherman Street to accommodate that need. So with that, I will pass it back to Kathy who will kind of go over the larger city budget context.

Thank you. So you go ahead to the next slide, Naomi. So the next series, there's a couple of slides that are really trying to set up the budget context So none of this information is new. This is all from the February 11th Finance Committee discussion we had around capital planning. and our overall capital program. So we talked at that hearing a lot about the different types of funding that we're using, capital funding on including streets, school improvements, OpenSpace, and Buildings. And we talked about that, about how in the last five years we've seen a significant increase in our overall capital program. and particularly an increase in their building portfolio, the amount of funding that we're spending on that. So I would say that of the various programs, The municipal building one is sort of the least well-developed and the one that when we sort of look out and say what are our overall needs is quite significant.

And in that context, we also talked about, you know, we've had this sort of almost 16% Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Next slide. So in that discussion, we talked specifically about some of our buildings. So again, this is not the overall portfolio, but just to sort of set the context of The types of projects that we're doing in terms of maintaining our firehouses, maintaining our youth centers, looking at our overall building portfolio, and all the needs that we have in those areas. Next slide. and this was sort of laying out okay as we're looking into the future how are we sort of seeing spending in different buckets and so we had sort of put in there sort of a 30 million dollars a year to go towards

And I will say that when you actually start looking at the projects and laying those out, That still leads a lot of needs there. And so as we're looking at the buildings and having this conversation about how do we use our buildings, what does that mean on the bottom line, both in terms of our operating and maintenance budgets as well as our overall capital budgets? So we just want to sort of set that context as we're starting to look at these individual projects. Next slide. The next couple slides really lay out, so some of the conversations we're having is, You know, could we use some of the city projects to support other uses, such as affordable housing or nonprofit space? And what are the sort of mechanisms by which we do that? And so we wanted to go through and really walk through Some specific city and state requirements that really oversee how we dispose of property or how we decide to use property. So there's a couple specific ones we want to walk through. So next slide.

The first one is, this is a city requirement, so this was the city disposition ordinance that was put into place in 1990. And this really oversees if we decide to either lease or sell city property. How do we do that? What's the process? And so the city disposition ordinance really lays that out. And again, the fundamental... You know, guidelines are how do we ensure that if we are disposing of property, and again, that's lease or sale. that it's really meeting a public purpose and that the city is getting sort of fair market value for the use of public property. What does that look like? and that the city property disposed of without favoritism. So those are all sort of framings that come from that ordinance. And again, from 1990. and in that it really lays out the process. So if we're gonna dispose of property, it requires a report, requires a planning board hearing and it sort of talks about sort of the roles of each of those and then a two thirds vote of city council.

One of the things we just want to point out is that the transfer of property to the Affordable Housing Trust, and there's a couple examples in here that you'll see of that, is specifically called out in the ordinance as being exempt from the city disposition ordinance, but still does require a council vote to transfer property. So again, that's the city disposition ordinance. Next slide. And then we talk about the state requirements. So if we were to dispose of a property, we go through the city process, and then there's also a state process 30B, and it sort of oversees how you buy or sell goods. And so again, the state process also sort of makes sure that you have an open and fair process. and you have to solicit bids. You can establish criteria for the terms of the sale or lease and then you have to evaluate bids. So you're just really making sure that as you're disposing of public property you're doing it in a way that people can that is transparent and people can really navigate that process.

And again, I would just point out that the transfer of property to the Affordable Housing Trust as well as Cambridge Housing Authority or Cambridge Redevelopment Authority is exempt from the 30B process, but again, we'd still need a vote of city council. Next slide. And then the final one I just want to talk about, and I think we've had a number of conversations at City Council about Article 97. So we talked about Article 97. That's a constitutional amendment. to the state constitution that was passed in 1972. And that really makes sure that Any changes to any open space are done through a pretty comprehensive process so that you don't have net loss in open space. If you have a parcel that is protected Article 97 open space, you have to go through a process whereby the city council would have to do a home rule petition and then it goes to the state legislature for a vote.

and you have to show that if you're taking existing open space and doing something else with it, you have to have replacement open space so that you don't have a net loss of open space. and we've most recently done that with two projects. One is at the Tobin School and one is in Inman Square. So for both of those, we went through the Article 97 process. So at the Tobin School, Thank you very much. We just wanted to be clear about that. So this is the sort of the six parcels that we're really focusing on tonight.

I keep saying tonight because it's hard to be at City Council and not say tonight. but these are the six parcels we're really focusing on and we'll go through each one and talk a little bit about why we're sort of focusing on these today and then at the end we'll talk about additional properties that we want to continue this discussion on and really come back to the city council a little later this year. So as Melissa teed up, we're going to focus on those first couple parcels, really focus on the city operations conversation, and then we'll talk about the other parcels really focusing on community goals. Next slide. So city operations is going to be the first bucket. And these really all come back to sort of DPW space needs. I think many city councilors, we really began this probably one or two terms ago and have done A number of tours of DPW, so we should reach out to some of the new folks and bring you out on the tour of DPW. So we really began going back to 2020.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. We have about four acres that we sort of actually use and control. The bulk of that is 140 Hampshire Street where people think of DPW land. As we're coming out of that study and COVID and recognizing that we didn't have enough space for public works, we're actually able to lease four acres of space at Mooney Street. And so we'll talk a little bit about each of these. Next slide. So this is sort of a map that shows our existing sites in blue for public works and then the red ones that we're really focusing on tonight. Next slide. So I started to get down this path about the four acres that we're leasing.

So we are leasing four acres at Mooney Street. So this is, again, parallel to Concord Ave. but closer to the railroad tracks. and that includes both a pretty large yard space that we've been using as well as some office and storage space and it's been a really big benefit in terms of DPW having a little more space to work with. But again, as a lease and at some point, HealthPeak will be developing that area and we will not continue to be able to lease that space. Next slide. So as part of the zoning process for the Alewife area, able to identify... benefits in the zoning for additional height, additional FAR if the developer is to transfer an acre for municipal use and public works.

throughout that rezoning process had a lot of really great conversations with the community, really supportive of having dedicated space for DPW, sort of a way to sort of buffer some of the heights next to the neighborhoods because this would not be one of the Taller buildings, but this would be a permanent about a little over an acre that would be dedicated for public workspace. Next slide. The next parcel, so that's sort of the alewife. So we have the four acres there permanently, you know, rented now, opportunity for this one acre permanently. We also have some other space to be making up for. So at 333 Webster Avenue, when we bought this property, we had a lot of conversation with council. about it being a really useful site for short term for public works and then longer term it really wants to be housing as you look at the Webster Avenue corridor.

And so we've been working to, there were buildings on it that needed to be demolished. Those have been demolished, doing some site work, and then Forestry Division will really be moving into that site and using it in the short-term basis. Next slide. Next slide. So again, that just shows that it's actually three different parcels, but combined together, it's just under an acre of space. And again, we'd be supporting the forestry division. DPW is working on having an open house with the neighbors in April. And then you can go to the next slide. And then the other thing, and we've had, as we've talked to the community about this space, it's really clear that, you know, Webster Avenue is a very changing type of street. The connection to the Green Line now, so you're seeing a lot more pedestrian activity. So there's good conversations about how do we make it a more attractive buffer as you're walking along there. So I've been working with the Arts Council to identify

Some murals that really feed off of the forestry division, this being the home of the forestry division in the near term. So we're pretty excited to be able to make some improvements along that edge as well. Next slide. So again, just sort of final, just to be clear, this has never really been talked about as a long-term location for DPW, but it is necessary in this moment to have space. And then once we're able to open up space at Sherman Street, which we'll talk about next, This location would be available for housing. Many of us think of it as the old Jose's parking lot or the Montessori parking lot. But right on Sherman and Bella Circle, when we bought it, we talked about it as Bella Circle. We've since readdressed it to Sherman Street. It's a vacant surface lot.

We're going to talk a little bit about a little detour to talk about combined sewer overflows because this is a critical location in terms of our overall work to decrease combined sewer overflows going to the Elwife Brook. So next slide. So I think some of these slides are some that hopefully Council has seen because we've done some discussions about combined sewer overflows. The image on the left shows if you have a separated system. and all your sewage is in one pipe and it goes to Deer Island and all your storm water is in another pipe that goes out to the river. Much of the city, I think about still about 40% of the city is combined sewer systems. And so that means there's one larger pipe, as shown in the middle drawing. You know, in smaller rain events and even up to some middle-sized rain events, those work pretty well. and your sewage and your water all goes to Deer Island.

If it gets to be too heavy a storm, if you don't have this overflow, then those... Sorry, Melissa, I'm going to knock your thing over again. You can have backups into people's houses, backups into catch basins, and backup into the city. So you don't want that. And so you have these combined sewer overflows. that then during that high volume activity overflows into the Ale Wave Brook, which is what we're working on through the Combined Sewer Overflow Plan to reduce and reduce those continuously. and in this kind of location where you're right at what we call the regulator structure which I think of as that decision point of if the flow is staying in the pipe or if the flow is going out to the river If you add storage there, instead of that flow going to the river, it can go into a holding tank and then after the event, it can pump out into the system. And so that is what we're looking at at this location.

and it has the ability to really eliminate combines who are overflows from a typical year at this location as soon as this tank is constructed. And so it's a very efficient, cost effective way to address CSOs from what is the most active CSO in the system. Next slide. So this shows an image of what this looks like. The top drawing, what you're seeing is sort of what would be a parking lot, and then there's about 2 million gallons of storage underneath it, and that's up against Sherman Street. On the left, there's an you know showing a bike and ped connection that would connect between Danahy Park out to Sherman Street and then in the rear of the parcel would be a lower story building that could support DPW. And so we see this as a really good opportunity to say this is right at that regulator structure. We could do a large storage tank, really address those CSOs from the most active combined sewer overflow

and this would support both Parks and Forestry Division, which would then free up that 333 Webster Avenue for housing. And so again, we're looking at trying to do a lot of different things on this site. And given the size of that infrastructure, co-locating it with DPW makes a lot of sense. Next slide. And in terms of next steps here, DPW's had one community meeting. There'll be another community meeting in June. And I think we need to share more details and just make sure that we're really emphasizing the overall goals and environmental benefits of the CSO program. Thank you very much. Thank you. and I don't know if people remember that construction, but it's significant construction. And if you're doing it in the street, you've got to work around utilities, you've got to close streets down for multiple years.

And so if we were to try to do 2 million gallons of storage Thank you very much. of doing this at this location. So next slide. So just again, sort of summary closure on the DPW space needs. Again, we've been sort of on this journey. And some of the other ones we've talked about, the salt shed and some other improvements that are really, again, looking at the condition of the space. And then we believe that with the current four acres and then with Alewife, and then the Sherman Street location, we'd get up to about six acres for public works. And again, still tight and challenging, but certainly a much more sustainable place to be for public works as we're looking into the future.

So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Melissa for the next set of projects.

Great. Thanks, Kathy. So again, the next three will be focused on how to achieve community goals. Next slide. We'll first talk about 139 Bishop Allen Drive. So as you know, this property was acquired by the city via eminent domain in 2016 and transferred to the trust in 2017 for affordable housing development. That development was paused. Well, there was the lawsuit underway. Now that there's a settlement in that lawsuit, we're excited to be moving forward with affordable housing. Next slide. The housing staff is working on scheduling a public meeting for next month to discuss the future of this site for affordable housing and give people an update since it's been a while since we talked about it.

The plan will be then for the trust issue an RFQ to select a development team that will then be responsible for leading the community meeting process to finalize the design, seek funding, and build the housing. We expect that they'll have a series of additional community meetings later this year and in early 2027. And construction will start as soon as funding has been committed. Next slide. Other site is 185 Large Road in West Cambridge. So this property was acquired in 2020 by the city. It is previously open space that used by BB&N school.

At the time that this was acquired by the city, there was a lot of council discussion around the need for affordable housing in this area and that we should be thinking more expansively about not just using this for open space. So one of the ideas we have, next slide, particularly because West Cambridge is one of our neighborhoods least served by affordable housing, that this would be a great location for a combination of housing and a smaller open space to serve the neighborhoods. We are excited about the discussion of a social housing concept and what that would be and think that as part of that study and ongoing community conversations we could look at This site in particular is a potential model to consider for social housing.

Next slide. Thank you. So I want to talk a little bit about some of the history and thinking around the 25 Lowell Street property. So I think many people know it's a historic schoolhouse. It was used by Cambridge schools until about 1979. And at that point in 1980, the city entered into a lease with New School of Music. So under that terms of lease, New School of Music does maintenance on the building, and then they also pay us, and the rent is about, it's 8% of their tuition, and so it tends to be around $20,000. and then $10,000 or $15,000 on building repairs. So that's the sort of... The financial agreement. And again, that was the lease from 1980 and it was intended to be a five-year term with a five-year renewal. But it's continued in place and both sides have sort of continued to meet the requirements of the lease. So it continues to be

and then the New School of Music subleases some of the space to the Cambridge Arts Association and again maintain the building and continue to work on that. The one thing I would say, because I think one of the questions is sort of like, why is this coming up now? And so back in November 2024, there was a small fire on the property. and at that point you know people sort of knew it was a city building but you know they've been taking care of it and it just had sort of continued to roll on And at that point, it sort of brought up this issue of what are the terms of the lease, and what is this 40-year-old lease at this point, and how is that still in place? So that really identified some of these issues and raised some of these concerns. So if you go to the next slide. One of the things we just want to be really clear about is there's actually two parcels here. So if you look at the image on the top right,

The sort of red dashed line is the parcel that's associated with the building. And then the other area that's like a bigger L is actually the park parcel. So there's two different parcels. And then the entrance to the park, there's no entrance from Mount Auburn Street. The only entrance is on Lowell Street that sort of comes along this sort of brick walkway adjacent to the park, but the park itself, adjacent to the parking lot. but the park itself is sort of tucked in behind the building and doesn't sort of have a publicly facing entrance to it. So one of the things, and maybe I'll just talk about this and then flip to Melissa. So one of the things as we look at some of these options, like over the years there's been conversations about, oh, could we do affordable housing in the parking lot? What would that look like?

And so we've looked at a couple different options of build-outs and feel like that isn't the right location. So when we're going to do affordable housing, sort of trying to squeeze it in there. Great, thanks. Next slide.

So these are in order of the city's preference, but I'll start with the first option, which is to develop as affordable housing. And as previously mentioned, West Cambridge has the lowest percentage of affordable housing in all neighborhoods of the city. As Kathy stated, it'd be a little tight to build additional housing on the parking lot, but what we could do and could create 20 or more affordable units is we could certainly renovate the historic building. and that add infill housing in the rear. This would maintain the prominence of the historic structure It would also have the dual benefit of opening up Lowell Street as a park to get better entrance to the current Lowell Street Park. So that we see as a big benefit. Right now, as Kathy described, you have to access the existing parking lot, and it's not a great visibility. There's no access on Mount Auburn.

It's also a great location for affordable housing. So as we think about certainly trying to actively distribute affordable housing throughout the city, this is near transit, bus lines, near the hospital, it's near a park. So it's really a great opportunity for folks. This would require Article 97. So as Kathy described earlier, we'd have to go to the state legislature and ask for a land swap. Again, we'd be exchanging the open space that is currently open space in the rear to the land that is now the parking lot. Again, it would be an equal swap, and that would allow for improved activity or access to the park and affordable housing creation. Next slide.

The second option would, if we were to continue it for nonprofit use, and our preference would be to sell the parcel instead of leasing the parcel. We'd have to be consistent with state and local ordinance and would have to be through an open procurement process. Thank you. brought enough that multiple entities could bid on it. This would maintain the park in its current configuration. And again, the benefit of selling it is that From the city perspective, it would be no more financial liability in terms of operating and maintenance costs. Next slide. The third option is similar.

Again, except this, we would maintain city ownership and lease it, but we'd still have to go through the state and local disposition ordinance. Same thing, we couldn't Thank you. Be the owner prior to putting it back on the market for lease. There is some significant investment we need to do to get the building up to standard before we could release it and then the ongoing capital liability moving forward. Next slide. So as you asked in a December 2025 council order, we really have looked at the various possibilities.

We certainly understand the value of the space to the New School of Music and the Cambridge Arts Association. and we would want to continue to work with them to make sure they had a transition plan, but understanding that in all three scenarios, there's no guarantee that they would be able to stay in the place We do see this as a really great opportunity for affordable housing development and would recommend it for that use. Next slide. And I will turn it over to Kathy again.

And this is really just to tee up. I think we mentioned the last slide sort of coming back to the council before the end of the year, probably in the fall, about some additional discussion about the overall city portfolio. So you can go to the next slide. and that includes some of the parcels that I think people are quite familiar with Thank you very much. Five different locations are we trying to consolidate some uses. If you sort of go to the next slide, just sort of, again, this is sort of just laying out the various facilities we want to look at. and then the final slide, Naomi. We want to really take a step back and we've had a number of different sort of plans that we've worked on over the years. But to really put the pieces together and say, you know, what is the right building portfolio?

How do we think about our capital budget but also our operating and maintenance budget as we're looking at various projects? I think 51 Inman is a really great example of a space that has worked really well for many years for human services. is in need of significant investment. And so there's real questions about is that the right way to invest? Are there other ways of investing? that would allow us to free up some additional properties for community space, for affordable housing. What does that look like? And then I think the issue of office space came up when we had the conversation around housing Thank you. by having lots of smaller office buildings that gets much harder to do. And so I think that is a conversation we really want to think about. The other one that's come up a lot is sort of exhibition space, really focusing on arts and history What does that look like?

We have the Arts Council Gallery. Are there other things that we could locate with that? Like we think about some history exhibits or some of the work that certainly Councilor Simmons has been doing at City Hall to bring some more history into are public spaces. And so how do we think about that and what could this look like? You know, and the city manager sort of alluded to, you know, as we look at sort of future energy efficient, you know, ongoing energy efficiency requirements, Butoh requirements, How are we thinking about that as we're thinking about our overall building portfolio? So we just want to be really clear. There's a lot more work to do on these and we really want to come back to the council and have that conversation. We wanted to focus on those sort of first six properties today because we feel like those have the sort of the most momentum and movement at this moment. And then again, come back pretty shortly with the larger conversation. Next slide. So again, this is sort of a summary slide of the six parcels that we've really talked about.

And again, the sort of the three that are focused more on the city operations side. and then the three that Melissa went through in terms of the community goals, really looking at affordable housing and some other opportunities there. So with that, that is the presentation and we will turn it back to you Mayor Siddiqui.

Thank you for the overview. I know there must be a lot of questions, so we'll start with two questions from each counselor. And then we can open it up from there. It's about almost 3.40, so we have a good hour and 20 for discussion. So we'll start with Vice Mayor Azeem. And just two questions. Just two questions.

I said you don't want discussion at this point, like any comments we have?

No, this includes back and forth.

Okay, great. I just had one question to start with about, let me just bring up the slide, excuse me one moment. 25 Lowell Street. For option one with the affordable housing, would the goal be to still have the front operate as a school or would you want that to also be housing?

Thank you, through you, Mayor. Both buildings would be for affordable housing, so the front building would be adapted for affordable housing as well as the new rear infill.

Is there an option of doing a hybrid or would that be difficult?

We certainly considered that. We think just given the size of the lot, it would make it a lot more challenging financially for a viable affordable housing developer to redevelop.

I was just going to say, in general, I'm very supportive of a lot of the projects. I think that 185 Large Road would be great for social housing. I think that there's a lot of momentum to do stuff this term on City Council. I think that's always a spot where we've talked about having affordable housing of one type over another. And so I think that's particularly exciting. Excited to see what we do with Gale Court, right? Obviously very close to Central Square and the T-Stop. So very, very excited for that. I think for 25 Lowell Street, I don't think that literally every single lot has to go to housing. I would have preferred option one if that mixed hybrid was possible. But also, I do think that the New School of Music is a great I also don't want us to be necessarily selling public land and so I know that option three is your least favorite. And so I don't really know what to do, but at least wanted to put those forward. I think that even in option three, it's not guaranteed that the New School of Music could continue.

But it would be really great to find some way to support them. and I think an ideal scenario would be, you know, if we could build housing in the back and allow them to keep the land in the front and run as a school, but I would love to just see more information on that before we make a decision. They seem like a great community benefit.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. We'll go to Councilor Flaherty.

Thank you, and through you, Madam Chair. The same project, the 25 Lowell. Do I understand correctly that on that slide that we just looked at with, I forget which option it is, The city's proposal of housing both in the front and the new school of music and a new construction in the back that that would require two different types of disposition processes. Do I understand that correctly? Because the front... If that were a transfer to the Affordable Trust, that would be exempt from the 30-B process. But in the back, If we were to construct affordable housing there, that would be an Article 97 disposition that would require a replacement of open space from somewhere else in the city?

Is that right? Through Mayor Siddiqui, so close. So the nuance is that the Article 97 would basically allow you to swap Thank you for joining us. would be combined with the building itself. And so you would have a new parcel, and then you would go through the disposition process with that new parcel. But in order to make that swap of land, you would need to go through the Article 97 process.

So you'd have to do both Article 97 plus Chapter 30B, requiring a home rule petition to the state legislature to do all of it, right?

Yes, unless it goes to the Affordable Housing Trust, in which case you don't have to do those other processes. You just have to vote to send it to the Affordable Housing Trust. You don't have to go through the disposition process.

But don't I understand you have to do the Article 97 because it is a SWAT?

Yep, you'd have to do the Article 97 and then you would reconfigure and you would have a new park parcel and a new development parcel, building parcel. and then you would go through a vote to then send it to the Affordable Housing Trust. Okay.

Councilor Flaherty? Right, I got it. And so, but that doesn't... That complicated process would be, well, I'll strike that for a second.

You would not need to go through Article 97 process to either sell or lease the parcel in its current form. Right. So that is, I think, the point you're trying to get to. Okay.

Yep. And as far as 185 Lodge, the same rules apply to 185 Lodge. If there were a disposition with a contemplated Thank you very much.

Megan, please correct me if I'm wrong. The BB&N location, the Larch Road, is not dedicated open space. It was not bought for open space use, so it's different than other park spaces that have been bought specifically for open space use. But City Solicitor may have some clarifying.

Through you, Madam Mayor, I just... to agree with Deputy Watkins. When the city acquired 185 Larch, Thank you. Flaherty.

Did I exhaust my two questions?

You did. One was a very long question.

Well, I'm so sorry for that, but I'll make a comment like my friend, Vice Mayor. Please. I only had one question. I've got more than two. But I like the School of Music, too, and I'd like to see it continue. So thank you for that comment, Baran. I yield.

And we can come back as well and do another round. We'll go to Councilor Zusy.

Thank you, Chair Siddiqui. Well, I like 25 Lowell as the new School of Music in the Cambridge Art Association, too. And I think in this slide, We list community goals, which include affordable housing. And we're talking about making three of these spaces affordable housing. We're talking about Vail Court, where I hope we can get a little slice from the Intercontinental A parking lot to make it larger so we could really build big there. That would be great, right? Megan can you make that happen? and then 33 Webster, that'll be affordable housing, 185 Larch Street will be open space and hopefully Social Housing, and I'm sure you've all seen the Affordable Housing Report, the five-year report released recently. This was like spectacular.

Over the last five years, the Affordable Housing Trust has created or has preserved 900 units, and they have 1,000 units in the hopper. So I don't think we have to give it to West Cambridge here and turn their beautiful cultural space into affordable housing and I think we can cultural spaces should be one of our community goals. Not just affordable housing. We do want nonprofit spaces. It currently is a very successful nonprofit space with over 700 Music students with scholarships, with programs for the elderly, with programs for the disabled. We do need public parking as a community benefit sometimes, and we need open space. We need all of those things, but cultural space should have been added as a community goal.

And I think in the city's inventory of cultural spaces we own, well actually we don't own the Maude Morgan Art Center, right? That's privately owned. The Community Arts Center isn't owned by the city, but right, that's leased. The Foundry is owned by the city, the Multicultural Arts Center. is owned by the city. And then we've got this space. It's not owned by the city.

What? The space that's the multi-arts cultural center, that is not city-owned.

Okay, that's good for me to know. But I, you know, I come from the arts. I feel profoundly that the arts are the highest expression of creativity and our humanity. and I think especially in this crazy, crazy world that we live in, we really need to provide opportunities for self-expression and we really should have them in like every other neighborhood. They should be Thank you so much for joining us. Cultural spaces should be considered a significant community goal. My questions, Deputy Assistant Manager Watkins.

So now we're leasing four acres in the Elwhaif Quad for DPW, and you'll soon have 10 acres. I'm wondering, is... Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. DPW being all over the city and that not being efficient. Is there any way that we can consolidate DPW space? I wish there was a way to do land swaps that would allow for that.

So I want to be clear that what we're talking about for DPW would end up being a total of six acres. So it's the four acres we currently control. and then the lease space would go away and then so that is not a permanent lease space so that is very temporary and then we would end up with two additional acres from the Mooney Street with HealthPeaks, and then ultimately the Sherman Street parcel. So that's a total of six acres. And I would say it's fairly tight. So I think if we had more space, we would certainly look for more space. And I think the question about co-locating is really challenging. There is nowhere in the city that we are going to get eight acres, six acres or more to locate a new DPW. So over the years, we have looked at different parcels. It has been hard to sort of keep up with the market.

and so we feel like this is a good plan in terms of really having space where teams can be together like Parks and Forestry together makes a lot of sense. Thank you for joining us. to locate a DPW. So I think given that, this is a really strong plan for Public Works.

Thank you. Well, I'm really glad that Public Works is going to get more space because I think it's essential that you have it. I just wanted to say also, I don't know, has everyone here been in 25 Lowell Street? Raise your hand if you've been in that building. Yeah, because if you've been in that building, you know, the ceilings are very high. It was a school. So I also just don't think that affordable housing is an efficient use of that space. You walk in, it really is a great public... It should be a public... I know public housing is... Thank you very much. and I am aware that the new school wouldn't automatically get to stay there but I'm hoping that we'll figure out a way McGovern.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you.

First, I want to thank you. As I was listening to all this, I was thinking of, and I sort of want to invite the community at large also into this, that This is like a really crazy puzzle. It's like those Those old plastic games with the tiles inside and the open space and you're moving them all around and wherever you move them, they fall somewhere else, right? We have all the needs of a major city. Trying to do it within six square miles. So we need DPW space. We need housing. We need open space. We need cultural space. We need schools. We need city buildings. All of that. And we're trying to do it in a relatively small amount of space in a city that is pretty built out.

you know take out what Harvard owns and MIT owns and Fresh Pond and Danahy Park and Cambridge Common and all the municipal buildings we already have you're not really talking about a whole lot of room to do all the things that we need to do and so I just want to thank you for trying to piece all this together. I know I can do this and I think this happens sometimes as people get their tunnel vision on their cause. I'm the affordable housing guy. I want affordable housing everywhere. or, you know, I'm concerned about the new school, you know, I want to advocate for what's best for us. I want a sewage overflow. I want that, you know... Thank you very much.

But also inviting the community members to stand in the shoes of the city and realizing that we have a lot of things we have to balance and they're all valid and they're all important to somebody and it's hard. So I thank you for trying to piece all that. My two questions. I'm just going to ask a quick question on Webster Ave. That little section that's technically in Somerville, I'm sure if we asked nicely they would give that to us, right? Okay.

So it is ours. So it is part of the parcel we bought. We're just clarifying that we own a piece of parcel that is located in Somerville.

Okay.

But it's ours. It is ours. The green line shows what we own.

Okay. All right, good, because I was, you know, it's not much use for them. It's so small, but it could make a difference in how we scale things. And then on the Wall Street, you know, I'm sort of where... The Vice Mayor is in that we'd be talking 20 units of affordable housing, which again, every unit, you've heard me say it a million times, 20 units may not be a huge number to... I think that's the overall number that we need, but 20 units to those 20 families is significant. But I also think we can make some of that up in other places. It's not a huge enough number that it would be impossible to say if you went up a story or two on Larch Road when we get there, right, that you could make up those 20 units in another location.

In terms of getting more affordable housing into West Cambridge, and I am all for that, we would be talking about affordable housing on the BB&N field, right, which would add a significant number of affordable units into West Cambridge. And I would assume that it's not guaranteed yet, but I assume whatever is going to go into Thank you very much. Otherwise, you're probably talking about a, I don't know, I don't want to throw out a number and get people all freaked out, but it's going to be a tall building, which would also then include inclusionary units. and subsidized units and could potentially be all affordable if somebody bought it under the AHO.

So we're going to see increases in affordable units in West Cambridge just on those two sites in and of themselves. So I'm not sure that... You know, the 20 at Lowell Street necessarily is worth that trade-off. And I lost it. Sorry, hold on, Madam Mayor, I apologize. Could we, in terms of the park space at 25 Lowell, you said that there's not a... There's not a way to get in from Mount Auburn, right? I remember I used to play at the basketball courts right there, or half court. Is that, could we create one there? I mean, it doesn't seem like we'd have to. That seems to be an easy fix, right?

Yeah, so I think that was part of the community design process when those renovations were done, I think, in 2010. It's not as simple as just sort of opening up the fence, I'd say. Thank you very much.

I'm hesitant to sell city property. I mean, once you sell it, you don't get it back. And 50 years from now, maybe the new school of music isn't there and there's a need for something else. And once it's gone... We don't own it anymore. We can't do anything with it. So I am a little nervous about selling city assets. And that's where option three would come in, even though the city doesn't love that option. But even if we did, there's no guarantee that the new school would get that property. But assuming they did, there is a way to keep them there, create some more public open space on that lot, and then Make those 20 units of affordable housing that we would be losing or not getting on Lowell Street somewhere else.

The one clarification is I would say we wouldn't do a park on that lot. So we could keep the park in its current shape and then add in, again, when there's renovations to the park. Add in a connection from Mount Auburn Street, which I think when it was done in 2010, people did not want to see that. And so I think we are in a different moment such that when we did renovations to the park, we would certainly look for an access point. and a really much more celebrated access point from Mount Auburn Street. Thank you.

I should have said access point. Thank you. I'll yield for now, Madam Mayor.

So before we go to you, Councilor Nolan, I wanted to go to Councilor Al-Zubi on the Zoom.

Thank you. Through you, Chair, I just want to also reiterate lots of gratitude for your work on this. Two questions for now. First is I want to recognize that currently our community garden use has a pretty large wait list. We have about 400 gardeners. and about 520 on a wait list. Is there a possibility for us to explore community garden use on any of these sites or potentially on ones that you'll be showing us later just to consider pieces like urban agriculture Open Access and Green Space being in line with sustainability and pushing towards better food access for our city.

Melissa, if you have thoughts. I think certainly as we're renovating parks, that is one of the things that's looked at as part of How do we use different open spaces? I think certainly the 185 large where we're sort of talking about is there a model that has significant amount of housing that also has Thank you very much. A location that could make sense to add in as part of an overall park design to add in community garden space.

Councilor Al-Zubi?

Yeah, I think it'd be great to be able to try to have a community process and work in ways to do that because I know it seems that they are focused to the Central Square and Port area as well as like the North Cambridge area. And the other question I have for now is related to 25 Lowell. Is there a way for us to navigate trade-offs with open space? I know it might not be favorable, but could there be a way to take more of the open space So that we can create affordable housing and keep the schoolhouse.

Through you, Mayor Siddiqui, if I'm understanding you correctly, so the way the open space works, because again, this is protected open space, and so if you, any sort of change in use, you have to offset that with additional open space space. and so that's why we had talked about this sort of swap where you would have the parking lot become open space in the area in the rear for housing. If you made more of the space for Thank you very much. and they are, you know, the last couple rounds have been, you know, as close to the area that's impacted as possible.

Councilor Al-Zubi?

Gotcha, that's helpful to know. As I recognize, similar to my colleagues, I think there's a lot of appreciation culturally for what The work that they're doing has and recognizing that it is a great site as well, you know, considering the healthcare access, Open Space Access, Transit. I also just want to recognize and appreciate that there is a site proposed for social housing and especially someone who advocates towards you know the decommodification of housing and treating it as a human right it's great to see that 185 large road is is on there as a possible site and would love to continue to navigate these conversations, recognizing that we have a community process at each stage and better understanding what that could look like, as well as echoing what Councilor McGovern said on You know, ideally maintaining long-term ownership of all our land.

That way it can continue to be used towards public good. I'll yield for now. Thanks.

Councilor Nolan? Thank you. Lots of kudos for addressing this, and not just these six lots, but we have More lots coming in the rest of the year. And there's still central square parking lots that we started to discuss. So the city actually has... Thank you very much. with that in mind, which I think is important. I will note on DPW space needs, we could have four acres all in one place, but that would require having 185 Larch Road be... McGovern.

Thank you very much. If it's not friendly taking, which the 185 Larch Road was a friendly taking by eminent domain, it went through really quickly. Vale Court was not a friendly taking and it took 10 years and I shudder to think how many hours of our staff time on legal, not to mention some of my colleagues who were deposed for hours and hours. So just to remind all of us that is a really challenging thing. But I will say on Vail Court, my response was look at that big empty parking lot right next door and why can't the city somehow figure out maybe through a friendly something or other with that. who owns that property, which is empty almost all the time. So I really hope that we think about that as well. 185 Larch Road.

I hope as we consider this that one of the uses, I like the idea of Urban Agriculture. This city so desperately needs a swap shop, so desperately needs a safe place for people to go in and donate. Household Goods or Clothes or something which so many other cities in the state need. Is that, so through you, Mayor Siddiqui, to the staff, is that something that could be contemplated for that kind of site? It's just, it would only be, you know... One-eighth of the site or something, but it's something this city has wanted for time and time and time again. It's part of the Zero Waste Master Plan concept for the future. Is that the kind of thing that, and when in the process should that be put on the table as something to consider?

Through Mayor, I mean, I think now is helpful because I think what we're trying to do is get good input from city council as we start to really roll out and think about how do we have these conversations. And then I think Melissa could talk a little bit about the process you would have around that. You know, I think it's a potential. I think it's going to be, you know, how are we trading off open space and housing and those things. So I think it would need to be part of that conversation. But I don't know if you have thoughts about the kind of process you would go through on Larch Road.

Well, certainly we'd want to do a broad community process here from the neighborhoods and also citywide since it's a citywide issue as well about what the future use is. I think in context of this next step for exploring it for social housing is really at a conceptual level and just having a site to look at some Pro Formos to see how the model could work and that could help inform the conversation around how we define social housing and what are the aspects of it that we value as a community. So I think that exercise will be important, but I think as we think about an actual development project that will require much more community process and design conversations

Yep, thank you. And to be clear, this is in addition to, this totally accepts social housing. Mixed income housing is something I've been wanting and promoting for and advocating for since I started on council, you know, five years ago. So this is just... Part of that site because the entire four-acre site is not scheduled to be used for all of social housing. My other question is on 25 Lowell Street. I think it's really hard because it is something that we need, community arts-based organizations. My kids went to the New School of Music. My husband's on the board of the Cambridge Art Association. And we know that no matter what scenario happens, there's no guarantee either of those organizations will be in place. I think that's what we have to remember. Regardless of what happens, we can't guarantee it. It has to go through an open, transparent process. So my question is, and I love the idea of housing on that site and I also love the idea of

Thank you very much. and I would also say I think for both organizations it would be terrific to have a place in other parts of the city, you know, Central Square or Harvard Square It would broaden it out to be more in the center of things. While I love the space, I've been there a lot and have friends who play music there, it's also something off the beaten track as opposed to right at a storefront on Mass Ave, for instance, which would get Way more artists if it was an art gallery just like we've seen with 541 Mass Ave and way more students from across the city and within the city. So I'm just curious of what that promise would mean and how that would unfold because again there's no guarantee even if it is either of those a sale or And as we know, this current lease can't continue.

$20,000 for a 5,800 square foot building is just not something that even for a nonprofit that's a city could reasonably sustain going into the future.

So I can start. I mean, I think we've just started having those conversations. Throughout this process, we've been really clear and consistently communicating and engaging with the nonprofits to make sure they understand the process and, again, can engage and advocate for themselves. We've started setting up some site visits to look at other potential locations. It is really challenging with the music school, particularly one that has evolved and works really well in its current location. And so we set up a visit to go look at the foundry space to sort of say, like, oh, is this something that could work? you know just with the number of pianos the number of types of classes they have going on at the same time that kind of shared space didn't really seem like an option and so I think we're really still I don't have the perfect answer for that but really continue to engage with them and

You know, we've talked about, you know, if it was a sale option, you know, if it was an affordable housing option, you know, we're talking about sort of three to five years. before they'd actually have to find a new home. If the direction is different, and I'm getting a lot of good feedback here, we would work with them in terms of that timeline and process. and then also to continue to, we've also worked with the CRA to see if there's any supports there. So I think we're still really exploring what that would look like.

Thanks because I think what's really important regardless of what happens that we continue to support have some kind of community music and art and it doesn't whether and if it doesn't end up being in that site it has to be somewhere in the city and again it could be Thank you for joining us. That it's a possibility and that we should all be planning for how it is that we can move forward and ensure that we support the arts, that we support community music, that we support a broad-based nonprofit organization that does the great work that the New School does. and Cambridge Art Association does. And that regardless of what happens with this particular site, obviously we're going to be doing some community process and following some kind of our own rules. So those were, since I'll stop at two.

Simmons.

Thank you so much. Thank you, Madam Chair. It's always a pleasure to be in the same room with our very competent, able, underworked, underpaid staff. How many meetings has this been today? Twelve? But it's good to see you here again. Thank you for the presentation and the slides. Very, very informative. I'm really pleased to see Vail Court going forward as someone who lived through every minute of it. And then some. There should be a award for it, you know. But I'm really looking forward to that development. So I just wanted to say, hard work, long time coming. Glad to see it happening. I'm sure you don't read tea leaves, but if you did, you would kind of get the feeling that we have some feelings and issues around new school and housing. And so I don't need to necessarily repeat what my colleagues have said, but it is a hard choice to make.

This city council, without doubt, is a pro-housing council. We know that. but it kind of feels like we're being put in a place of choosing between one thing that's very important to us and something else that's also is there a both and or is there a Another location. I would, having talked to a number of the people, and thank you for those of you that came out. from the new school and spent time with city councils individually and as groups to share what asset we have is how do we keep that asset without forfeiting something that we find very important. So no more on the new school. DPW is a whole nother thing.

I'm very anxious to see something move a little bit with more speed on that and would love to know. Is what you're proposing going to take care of all your DPW needs, or is this just a stopgap? Are we going to be looking at trying to make some acquisitions down the road?

Through you, Mayor. So one thing I would just say about your first point about sort of... Which one? No, about your middle point, sorry. The Vail Court, we're all excited. at 25 Lowell Street. And I think a couple other counselors have talked about it. It's like, if the desire is to continue to support nonprofit use there, Then I think it's sort of looking at, okay, Larch Road, and how do we do housing there? So I think that is probably a more realistic option than trying to do too many things on what is a pretty small site at Lowell Street. you know that is sort of the direction of council that really we want to look at 25 Lowell Street continue to be for nonprofit space then I would say that the sort of the housing and sort of we know it's in priority and in priority in West Cambridge then it's really sort of shifting and some of that onto the Larch Road conversation. So I think there is a path forward there that both represents sort of nonprofit use and affordable housing but not trying to do too much on too small a site.

I think that makes very good sense. Now Larch Road is very interesting now. When we purchased Lodge Road, there was some pushback from the community about putting housing there. I think we can get to a place where people will feel comfortable by working on the edges, building more toward fresh ponds, Thank you. Thank you.

Oh, and just in terms of public works, I mean, I think when we talked about the sort of capital and a number of the conversations we've had at city council, like, you know, we're investing in the salt shed, which is a critical piece of operations for us. We've done some office improvements at 147. I think there's additional improvements there at 147. Yes, sorry, at 147 Hampshire. So we've done some building improvements. I think there's still some garage improvements, but within that space. So I don't see us coming back and saying we need more space for DPW. It's really just sort of continue to invest in those existing facilities.

Thank you. That's helpful. So lastly, one of the things that we haven't talked about, and I just want to bring it back to the table as we talk about housing in general. As we look at some of our assets, particularly where we're considering housing, I want to bring back to the table the LGBT-friendly housing. We thought about that for 25, 35, 45, Cherry, I don't know what the address is, so I give you all three. and we thought about that. We worked hard on it for a while and then all the air got sucked out the room around it. We stopped talking about it. It's back on the table. It's going to be developed for housing. Couldn't be more pleased. But I don't want to abandon the conversation around LGBT-friendly housing. We talked about how Boston got ahead of us. I don't know. I'm not going to belabor that thought. But I would love for us to at least think about it. If we're thinking about building housing and where it should go and what assets that we had that can be developed into housing. I would love LGBT friendly housing to be one of those.

So I just wanted to say that and also looking at our city needs in terms of Office space, you know, something, a conversation we have all the time. I mean, right now, a number of our different departments are talking about where they're going to store the historical records, because we right now pay to have them off-site, and that's a cost to us. So I just want to have a little bit more, kind of put that on your plate of things to consider. Madam Chair, I yield the floor.

We'll go to Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler.

Thanks for having me here. Through you, I had a couple questions on the presentation, and thanks for putting this together and taking the time to walk through this and talk about it. All is one piece. I think a lot of times we have discussions about what's going on with this one lot and what's the update here. Sort of think about it holistically is helpful. The follow-up questions I had were on 139, Bishop Allen, the Vail Court lot. If you could just, you touched a little bit on Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. and many more. who that'll go out to and what we expect those responses to look like.

Also, is that the same process we're proposing for 333 Webster after it's done being DPW property, or would that not be an RFQ process? Would that be slightly different, if you could speak on those two?

Sure, through you, Mayor Siddiqui. So we would draft an RFQ request for qualifications that would Seek for a developer that will do 100% all affordable development. So it could be one of our nonprofit developers or a for-profit developer. But we would be looking at their experience in building at that scale and operating that housing. We'd be looking at their... teaming qualifications, the diversity of their team experience and serving that population. And oftentimes it will include a proposal of what the project would look like under the current zoning. In this case, it would be under the affordable housing overlay that we would expect them to build to.

Thank you. And then the other question I had was around Retaining city ownership of the land and just confirming for these six sites that was the case. I guess there was one option for 25 Lowell Street that was selling the parcel, which it sounds like is not the city's preferred option. and then for the other five in all these scenarios we'd be retaining city ownership or is there some proposal to have it not be city owned anymore in the other five?

So typically when we transfer to the Affordable Housing Trust and Conveyed to the 100% affordable housing, it is a transfer to the new owner, but there's a deed restriction that it be affordable in perpetuity. So in that case, the affordable housing developer, obviously with continued support from the city if needed, would be operating the building in the long term and have that liability.

Thank you, that's helpful to understand. I think 100% of oral housing is a good case. Retaining city ownership, very important, as much as we can for pieces. So helpful to think through that. Those are my two questions, and then I'll just speak a little bit about some of the other folks that counselors have touched on, on the importance of cultural and nonprofit spaces that Councilor Zusy raised. very much agree with that point and just wanted to provide some context on it and that. and I used to work at a nonprofit before I was on the council, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy that was in West Cambridge and there are a lot of great benefits of those cultural resources in West Cambridge. I think of where I was at, We were totally surrounded by them. Leslie University on one side, the Longfellow House on the other side, the Long Beach School on another, Mount Auburn, BBNN, a lot of great cultural

and a number of other great benefits I think in West Cambridge as well, including more so than in other parts of the city when it comes to tree canopy, you know, consistently shows West Cambridge I think has the highest parts of it. Highest Open Space of any part of the city, Mount Auburn Hospital, obviously, sort of real well served by these cultural institutions and nonprofit spaces as well as some of the environmental factors that we consider so much. I think one of the points to frame here, I think one of the benefits that it has less of than other neighborhoods is affordable housing. And just the name, affordable housing, in my conception, I think a lot of folks It's not a burden. It's a benefit. It's a resource. And we've been underserving West Cambridge with this benefit. I don't think it's fair that we've given so many resources when it comes to affordable housing to North Cambridge, to East Cambridge, to Cambridge Port where I live. are sort of neglecting West Cambridge and not providing it with the same attention when it comes to this really important benefit.

I just don't think it's fair to sort of be doing disservice to one neighborhood in particular and want to make sure we're advocating for West Cambridge here. So I think, as other folks have mentioned, want to continue to support the New School of Music, this great institution. Also want to be supporting of Affordable Housing, and sort of rejecting the binary that it's one or the other, supporting an institution or putting a burden of affordable housing on our neighborhood because these are both resources. We want to have both there. I think there's a lot of folks saying, you know, this is a yes and approach. We can have affordable housing and we continue to support this institution and that's what we're trying to figure out here. And then finally, I just wanted to I'm really excited to see social housing shouted out here for the 185 large site in particular. Excited for the task force that's coming. Great to see it named and incorporated. Looking forward to the report back. Coming from city staff, was just talking with CDD folks about that this morning, and good to see it named in this planning process as well. So with that, I yield back.

Just so I don't repeat myself, what was the last thing you said? Which building? All right, so it's 4.23. I'm going to be really brief because I know there's more questions. On page five, when you list out New Term and other city-owned property. Can we ask Brendan Monroe to also provide the council with just these properties listed out with their where they are just because that would be helpful and Thank you for watching! I think based on kind of what I'm hearing, I think what the city is looking for is some guidance on 25 around various options. I do think number three

Calling out how much capital would be involved, 12 to 15 million is not insignificant, so I think That's something that I'm more... likely to then say, okay, two makes sense. If the will of the body is, that's the will of the body. So that's kind of, you know, where I'm at. I agree with Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler too in that you know I understand there's a lot of advocacy and I appreciate it and I hear a lot of my colleagues and you know and agree and I think with even two if we do go that route which is Thank you for joining us. Just say that over and over. It's not guaranteed.

And so I do think on Councilor Nolan's point and others' points around what support looks like and you've been doing that is important, but... wanted to get that reality out there that that's there the question around the continued evaluation for the other City Portfolio. Late fall 2026, is that like November? Is that...

It would, through Mary, I mean, I would say sort of towards the very end of the fall. I mean, just be realistic. And I think that's sort of going to come back with likely sort of a framework. I don't know that that's like a sort of a final, like, here's our plan for... Moving 20 different chess pieces, but to really lay out that framework, lay out the sort of, you know, we're looking at the operation maintenance costs, what does that look like? Again, trying to really tie some of these decisions to what are the long-term impacts on the budget. So, yes.

Thanks. And then I did get a question around 105 Windsor Street. Past councils have talked about 105, you know. A good amount. And so could you just say the council in the past did appropriate amount of money, but if you could provide that context, that would be helpful.

Sure, and I don't have the exact date, but Council appropriated $4.5 million for the design and construction at 105 Windsor. That money was appropriating for to sell a bond. and so it was not like a free cash appropriation where there's money sort of sitting there. So council took an action that authorized the city to sell up to four and a half million dollars Because that project hasn't moved forward, that money is still, you know, that appropriation is still there. We haven't sold the bonds. None of that money has been spent on anything else. I do think that sort of picking it up again, looking at some of the other moving pieces, I think we can probably have some really productive conversations and sort of I know people are sort of anxious for that building and it's one that is vacant. It makes sense to move. It's at a key location in the neighborhood. But I do think sort of having the conversation as part of some of these other moves, I think we can have a more productive conversation.

Yeah, thank you. I agree, and I think when you come back with this response, kind of also reminding the history, particularly for that, is important. So I saw Vice Mayor's hand up, so we'll go to Vice Mayor and then we'll continue. And again, I think I'll be nice and do one question, but not two questions because we only have half an hour left. Will the Vice Mayor yield to Councilor Simmons?

Thank you. Very quickly. Vail Court. Intercontinental still owes the parking lot that's... Have we had any conversation? It's an empty parking lot. It's been an empty parking lot forever. And I'm just curious, have we... Talk to them about, are you interested in letting it go or giving us a little bit of it? Just curious, because actually they have two parking lots on either side of whatever that street is, Prospect, I think. It'd be interesting to know if there's some there there.

Yeah, absolutely. And certainly as part of the ongoing zoning discussion, Talking to the owners will be a really important step in understanding the interest. Part of the challenge with those lots and moving forward was They were using that parking as a requirement for PTDM on other sites. So now that that no longer exists, there could be more opportunity for redevelopment. And I think that in combination with Increasing development capacity really lends itself to having more productive conversations with the owners.

Vice Mayor Zeeb.

I just had one very quick question about Article 97 process. So we talked about we need to preserve the amount of open space and then at the same time we mentioned that the BBN field was not designated as open space. Could we designate part of that as open space and use that as the adjustment for the other site?

So we'd have to work through the state with that. So the preference has been close, and so I can't give a definitive answer, but giving the sense I'm hearing from the council about wanting to preserve the use of the main building, I think It's sort of, and I know there's always a desire to like, oh, let's do a little of this and a little of that, but it's a pretty small site. Even if you took over more of the park space, I think the preferred option would really be to say we want to continue to use that for non-profit space and then do more housing on the large road. Because it's a pretty complicated process. Does that make sense?

I was just going to end off with saying that for that process like please keep us updated like obviously the big question is for options two and three is because is you know the new school of music are likely bitter and that determines on whether they can pay like fair price for it and so those are probably conversations that you guys can have at least at some extent or not and if it looks like they won't be able to pay fair price I think that will fundamentally change the conversation and so would love an update if that's the case so we can go over all the options.

So we've been having conversations with folks, and I think they've been very positive about the option of buying the property and feel like they can run a successful capital campaign to have resources to do that. One of the things, and this goes a little bit to what Councilor Simmons was saying, you know, our current scenario where they're on sort of a tenancy at will Thanks for joining us. The sort of very short-term lease is not really in their best long-term interest either. The executive director is wanting to do you know accessibility improvements and you know there's potential to do a state grant but in order to do that you need to show you have five year a minimum of five year control of the building and so you know the goal you know if you were actually to be able to buy the building You open up a lot more opportunities in terms of grant fundraising. And so we have had those conversations.

And the initial feedback was that they were actually really excited about being able to have a more permanent control over their destiny.

Moving on to others who have further questions. Yes, Councilor Flaherty.

So quickly, obviously I favor the new school of music and the arts play a very important role in the city of Cambridge. And when we When we do a comparative analysis of 20 potential affordable housing units versus 700 families that are allowed to develop and Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

to use Councilor McGovern's metaphor about plastic puzzle pieces. And we're moving everything around the city looking at our needs. Is there some thought to quantifying exactly what our needs are for housing? What are our needs in West Cambridge? And for whom are those needs? Because it occurs to me that if the new school of music will remain a non-profit, hopefully as a school of music and arts, and we're looking for affordable housing somewhere in the city, with a transfer of naturally Thank you very much. Designed for seniors who may be house rich and income poor.

Maybe some individuals living in a large two or three family house or a single family home. Thank you very much. If there was a location in the city of Cambridge where they'd be able to transition, 2. Would that both serve that need for senior housing and also open up some of the housing stock in and around West Cambridge for families? to populate our cities and our schools and our youth programs. And if we look at that and we look at sort of What we have in the pipeline for our city portfolio and we consider what's happened in the city of Boston with Pinnacle Developers,

by using some city grants, tax credits, historical tax credits, and other mechanisms repurposing office buildings like we've got here You know, and Inman Street, Western Ave, the Lombardi Building for affordable housing in those locations. Maybe it's both cost-effective and time-efficient. to designate those plastic puzzle pieces for affordable housing. 185 Lodge for senior housing opening up potentially Long-term ownership and homes for families in and around West Cambridge and we can create sort of an ecosystem where we're moving our Plastic puzzle pieces and our human beings around the city of Cambridge so we could continue to be a thriving, sustainable city. I mean, is that something worth talking about and thinking at CDD?

Yeah, thank you. I think all great points. I think certainly we can look at, I mean, there's so much demand for housing at all levels and ages and incomes that certainly there's a solution there. I think we made it a point to build affordable senior housing, and there is a need for that. That does open up, as you said, existing market homes for other families to come in. I think the challenge is always... Thank you. at different levels, sizes of units to really accommodate the wide diversity of needs in Cambridge to have the community that we want.

All right, now yield with last question. Final question. Final question. And the final question is, when we're talking about 185 Lodge Road, City staff stand at the lights of Freshmont Parkway and Huron Ave with me where I live to see the traffic before we decide what to do at 185 Lodge.

So many great ideas.

Through you, Mayor Siddiqui, we want to have open space at 185, too, for those community gardens. It seems like a great place for community gardens and for housing, too. I wanted to ask whether this is for Director Roy, Capital Building Projects. We should be hearing from you. This is really your meeting, right? Yeah, but that wasn't my question. My question was, do we have a value? Do we have a 425 Lowell Road? and if we were to sell it to the new school and the cost of repairs, I understand that the new school has actually been spending more like $20,000 a year on repairs. But I know earlier they'd come up with estimates and they'd thought they could come up with the money to do other fixes to the building, but they weren't in the $12 to $15 million range. That's a very big number. What does that include?

So through you, right now we're kind of in the very early stages of just assessing the building. So we haven't gotten or we haven't engaged any design teams yet to go through it. We've just done our own self-assessments with my team walking through the building, taking a look at what issues could come up. So we haven't gotten to that level of detail yet, but from what we've seen in the rest of our portfolio, that's the rough number that it would probably come out to be.

And the one thing I would add to that is, you know, we're sort of saying that at some point in the future. So I just want to be really clear about, you know, what we've talked about is, you know, there are existing bathrooms in the basement that don't work. if we were to go out and lease the building those kinds of things would have to be addressed before we could lease the building. As we look at our portfolio and I think this is one of the things that we're really and Brendan's team is really leading on this is Again, quit sort of thinking about like, okay, what is this project, but what is the overall portfolio? What is the 30-year cost of this building? So we're not just looking at, okay, here's the capital cost, and that's what we're sort of comparing against, but... What are we looking at in terms of overall operation and maintenance? What are we looking at in terms of long-term investment? So no one's sort of saying that like, okay, tomorrow we need to go do this. There is, if we were to lease, particularly if we were to release the property, we can't lease it before the bathrooms close because the plumbing doesn't work. And so there's those kinds of things that would require more immediate attention.

and then the sort of longer term potential expenses. And then, you know, I know we have not done appraisal as part of a disposition process. We would go through a formal appraisal. That would be part of the process in terms of You can look on the assessing database and see the assessed value, but before we went through a disposition process, we would have the parcel formally appraised.

Councilor Zuzi? Yeah, so does the building need, so it sounds as though it needs some new plumbing it might need. Does it need new electrical? Does it need a new roof? That's a lot of money, $12 to $15 million.

It starts to add up. And again, like Kathy mentioned, we're looking at it over a longer term, over the next 10, 20, 35 years, what it would need. So it might not need that full $13 million tomorrow, but these are the expenses that would have to come up in the next couple of years. And then to answer your earlier question, I think in the fall you'll be hearing a lot from me in terms of the rest of our portfolio.

Oh, good. I look forward to that. And I want to make sure that you're fixing any leaky roofs we have. Council Member Govern.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you. First, on Larch, I do think it's obviously a big lot, and I don't think we necessarily have to build out Right to the property line on the whole lot with housing. But it is a little hard to, and my father lives two doors down from this guy, Flaherty, over here. So he might be on the corner with you looking at traffic, but he supports housing at that site, so not to speak for him. But, you know, there is a lot, I mean, it is a lot that is right across the street from Fresh Pond, right down from Danahy Park. Tobin School, Glockenfield. I mean it is not that particular subsection of West Cambridge is not a section that needs a lot of public open space. There is a ton of public open space there. So there can be some sort of balance.

I'm not saying that the whole lot has to be filled with housing and there shouldn't be some open space just to make the housing there nicer, but I'm not sure that that Thank you very much. and again not knowing sort of what each of these buildings need and so there may be some that haven't been on the list for very long but are like really desperate but I mean I got to make the plug for for Windsor and Western Ave. Those buildings have been empty for over a decade. Western Ave, You can't even go into that building without a hazmat suit. It's that bad, the mold and how awful that site is.

Those would be the two that I would want to see prioritized given the length of time that they've been empty, the neighborhoods that they're in, those neighborhoods deserve better, and just the conditions of those buildings. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Yeah, and I think I would probably add, you know, it's 205 Western, 105 Windsor, and 3 Bigelow that are the truly vacant buildings. And so, you know, I think we've got lining up a fall conversation, but we'll also be thinking through whether we might need to come back a little earlier and we can think about whether some of these properties we want to tee up a conversation about.

Nolan. Thank you. Glad that we're stepping back and thinking about the whole portfolio. A question is around, as we think of that portfolio, do we sometimes think of mixed use? So for instance, you know, Vice Mayor Azeem said, well, we could keep the new school and then do housing behind. That doesn't sound like something that makes sense just because of the scale. But the social housing on Larch Road, we could have a community center or a library or something We just did it with, just to start, we have a childcare center in the same space as a job connector. So as we think particularly about the larger projects, I hope we're thinking about ways that we can combine community use. Just like just earlier today, we were talking about, hey, it's really great to have retail use on the bottom and then housing up above. Similarly, it's not a bad idea to have community use on on some kind of ground floor and then housing as part of it.

So I really hope we're creative in thinking about the ways that we're blending these uses together. And I have a question, which is as we take this portfolio approach, We have a lot of city-owned properties that we lease, including several to the Cambridge Health Alliance for no money at all. We've only talked about Lowell Street on this, but we also have the First Street Garage and 5 Western Ave., And my question is, we also have a slew of leases that the city itself pays for that lot on... Sorry, my glasses should be... I think it's 1.5... Thank you very much. portfolio so that we no longer have to pay for these leases and we can use the existing city-owned buildings, build them up, build them out.

I agree Bigelow Street maybe should be a much bigger building if we could use it or Lombardi should be Six stories or nine stories. to enable the city staff not to be totally crunched in. So my question on that is, are we thinking of that too? I don't know if the whole council has seen the list, but there's a bunch of spaces that we in the city have to pay to lease when we're owning all these other buildings that Thank you very much. and rebuilding anew. That's not something that we always want to see, but it was judged the financially and fiscally responsible thing to do. So how are we blending these into this discussion?

So through Mayor Siddiqui, we are absolutely looking at that in terms of particularly as we think about, you know, the spaces that we're leasing for office spaces, because it's like one of the goals is can we better co-locate people? So part of that would be pulling back on those. And so that is part of what we're looking at is this broader portfolio is like what are the total cost of operating and maintaining the sort of existing conditions versus other alternatives and how do those stack up. So that would be part of. will we be teeing up for the fall conversation?

Just a quick, and I'm glad that the fact is the city council offices, which were quite grandiose and huge, and we decided, you know what, we can all contribute to this, and so we're consolidating ourselves, I want to say. It can be challenging, but it was the right thing to do, and I think all of us are working to ensure that that is something that then freed up some space and some desperately needed space for some city staff.

Any more questions, comments from the body? I think Councilor Al-Zubi is set as well. All right, Councilor Al-Zubi, we have 10 minutes.

It's very quick. It's very quick. Again, this is for Director Roy. Any chance of putting a parking lot on top of DCR's garage? at 147 Hampshire. This has been recommended to me by a business owner on Cambridge Street. On the DPW lot. It's not far from Cambridge Street where there's a real lack of parking. Is that ever being considered?

I will cut in for a second. I will protect Director Roy from this. So I would say that is a full reconstruction. modify that existing structure. Like that structure was definitely not designed or constructed Thank you for joining us. is pretty key operating space there. And so using up some of that space for ramps and other infrastructure would really eat into the amount of space that's available for DPW operations. If you think about a garage, you pull in and you have a lot of ramps and sort of That garage space is not very big and so thinking about adding public access and the footprint that would be required to access that would extremely limit the amount of space that's available for the garage and DPW operations.

Darn, I thought it was going to be a great public-private partnership. Director Roy?

The only thing through you, Madam Mayor, is we are looking at a lot of different things. We're analyzing a lot of data for all of our properties, so much like Councilor Nolan just mentioned, we're looking at a lot of different Mixed use opportunities and mixes for how to maximize our portfolio. So we didn't look at the garage upgrade, but there's a lot of other fun things we're looking at too.

Any other questions, comments? As far as next steps, the last page on this is... There are some next steps associated with some of the properties. On 25 Lowell, what it says here, City Council provide feedback on future use. This is spring 2026. Followed by city disposition process. What else do you need from the council? Do you have appropriate direction? Do you need clarification?

No, I think this is super helpful. And, you know, look, I mean, I'll just be honest. Like when we were coming up with the options, we sort of. sort of knew there'd be some you know a real conversation and we wanted to have that and Thank you very much. to support nonprofits. So we can work. So I think that's really helpful. We don't need a formal vote to do that. We would come back to the council with sort of a package and have you approve it and think through that process. will work on that internally. And we can investigate a little bit between the lease and the sale. I would say the city's strong perspective is that the sale gives folks much longer-term benefits as opposed to doing a five-year lease and then a five-year lease and a five-year lease and then again also takes it off the city rolls.

So we would come back to the council on the 25 Lowell Street with a more formal package for people to consider and approve and then start that process. And then I think the 185 Larch Road, again, Melissa and CDD will begin the social housing study and really have a much more thorough conversation on that. And then I think the other sites are sort of moving along. And so I think those were the two we really wanted to make sure that we were getting good council feedback in before sort of proceeding on those. So it's been extremely helpful.

Does the body have anything further to add on this? It seems like there's a majority at least that's giving you that direction. We haven't formally voted, however.

Yes, Councilor Nolan. Yeah, no, that is exactly the right direction. I just want to make sure if it turns out that the existing entities do not end up in it, we need to make sure that we as a city make a commitment to ensuring that there's a future in place.

And maybe just to add, thank you through you, Mayor. You know, I think we would be coming back to the council. And so there would have to be a council discussion and vote. before any disposition process happens anyway. And so, you know, this meeting helps us, I think, set pretty clear direction, but we'll have, we'll go back Thank you very much. A preference certainly from a number of councilors for the city to retain long-term ownership. And I think we'll just have to think through what that looks like. I'd sort of call out one of the challenges. With many of our buildings, 25 Lowell included, there hasn't been a huge amount of the regular reinvestment in that facility. That's where the pretty big number comes from in terms of recapitalization.

It may be something that we can actually accomplish in a longer-term lease. And I would recognize, you know, in terms of what the current status is, Thank you so much for having me. Thank you very much. So we'll think through that and can come up with some options to bring back.

Okay, thank you. We will go ahead and on a motion by Councilor Nolan to adjourn. We'll do a roll call.

Councilor Al-Zubi. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azeem. Yes. Councilor Flaherty.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor McGovern? Yes. Yes, Councilor Nolan?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Yes, Councilor Zusy? Yes. Yes, Mayor Siddiqui? Yes. Yes, and you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.

I'm adjourned.