Meeting Minutes: Cambridge Planning Board
Meeting Date: May 13th, 2025 Governing Body: Cambridge Planning Board Meeting Type: Regular Meeting
Attendees:
- Board Members Present: Mary Flynn (Chair), H. Theodore Cohen, Diego Macias, Tom Sieniewicz, Ashley Tan, Joy Jackson (Associate Member)
- Board Members Absent: Mary Lydecker, Dan Anderson
- City Staff Present: Evan Spatrini (Senior Manager for Zoning and Development), Swathi Joseph, Jeff Roberts, Eric Thorkelson, Susanna Bigelin, Drew Cain
Executive Summary
The Cambridge Planning Board held a continued discussion on the draft Multifamily Design Guidelines. The Board provided feedback to the Community Development Department (CDD) staff, focusing on improving the document's accessibility for smaller property owners, enhancing its promotional strategy, and incorporating a clearer hierarchy of design priorities, including sustainability and quality of construction. Staff committed to reviewing the feedback and integrating changes where feasible, particularly regarding public outreach and document clarity.
I. Call to Order and Attendance
- The meeting was called to order by Chair Mary Flynn.
- Remote participation was authorized pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025.
- Roll call was conducted to confirm attendance and audibility of board members:
- H. Theodore Cohen: Present, visible, audible.
- Mary Lydecker: Absent.
- Diego Macias: Present, visible, audible.
- Tom Sieniewicz: Present, visible, audible.
- Ashley Tan: Present, visible, audible.
- Dan Anderson: Absent.
- Joy Jackson: Present, visible, audible.
- Mary Flynn: Present, visible, audible.
- Five regular members and one associate member were present.
II. Community Development Department (CDD) Update
- Evan Spatrini, Senior Manager for Zoning and Development, introduced CDD staff present: Swathi Joseph, Jeff Roberts, Eric Thorkelson, Susanna Bigelin, and Drew Cain.
- General Business Item: The primary agenda item was a continued discussion of the Multifamily Design Guidelines. CDD staff previously presented the draft on April 29th, and public comment was received at that time.
- Upcoming Meetings:
- May 20th (Planning Board): Two public hearings are scheduled:
- Project review special permit at 350 Mass Ave (conversion of office to lab space).
- Zoning petition by 10+ residents to amend dimensional requirements for religious uses.
- May 20th (Ordinance Committee): Two public hearings are scheduled:
- East Cambridge Community Enhancement zoning petition.
- Religious uses petition (also to be heard by the Planning Board later that evening).
- June 10th (Planning Board): The next scheduled meeting will include the annual utility report as a general business item.
- May 20th (Planning Board): Two public hearings are scheduled:
III. Continued Discussion: Multifamily Design Guidelines
- Chair Flynn noted that the board had received written comments on the design guidelines from Ethan Frank and Gordon Moore by 5 PM on May 12th.
- Board Member Discussion and Questions:
- Diego Macias inquired about the overlap between the Multifamily Design Guidelines and the Urban Design Guidelines, noting differences in formatting and subject matter organization.
- Eric Thorkelson (CDD) explained that the documents are compatible in content but differ in focus (residential vs. citywide). The formatting difference stems from the Multifamily Guidelines being developed in-house based on prior templates (AHO, Envision Alewife), while the Citywide Guidelines were developed by a consultant team.
- Evan Spatrini (CDD) added that the AHO guidelines explicitly reference these new multifamily guidelines, but no new zoning changes explicitly reference them outside of AHO.
- Ashley Tan asked if any changes to the zoning ordinance were made to explicitly point developers to this document, similar to district-specific guidelines.
- Jeff Roberts (CDD) clarified that guidelines are not zoning and are not criteria for approval but are meant to be helpful. Article 19, which outlines the city's urban design objectives, allows the Planning Board to refer to established city guidelines during project review. He emphasized that CDD aims to be a constructive partner in development, helping developers navigate requirements like inclusionary zoning, green building, and flood resilience, and stressing the importance of urban design.
- Tom Sieniewicz questioned how the guidelines would be deployed, particularly for smaller developers, and how CDD could proactively engage with those interested in creating housing. He suggested an introduction outlining available CDD resources and a process for engagement.
- Jeff Roberts (CDD) noted increased interest from developers in understanding the new multifamily zoning and CDD's supportive role. He highlighted that CDD helps explain zoning, standards, and requirements, and makes staff available for urban design guidance.
- Eric Thorkelson (CDD) added that the guidelines encourage designers to consider project impact on existing and future contexts, promoting flexibility and early engagement with CDD.
- Mary Flynn suggested a more proactive marketing strategy for the guidelines, including distributing them to smaller architectural firms, urban design firms, neighborhood groups, and libraries, and incorporating announcements in city communications.
- H. Theodore Cohen praised the user-friendliness of the guidelines but suggested more emphasis on smaller developments (e.g., 3-6 units). He recommended moving the glossary to the beginning and reducing repetition to make the 70-page document less daunting for non-professionals. He also suggested showing examples of undesirable design.
- Tom Sieniewicz advocated for a hierarchy of importance within the guidelines, foregrounding critical issues like sustainability (tree canopy, urban heat island) and quality of construction (durability of buildings). He also questioned how the guidelines could encourage innovative, "iconic" design that might not strictly conform to conventional rules, referencing "firmness, commodity, and delight" as principles of great design.
- Ashley Tan expressed concern that too many similar images might inadvertently constrain design and suggested condensing images or including examples of undesirable outcomes.
- Diego Macias suggested bridging the gap with the Urban Design Guidelines by incorporating "core values" or "principles of good multifamily design" throughout the document, similar to the Urban Design Guidelines' structure. He praised the "principles in practice" section for its visual representation of massing relative to neighborhood context.
- Diego Macias inquired about the overlap between the Multifamily Design Guidelines and the Urban Design Guidelines, noting differences in formatting and subject matter organization.
- CDD Staff Response to Feedback:
- Evan Spatrini (CDD) acknowledged the value of broader marketing and committed to discussing internal strategies for promoting the guidelines beyond just website posting, including email lists and city manager updates.
- Eric Thorkelson (CDD) agreed on the need to refine illustrations, particularly for at-grade parking, and to address minor cleanup, clarification, and redundancy issues within the text. He noted the challenge of balancing comprehensiveness with conciseness.
- Follow-up: The Board requested CDD staff to reflect on the notes and clarify any questions. Staff indicated they would review the feedback and integrate changes, particularly regarding promotion and document clarity, but did not plan to present the guidelines again to the Board.
IV. Motion to Conclude Discussion
- Motion: H. Theodore Cohen moved to conclude the discussion on the multifamily housing design guidelines.
- Second: Tom Sieniewicz seconded the motion.
- Roll Call Vote:
- H. Theodore Cohen: Yes
- Diego Macias: Yes
- Tom Sieniewicz: Yes
- Ashley Tan: Yes
- Mary Flynn: Yes
- Outcome: The motion passed unanimously (5-0).
V. Adjournment
- The meeting was adjourned.