Planning Board - Planning Board Meeting

October 28, 2025
Watch Video View Transcript
AI Disclaimer: Summaries and transcripts above were created by various AI tools. By their nature, these tools will produce mistakes and inaccuraies. Links to the official meeting recordings are provided for verification. If you find an error, please report it to somervillecivicpulse at gmail dot com.

Podcast Summary

Subscribe to AI-generated podcasts:
RSS Spotify Apple Podcasts

Cambridge Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Meeting Date: October 28, 2025 Governing Body: Cambridge Planning Board (jointly with Cambridge Redevelopment Authority for the first agenda item) Meeting Type: Regular Meeting

Attendees:

  • Planning Board Members: Ted Cohen (Acting Chair), Mary Lydecker, Diego Macias, Ashley Tan, Carolyn Zern (recused from PB 315), Dan Anderson (Associate Member, appointed to vote on both cases)
  • Absent Planning Board Members: Tom Sieniewicz, Joy Jackson, Mary Flynn
  • Cambridge Redevelopment Authority (CRA) Board Members: Conrad Crawford (Chair), Kathleen Bourne, Joe Camillus, Filo Castore, Aviva Rothman-Shore
  • CRA Executive Director: Tom Evans
  • City Development Department (CDD) Staff: Jeff Roberts (Director of Zoning and Development), Swathi Joseph, Eric Thorpeldsen (Urban Designer)
  • Applicants/Presenters:
    • PB 315 (Boston Properties): Jeff Loewenberg (Senior Vice President of Development, BXP), Katelina Pidea (BXP), Maxwell Bomb (Picard Shultz and Architects), Tony Marchese (Picard Shultz and Architects), Jim Rafferty (Local Counsel)
    • PB 368 (MIT Investment Management Company): Ben Lavery (MITIMCo), Mike Cheney (Biogen), David Manfredi (Elkus Manfredi Architects), Christine Song (Elkus Manfredi Architects)

Executive Summary

The Cambridge Planning Board, in a joint meeting with the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority, addressed two key items. The primary discussion revolved around a major amendment to the Infill Development Concept Plan (IDCP) for the MXD zoning district by Boston Properties Limited Partnership (PB 315). The amendment proposed shifting approximately 149,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area (GFA) from 250 Binney Street to a new building at 105 Broadway, offering two development paths (baseline and alternative). The boards approved the amendment, allowing the applicant to pursue either path, with further design details to be ironed out during subsequent design review. The second item was a design review for a minor change to Building C3 at 75 Broadway (Volpe site) by MIT Investment Management Company (PB 368), specifically concerning the external bulk gas tank enclosure. This revision was also approved.

I. General Business Items

A. Board Member Attendance

  • Mary Lydecker: Present, visible, and audible.
  • Diego Macias: Present, visible, and audible.
  • Tom Sieniewicz: Absent.
  • Ashley Tan: Present, visible, and audible.
  • Carolyn Zern: Present, visible, and audible (recused from PB 315).
  • Dan Anderson (Associate Member): Present, visible, and audible.
  • Joy Jackson (Associate Member): Absent.
  • Mary Flynn: Absent.
  • Ted Cohen: Present, visible, and audible.

B. CDD Department Update

  • Presenter: Jeff Roberts, Director of Zoning and Development.
  • Staff Present: Swathi Joseph, Eric Thorpeldsen.
  • Upcoming Cases:
    • One public hearing (PB 315) and one design review (PB 368) scheduled for tonight.
    • November 4th: Election Day, no meetings.
    • November 11th: Holiday, no meetings.
    • November 18th: Next meeting, with a second Planning Board advisory consultation session for 28-30 Wendell Street (affordable housing overlay development in Baldwin neighborhood).
  • Ordinance Committee Public Hearing:
    • Thursday (date not specified, but following the meeting): Public hearing on zoning petitions for Mass Ave and Cambridge Street (previously reviewed by Planning Board). Expected to be primarily for presentation and comment.
    • November 13th: Continuation of the Ordinance Committee meeting, both at 5:30 p.m.

C. Approval of Meeting Minutes

  • Minutes Reviewed: Certified transcripts for meetings held on August 5, August 19, and September 30, 2025.
  • Motion: Mary Lydecker moved to accept the transcripts as the meeting minutes.
  • Second: Ashley Tan seconded the motion.
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Mary Lydecker: Yes
    • Diego Macias: Yes
    • Ashley Tan: Yes
    • Carolyn Zern: Yes
    • Ted Cohen: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed unanimously (5-0).

II. Continued Public Hearing: Case PB 315 – Major Amendment of the Infill Development Concept Plan for the MXD Zoning District

Applicant: Boston Properties Limited Partnership Review: Jointly held with the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority (CRA).

A. CRA Meeting Opening

  • CRA Chair: Conrad Crawford.
  • CRA Board Member Attendance:
    • Kathleen Bourne: Present and audible.
    • Joe Camillus: Present and audible.
    • Filo Castore: Present and audible.
    • Aviva Rothman-Shore: Present and audible.
    • Executive Director Tom Evans: Present and audible.
  • Quorum: Noted that only five Planning Board members were present, and five votes were required for approval.
  • Applicant Agreement to Proceed: Jeff Loewenberg (BXP) confirmed the applicant's agreement to proceed with five Planning Board members present.

B. CDD Staff Update

  • Presenter: Jeff Roberts.
  • Background: Continued public hearing from March, where the board requested additional information.
  • Project Type: Special permit for an Infill Development Concept Plan (IDCP) within the MXD zoning district, similar to a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
  • Proposed Amendment: Major amendment to shift a portion of approved commercial Gross Floor Area (GFA) to include a new site for redevelopment, remaining within MXD zoning limitations.
  • Applicant Response: Updated information provided in response to March comments; staff provided an updated memo.

C. CRA Staff Update

  • Presenter: Tom Evans, CRA Executive Director.
  • Project Context: Phases 1 and 2 of IDCP complete, Phase 3 in progress. Amendment introduces a development alternative for Phase 4.
  • Two Alternatives for Phase 4:
    1. Option 1 (Baseline): Advance redevelopment of 250 Binney Street (Commercial Building D) as delineated in IDCP Amendment #2.
    2. Option 2 (Alternative): Construct a smaller building at 250 Binney Street (Commercial Building D) and deploy the remaining GFA to a proposed new building at 105 Broadway (Commercial Building E).
  • GFA Impact: No augmentation of total project GFA; rather, a redistribution across two plots instead of one.
  • CRA Action: Vote on a draft motion with potential conditions, or continue the hearing. CRA staff memo provided.

D. Applicant Presentation

  • Presenters: Jeff Loewenberg (BXP), Tony Marchese (Picard Shultz and Architects), Maxwell Bomb (Picard Shultz and Architects).
  • Request: IDCP Amendment #3. If approved, would proceed to design review.
  • MXD Zoning: Traditional aggregate GFA cap; amendment allows shifting GFA.
  • Current Status: Phase 3 (121 Broadway, 290 Binney, substation, plaza) under construction. Phase 4 involves 250 Binney.
  • Proposed Amendment (105 Broadway): Approximately 149,000 sq ft of GFA shifted from 250 Binney to 105 Broadway. No new net GFA.
  • Decision Point: Applicant will decide between baseline and alternative paths at approximately 75% design drawings (pre-building permit stage).
  • Key Comparisons (Baseline vs. Alternative):
    • GFA: No change.
    • Parking Spaces: No change.
    • Bike Parking: Increase in alternative (retaining 250 Binney spaces and adding at 105 Broadway).
  • Mitigation Requirements: No change or completion with the first building in the alternative scenario.
  • Updates Since March Hearing:
    • Massing Changes: Refined 105 Broadway massing, particularly its relationship to 121 Broadway, to create a more asymmetrical form and open up the gap between buildings.
    • Shadows: Expanded shadow study (throughout year and day). Average additional shadow area on the central plaza is 7% during the 10 AM - 2 PM bracket. Equinox impact slightly higher (8.5%).
    • Ground Floor Components: Enhanced ground floor with retail and lobby focused on the 6th Street connector aperture, creating a welcoming entrance and activating the corner.
    • Market Viability: Maintained floor plate size to meet market demands.
  • Design Details:
    • 105 Broadway Massing: Shifted eastward to widen the gap with 121 Broadway, allowing more views from residential units and light into the central plaza. Chamfered corner works with C3 building on Matimco site.
    • Building Separation: The void between 105 and 121 Broadway is dynamic and larger than the void adjacent to the Akamai building.
    • Residential Privacy (121 Broadway): Primary view windows in residential units are oriented south, not directly east towards 105 Broadway.
    • Ground Plane Transformation: Envisioned complete transformation of the ground plane at the intersection of Ames Street and Broadway, with landscape, bike path improvements, and active uses.
    • Shadow Studies: Presented static views and dynamic animations. Acknowledged minimal impact of reducing a floor on shadow.
    • Views: Presented various views of the building within Kendall Square context, highlighting its sculptural form and integration.

E. Public Comment

  • No hands raised from the audience.
  • Written comments received from Jason Alves by 5 p.m. yesterday were entered into the record.

F. Board Questions and Discussion

  • Ashley Tan (Planning Board):
    • Timing of Decision: Asked when the 75% DD decision point would occur relative to Phase 3. (Applicant: Timing uncertain, depends on market dynamics; initial design review for 105 Broadway required first).
    • Green Roof Reduction: Inquired about the extent of the requested green roof reduction. (Applicant: No specific percentage, but life science buildings have significant mechanical requirements, making green roof challenging).
  • Dan Anderson (Planning Board):
    • Shadow/Wind Comfort Maps: Asked if comfort maps (sitting, standing, walking) were done for the plaza. (Applicant: Wind study in submission books shows improved conditions with 105 Broadway; shadow studies by PCA. Acknowledged that previous wind study was based on earlier massing and only included summer/winter comfort factors. Agreed to update wind studies for new massing and include shoulder seasons during design review).
    • Massing Tilt: Asked if tilting the building away from the plaza was considered. (Applicant: Chamfering from Broadway is effective; tilting from plaza would have minimal impact on shadow).
    • Flood Elevations: Inquired about current Long-Term Flood Elevations (LTFE) for 2025. (CDD Staff: DPW is responsible for review; applicant should confirm which standards they are reviewing. Applicant: In conformance with current understanding; will coordinate with DPW during design review).
  • Mary Lydecker (Planning Board):
    • Design Sequence for Open Space: Asked about the design sequence for the central open space and east-west connector relative to the baseline/alternative decision, and if the open space design could react to the chosen option. (Applicant: Approved design for central plaza; construction documents in progress. East-west connector design will respond to 105 Broadway design. Will adapt species if 105 Broadway happens).
  • Filo Castore (CRA):
    • Alternative Public Spaces: Asked if other areas mitigate shadow impact on the plaza. (Applicant: Other open spaces exist, including four east-west connectors, a large porch on 121 Broadway, and nearby parks like Danny Lewin Park, providing a network of open spaces).
    • Privacy (121 Broadway): Expressed concern about privacy for residential units in 121 Broadway due to proximity to 105 Broadway. (Applicant: Primary view windows in 121 Broadway residential units are oriented south, not east, to minimize direct views).
  • Ted Cohen (Planning Board Acting Chair):
    • Shadow Benefits of Reduced 250 Binney: Asked if studies showed shadow benefits from reducing the height of 250 Binney. (Applicant: No specific study for 250 Binney's impact on central plaza; reduction would primarily benefit streetscape to the north, not the central plaza).
    • Model: Inquired about the physical model. (Applicant: Displayed the model, highlighting the dynamic condition between 121 and 105 Broadway, and the angled faces. No model of reduced 250 Binney).
  • Kathy Bourne (CRA):
    • Broadway Streetscape: Observed the emerging "campus" feel of Broadway with sculpted, individualized buildings, noting it's a new definition for Kendall Square.
  • Conrad Crawford (CRA Chair):
    • Construction Impacts: Concerned about construction impacts of breaking one project into two and phasing.
    • Open Space Network: Asked about mitigation opportunities for open spaces, including 15 Cambridge Center (Biogen playground) and Binney Park, to ensure public access during construction.
    • Green Factor Cooling: Appreciated the green factor cooling treatments and heat island effect mitigation steps.
  • Applicant Response to CRA Comments:
    • 15 Cambridge Center Playground: Jeff Loewenberg (BXP) requested not to make the playground a hard condition due to existing lease until 2028 and future renovation needs of the building. Committed to a playground with the Center Plaza. Jim Rafferty (BXP Counsel) noted that conditions are reviewed until building permit/occupancy, and these recommendations are not in staff memos.
    • Cycle Track: Kathy Bourne (CRA) and Conrad Crawford (CRA) emphasized the need for expeditious cycle track improvements on Binney Street, noting previous delays. (Applicant: Acknowledged; CDD Staff: Would need input from Transportation Department for new conditions).

G. Planning Board Deliberation and Vote

  • General Consensus: Board members expressed comfort with moving forward, acknowledging that many design details would be addressed in subsequent design review.
  • Findings for Special Permit:
    • IDCP meets criteria in Section 12.3533 of Zoning Ordinance.
    • Conforms with PUD development controls and district development controls.
    • Conforms with adopted policy plans/development guidelines for Kendall Square (K2C2, Kendall Square Design Guidelines).
    • Provides benefits outweighing adverse effects (site design, traffic, utilities, fiscal impact, no substantial adverse traffic impact).
    • Consistent with urban design objectives.
  • Green Roof Reduction: Board members had no difficulty with allowing a special permit for reduction, compensated by a contribution to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust.
  • Zoning Ordinance Section 10.43: No difficulty in determining compliance.
  • Conditions: Incorporate conditions from CDD staff memo, including those related to retail, frontage calculation, comfort zones, shadow studies, and impacts on the east-west connector and central plaza.
  • Motion: Mary Lydecker moved to grant the requested special permit with conditions, based on the necessary findings of the zoning ordinance.
  • Second: Diego Macias seconded the motion.
  • Appointment: Dan Anderson was appointed to vote on this case.
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Mary Lydecker: Yes
    • Diego Macias: Yes
    • Ashley Tan: Yes
    • Dan Anderson: Yes
    • Ted Cohen: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed unanimously (5-0).

H. Extension of Time for Decision Filing

  • Request: Extension of time to draft and file the decision.
  • Agreement: Jeff Loewenberg (BXP) agreed to an extension until January 30, 2026.
  • Motion: Ashley Tan moved to agree to the extension of time to file the decision to January 30, 2026.
  • Second: Mary Lydecker seconded the motion.
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Mary Lydecker: Yes
    • Diego Macias: Yes
    • Ashley Tan: Yes
    • Dan Anderson: Yes
    • Ted Cohen: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed unanimously (5-0).

I. CRA Action

  • Discussion: CRA board discussed incorporating conditions, particularly regarding streetscape improvements and the cycle track, referencing the staff memo.
  • Motion: Conrad Crawford moved to approve with conditions the third amendment to the Infill Development Concept Plan, Kendall Square Urban Redevelopment Plan.
  • Second: Kathleen Bourne seconded the motion.
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Kathleen Bourne: Yes
    • Joe Camillus: Yes
    • Filo Castore: Yes
    • Conrad Crawford: Yes
    • Aviva Rothman-Shore: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed unanimously (5-0).

III. Design Review: Case PB 368 – Volpe Site (75 Broadway, Building C3)

Applicant: MIT Investment Management Company (Matimco) Review: Design review for a previously approved Planned Unit Development.

A. CDD Staff Summary

  • Presenter: Jeff Roberts.
  • Background: Design review for a Planning Board special permit case 368, approved in 2021. Building C3 at 75 Broadway (Volpe site) had previous design review approval in July 2023.
  • Proposed Change: A detail change to the external bulk gas tank enclosure on the east side of the building (Kendall Way).

B. Applicant Presentation

  • Presenters: Ben Lavery (MITIMCo), Mike Cheney (Biogen), David Manfredi (Elkus Manfredi Architects), Christine Song (Elkus Manfredi Architects).
  • Project Status: Construction started in March, deep foundational elements nearly complete. Project to culminate in 2028 with Biogen as the commercial tenant. 6th Street Park to be delivered at that time.
  • Biogen Remarks (Mike Cheney): Biogen is committed to Cambridge, with the new facility serving as corporate headquarters and a research and development center. Stored gases are critical for their work.
  • Design Review (David Manfredi):
    • Site Context: Building C3 at 75 Broadway, with Broadway at the bottom, 6th Street walkway to the left, and Kendall Way to the right.
    • Kendall Way: New street, entered from Broadway, provides service to 75 Broadway and future 55 Broadway (C2). Trucks use loading docks and exit onto Broadway.
    • Approved Layout: Included trees and bike racks on both sides of Kendall Way. Asphalt ran almost to the north edge.
    • Proposed Change: External bulk gas tank enclosure (15 ft wide, 40 ft long, open to sky) with three tanks (two 10 ft tall, one 32 ft tall).
    • Impact of Enclosure:
      • Rearrangement of bikes and trees (additional tree, redistribution).
      • Reduced asphalt, increased pavers to signal pedestrian environment.
      • Bollards to prevent through traffic on Kendall Way (only for service vehicles).
    • Pedestrian Circulation: Primary pedestrian path on the east side of Kendall Way due to crosswalk to Cambridge Center.
    • Elevation: Fence is 9 ft tall, 50% transparent, with 2-inch wide blades for natural ventilation. Tanks are set back.
    • Artwork: Overhead doors and louvers could serve as a palette for future artwork.
    • Views: Presented views showing the enclosure's integration and the idea of artwork.

C. Board Questions and Discussion

  • Ashley Tan: Inquired about entrances near the tanks. (Applicant: One is for retail space along the passageway, intended for Biogen's community lab; the other is a code-required hookup for an emergency generator).
  • Carolyn Zern:
    • Traffic Management: Concerned about Uber/Amazon drivers using Kendall Way despite intent for service vehicles only. Asked about bollards inside the fence. (Applicant: Bollards are inside the fence; designated drop-off on Broadway for ride-shares. 60-foot building-to-building dimension allows turning).
    • Corrosion Prevention: Asked about environmental protections for outdoor tanks. (Applicant: Assumed to be regulated, but not explicitly detailed in presentation).
  • Dan Anderson:
    • Tank Placement: Asked about the rationale for the tallest tank's placement. (Applicant: Placed to avoid blocking louvers for electrical gear on the second floor).
    • Enclosure Height: Asked if aligning the enclosure with the terracotta base was considered. (Applicant: Chosen height connects to a horizontal band on the building; shorter screen makes tanks less prominent).
  • Diego Macias: Expressed disappointment that artwork was not yet designed and asked if it could be integrated with the gas tank material. (Applicant: Possible, not eliminated).

D. Planning Board Deliberation and Vote

  • General Consensus: Board members were prepared to approve the design revision.
  • Staff Input: Eric Thorpeldsen (CDD) indicated he had sufficient information.
  • Appointment: Dan Anderson was appointed to vote on this case. Mary Lydecker was not sitting on this case.
  • Motion: Carolyn Zern moved to grant the request to design review revisions for Building C3 site plan, subject to continuing design review by staff.
  • Second: Diego Macias seconded the motion.
  • Roll Call Vote:
    • Diego Macias: Yes
    • Ashley Tan: Yes
    • Carolyn Zern: Yes
    • Dan Anderson: Yes
    • Ted Cohen: Yes
  • Outcome: Motion passed unanimously (5-0).

IV. Adjournment

  • Motion to Adjourn: Made by a CRA member.
  • Roll Call Vote (CRA):
    • Kathleen Bourne: Yes
    • Joe Camillus: Yes
    • Filo Castore: Yes
    • Conrad Crawford: Yes
    • Aviva Rothman-Shore: Yes
  • Outcome: CRA meeting adjourned.
  • Planning Board Adjournment: Ted Cohen adjourned the Planning Board meeting.

Last updated: Nov 5, 2025

Back to Meetings