a report from Councillor Dennis J. Carlone and Councillor Craig A. Kelley, Co-Chairs of the Ordinance Committee, for a public hearing held on August 8, 2018 to discuss City Council petition to amend the Zoning Ordinance in Article 5.000 as it relates to rainwater and flat roofs

ATTACNMENTA To: Planning Board From: CDD Staff Date: August 3, 2018 Re: Zoning Petition on Converting Flat Concave Roofs This City Council zoning petition would allow the Board of Zoning Appeal (BZA) to grant relief from certain dimensional zoning requirements for existing buildings with flat (concave) roofs and existing central drain lines connecting directly into the City sewer. The relief would allow a partial new story to be built above the existing roof of the building in exchange for disconnecting the central drain line and meeting other criteria. Past Zoning Proposals The Planning Board has considered versions of this zoning proposal in the past, first in 2013 and most recently in 2016. in either case, the Planning Board did not recommend adoption and the petitions expired with no action by the City Council. Attached to this memo are documents provided for these past petitions, including . Planning Board recommendations and staff documents, which contain relevant background information related to the proposal and issues raised in past discussions. Current Petition There are a few substantive differences between the current petition and past proposals, inciuding the following: • The current petition notes that buildings "may have poor upper-level thermal insulation and/or contribute to important heat island effects, or may suffer from the secondary effects of overinsulation," and includes as a criterion that projects "significantly increase the thermal efficiency of the building." Prior and current petitions require rainwater to be "dispersed at the ground to follow its natural path," while the current petition also requires rainwater to be "harvested on the property at the rate of 1/8 gallon per square foot of roof area." • The current petition includes "installation of solar panels (impractical on residential flat roofs)" as a review consideration; it is not explained why solar panels would be considered impractical. The relief that may be granted is the same as in prior proposals: an additional 10 feet in height above the existing roof line and up to a 20% increase in floor area ratio (FAR), but additions must be set back at least 6 feet from the existing roof parapet on the front side and 3 feet from the existing roof parapet on other sides. The title of the petition references "a kind of greenhouse/glass porch," but no other standards are specified.

CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS PLANNING BOARD CITY HALL ANNEX, 344 BROADWAY, CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139 Date: June 7, 2016 Subject: Rainwater Separation from Flat Roofs Zoning Petition Recommendation: The Planning Board does NOT RECOMMEND adoption. To the Honorable, the City Council, On May 24, 2016, the Board held a hearing on this City Council zoning petition, which would create a new Section 5.55 in the Zoning Ordinance to allow limited modifications to dimensional requirements (including FAR and height) by special permit from the Board of Zoning Appeal for improvements to buildings with flat or concave roofs that would result in disconnecting rooftop drainage connections from the public combined sewer system. The Board heard a presentation from Councillor Craig Kelley and discussed the proposal. No other members of the public appeared to testify. The Board also received material in support of the proposal by Nicolai Cauchy. The Board had heard a version of this proposal, with slight differences, in 2013, and received materials from the Community Development Department (CDD) and Department of Public Works (DPW) that were prepared at that time along with the Planning Board's prior negative recommendation on that proposal. At this time, the Board finds merit in some aspects of the proposal. Given the age of the housing stock and the desire among families in Cambridge to make use of existing homes, there is some benefit to providing a mechanism by which people can make better use of available space, including, in some cases, rooftop space. It is also true that there is some environmental benefit to disconnecting drain connections from the combined sewer, although the material previously provided by DPW indicates that such benefit is modest in comparison to certain other infrastructure improvements that are required of the City. Councillor Kelley noted that the improvements envisioned in this proposal can also allow for better removal of snow and ice from roofs. However, the Board has several concerns about this proposal. The primary concern is that allowing the addition of a partial story to a building would create significant value for one group of property owners, that is not necessarily balanced by the benefit to the public. The Board also questioned whether the City should prefer and essentially reward this one group of property owners over other property owners who might propose different environmentally beneficial renovations to their properties. If the Council wished to consider allowing homeowners more flexibility to add space to existing buildings in return for environmentally beneficial renovations, there should be a broader consideration of the types of public benefits that could be achieved Page 1 of 2

City of Cambridge, MA • Planning Board Recommendation Rainwater Scparation from Flat Roofs Zoning Petition through such allowances. If environmental sustainability is a focus, consideration should be given to the objectives of the Net Zero Action Plan and Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, which aim to address the causes and expected impacts of climate change. Housing affordability is also a major City goal that might be taken into account when considering where greater zoning flexibility might be justified. In addition, Board members have some concerns about allowing additional height to these particular buildings, as the three-decker is a pervasive and iconic development form in many neighborhoods, and the allowance of an additional story may disrupt that prevailing character. determine where such additions would or would not be appropriate, and where they might be objectionable to neighbors who would not be entitled to the same benefit if their homes do not have flat roofs and central drain lines. In conclusion, while the Board is generally supportive of approaches that might allow greater onung ilexibility tor homeowners in exchange for making their homes more environmentall ensitive, Board members believe that more consideration is needed to determine what specifi public objectives would be best served by allowing property owners to increase the usability and value of their homes, and to determine a fair way to balance the expected private benefit with those public objectives. Respectfully submitted for the Planning Board, Headed De H Theodore Cohen, Chair. June 7, 2016 Page 2 of 2

To: Planning Board From: Jeff Roberts, Land Use and Zoning Planner Date: May 17, 2016 Re: Rainwater Separation from Flat Roofs Zoning Petition On May 24, the Board will hear a City Council zoning petition that is a refiled and slightly revised version of a zoning petition heard by the Board in 2013. Attached to this cover memo are the Board's recommendation on that prior petition, along with past materials provided by staff. An explanatory package from Nicolai Cauchy, an advocate for the petition, is also provided. Overview The proposed zoning petition would allow the Board of Zoning Appeal (BZA) to grant a special permit to authorize, within limitations, the construction of a partial top story on an existing residential building with a flat or concave roof, if such construction would enable the disconnection of an existing storm drain line from the City's sewer system. This allowance would be available in any district for any residential building with the existing condition described above. The concept is that such a change would reduce stress on public infrastructure, but would not be economically advantageous for a property owner to undertake without some other improvement to the property. The current petition maintains the previously proposed limitations that any addition can be no more than 10 feet above the existing roof line, cannot increase the FAR on the property by more than 20%, and cannot constitute a new dwelling unit. In addition, the current petition proposes a new requirement that the added top story be stepped back at least 6 feet from the front roof edge and at least 3 feet from all other roof edges. Comments As noted in the attached Planning Board recommendation, the key consideration is the balance between the environmental benefits of removing drain connections and the potential impact of adding stories to buildings in residential neighborhoods that may have a fairly consistent established height. The added requirement for step-backs might help to mitigate this impact. It is difficult to determine exactly how many buildings would be eligible for additions under this proposal, but the information previously provided by the Department of Public Works shows that within neighborhoods, there are highly varied existing conditions, and therefore some buildings would be eligible for the proposed special permit while many others would not. Also, the attached 2013 report from the City Engineer notes that there would be some public benefit to separating storm drains, but the benefit is modest in relation to other priority improvements that are being undertaken by the City.

CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS PLANNING BOARD CITY HALL ANNEX, 344 BROADWAY, CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139 Date: September 3, 2013 Subject: Craig Kelley Petition (Flat Roofs / Rainwater Separation) Recommendation: The Planning Board DOES NOT RECOMMEND adoption of the proposed zoning amendment, but suggests alternative approaches. To the Honorable, the City Council, The Planning Board considered this proposed zoning amendment at a public hearing on June 18, 2013 and continued deliberation on September 3, 2013. The proposal would create a new Section 5.55, which would allow increases in the Gross Floor Area and height of existing residential buildings by special permit as an incentive for property owners to remove internal drainage connections to the City sewer from buildings with flat roofs. The Planning Board heard testimony from Nicolai Cauchy, a resident who supports the petition, and from Owen O'Riordan, the City Engineer and Acting Commissioner of Public Works. The Planning Board recognizes the environmental benefit of removing these direct central drain connections, which would reduce rainwater intake into the combined sewer system and help to mitigate the impacts on water quality that result from sewer system overflows. In addition, allowing rainwater to collect into the ground rather than being directed into the sewer system would promote groundwater recharge, which would benefit watershed protection. However, the Board also acknowledges that the environmental benefits would be modest, given that only a fraction of rainwater is collected on rooftops, and that most rainwater runoff from rooftops would continue to enter the sewer system eventually. It is not typical in Cambridge to allow buildings to add an extra story above the height limit, particularly in close-knit neighborhoods where buildings with flat roofs are most common and the prevailing height tends to be three stories. Allowing those buildings to add a story would significantly increase property values for some owners, by providing greater floor area and views, while other owners in the same neighborhood would not be able to enjoy those benefits and would be impacted by the increased size and height of nearby buildings. Therefore, the Planning Board believes that the public benefit to be gained by the removal of central storm drains would not justify the impact of allowing the construction of an extra story on residential buildings. On the other hand, the Board believes that there is merit in allowing some modest zoning flexibility to facilitate the removal of central storm drains where the property owner wishes to do Page 1 of 2

City of Cambridge, MA • Planning Board Recommendation Craig Kelley Petition (Flat Roofs / Rainwater Separation) so. Allowing property owners a few feet of height relief by special permit, rather than a variance, could facilitate the alteration of a concave roof that collects rainwater into a pitched roof that allows water to run off onto the property. As a modest incentive, additional Gross Floor Area could be allowed by special permit for the creation of a small roof deck, so that the owner could increase the value of the property by adding some usable open space and views in the process of making the necessary roof alterations. This incentive would be better scaled to the resulting public benefit, and would avoid some of the impacts of adding significant height and mass to an existing building in an established neighborhood. Potential concerns around privacy, noise and other impacts would still need to be considered in the special permit review process. The Board suggests that the Council consider this strategy as an alternative to the proposed zoning amendment. Respectfully submitted for the Planning Board, Hugh Russell, Chair. September 3, 2013 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF CAMBRIDGE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARIMENT BRIAN MURPHY Assistant City Manager for To: Planning Board Communily Develorment From: CDD Staff Date: August 28, 2013 Re: Craig Kelley Zoning Petition (Stormwater Separation) In response to the Planning Board's discussion at the June 18 meeting, we have prepared information on the following topics: • The range of properties affected by the proposed zoning Possible alternatives to increased FAR and height as an incentive to eliminate central drain lines Affected Properties The properties that might take advantage of the proposed zoning include existing buildings with flat roofs and drain pipes that collect water runoff from the roof and discharge it directly into the City sewer line. Data sources maintained by the City with information on existing buildings are not detailed enough to make an accurate accounting of the number of buildings that fall into these categories. In the memo to the Planning Board dated June 18, 2013, the Department of Public Works (DPW) provided some analysis of a small area in the vicinity of Concord and Huron Avenues that was performed as part of the City's Alewife Sewer Separation Program. DPW inspected 690 properties in the area and found 67 residential buildings (approximately 10% of the total) with flat roofs and internal drain systems connecting to the City sewer. There are approximately 11,000 residential buildings across all of Cambridge. If the overall building stock is assumed to be comparable in its mix of building types, the number of buildings with flat roofs and direct drain connections would be approximately 1,000. However, briefly scanning an aerial view of Cambridge reveals that the Concord/Huron area has a smaller proportion of flat-roofed buildings than neighborhoods in the eastern portion of the city, such as East Cambridge and Cambridgeport. While there are some neighborhoods that have a similar building stock to the Concord/Huron area, there are others where the proportion of flat-roofed buildings is likely around half or more. Therefore, the actual number of affected properties throughout the city is likely to be 344 Broadway greater than 1,000, possibly numbering between 2,000 and 3,000. Cambridge, MA 02139 Voice: [phone removed] Fax: [phone removed] TTY: [phone removed] www.cambridgema.gov

Craig Kelley Zoning Petition (Stormwater Separation) - Memo to Planning Board Alternative Incentives Allowing an increase in allowed height and floor area to build an additional story on existing residential buildings would be a substantial benefit to property owners. The cost and disruption that would be required to modify an existing drain line would also be substantial, but many property owners may be enticed to make those improvements given the increase in value that would result. However, as the Planning Board noted in its discussion, allowing ten-foot increases in height would potentially have negative impacts not just on abutters, but on the character of entire neighborhoods where there is currently a uniform prevailing height. One possibility that was raised is the allowance of usable decks or green spaces on rooftops. Such spaces are currently allowed under zoning. However, usable open spaces that are located above the second floor of buildings are counted as Gross Floor Area (GFA) on the lot, and therefore owners typically do not provide such spaces in favor of maximizing the GFA provided within the building. Also, roof decks usually require a stairway and headhouse for users to access them, which are not exempt from height limitations and therefore can be an impediment to building a roof deck. In situations where owners have sought zoning relief to build roof decks, neighbors have often opposed the request because of concerns about noise and privacy impacts. Aside from relief on height, floor area or rooftop open space, it is difficult to conceive of a zoning incentive that would be appropriate to the type of modification that is desired. Possibly, a few feet of additional height could be granted to facilitate the improvement of roof drainage systems while providing more spacious top floors and possibilities for skylighting without having to seek a variance. This would provide some modest benefit to property owners while minimizing potential impacts on direct neighbors and avoiding the overall impacts of increased floor area within neighborhoods. However, it is possible that the increased value of additional height without additional floor area would not be sufficient to offset the cost of the improvements. August 28, 2013 Page 2 of 2

DEPARTMENT MORES June 18, 2013 To: Brian Murphy, Assistant City Manager for Community Development From: Owen O' Riordars City Engineer Re: Flat Roof Zoning Petition 1 have been asked to provide comments on the zoning change proposed vis-à-vis flat roofs that contribute extraneous stormwater discharge to the City sewer systems. At the outset it should be stated that the Department of Public Works is broadly supportive and wants to encourage, to the extent that it is reasonable, the elimination of all sources of extraneous flow to our municipal sewer system. Extraneous flow, be it from rainfall or groundwater, contributes to combined sewer overflows polluting our rivers and streams. It is also causative of sanitary sewer overflows and back-ups into homes and basements causing public health issues for homeowners and businesses. Finally, every drop of additional water discharging to our sewer systems has to be paid for, as the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority wholesale charges are partially based on flow received from contributing communities. The municipal drainage system in Cambridge was originally constructed as a combined sewer system. The City has a well established program to separate sewer and drainage lines throughout the City. At this time approximately 65% of the municipal system continues to function as a combined sewer system. The Department of Public Works is presently in the middle of a large program in the Alewife watershed to separate the combined sewer system. After the work in this neighborhood is completed the number of times combined sewerage discharges (CSOs) to the Alewife and volume associated with these occurrences will be reduced from 60 times a year to 7 times per year and from 50 million gallons per year to 7.8m gallons per year respectively. The reductions achieved as a result of this effort will meet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) goals for combined sewer overflow control for the Alewife Brook. The analysis completed in designing the new separate systems in this watershed provides some details that assist in illuminating the issues that are the subject of this petition, but given the different goals associated with the sewer separation project and the zoning petition the data may be insufficiently detailed to answer all questions that may be asked.

CAUGIRAI Alewife Sewer Separotion Program A twin goal for the City in completing this work is to improve sewer and stormwater service levels in these areas. As a result of an incremental analysis the City determined that in order to achieve the CSO standards demanded and to eliminate sewer system back-ups except in the most extreme circumstances it will be necessary to eliminate 75% of the private sources on infiow to the municipal sewer system. After completing a house to house inspection of 90% of the 690 properties in the watershed area associated with this program we have identified those properties where inflow removal is both cost effective and minimally disruptive to residents. To that end 176 properties have been targeted for inflow removal, none include properties where stormwater and sanitary waste combine in one pipe stack constructed through the center of the property. The attached maps illustrate the extent of the investigations completed by DPW as part of this effort. We have identified sixty seven (67) flat roof buildings within the overall area. Of those buildings forty eight (48) have two internal pipe systems, one for sanitary waste and one for rainfall conveyance. Of the forty eight buildings identified with two pipe systems, thirty one (31) have been selected for inflow removal, Of the nineteen (19) buildings with a single stack conveying stormwater and sanitary waste in one pipe down through the building, none of these have been selected for sewer separation. These building were not selected due to the significant work required to either internally separate these pipes or reconstruct the pitch of the roofs. In summary, The Department of Public Works is not opposed to this petition; removing stormwater from sewer systems is an important goal of the City. However, we recognize that there are complexities associated with this proposal. The City expects to achieve a level of inflow removal in the Alewife watershed to meet the requirements of our EPA permit for CSO control. This will be achieved by completing a sewer separation program throughout the neighborhood which will include eliminating approximately 75% of the private sources of stormwater and groundwater inflow to our sewer systems. None of the private properties identified for inflow removal are of the type which is the subject of this petition. The primary reasons for not including these properties are that the work required to internally separate the systems is too expensive and the work would be too disruptive to those living in these buildings. Lisa Peterson; Commissioner of Public Works Cc:

Figure 10 - Sanitary Service Connections Huron A, Huron B & Concord Ave Project Areas Legend US Building Sanitary Sernce Connected to Storm Drain [CONCORD AVE Buiding Sanitary Serica Corrected to Combined Sewer Sta Buding Saritary Service Connected to Combined Sowar Frevously Classified as Storm Drain whin City GIS Builaing with Sanitary Service Connector to Sanitary Sower or Not Inspected lespection Rasuits from 199B-2001 Storm Drain Sahitary Scabr Combined Sewer Combined Stwer Provousty Cassified as Storm Drawl within Cly GIS Storm Dran Mahholo Saniary Sewar Manhole Combined Serpar Mechale Huron A, Huron B, & Concerd Ave Hydraulic Ecundares Notes: 1. Conditons from 1998-2001 building inspectan resuits are 2. Inspecton rosuls may include buildings outside of Huran A Huron B and Concord Ave project areas some cases been altered to reflect the fact thal those piper currently serve as combined sewers (Sea taxi of Huron A Field 48783- FRESH. POND HURON A 300283091 No. of Buildings with No. of Buildings with Sanitary Service Sanitary Service Connections to Connectionsto HURON Bed Storm Drain Combined Sewer *** a Project Area .: - 100 Huron A Huror B 139 Concord Avenue -Total 276

Figure 11 - Sump Pump Connectivity Huron A, Huron B & Concord Ave Project Areasf Legend (B352) Buidings with Sura Pump Corinecson; lo Slim Daln CONCORD AVE BiNdungs wch Sump Putta Corocions 1o Sardary Sewer is Buitings wit Sump Purra Cornections lo Combined Sewer Braidings wnth Unknown Sump Pure Dischages Buddings with Sump Puro Connections do Suctice is Drynel Buidings wilh No Stamp Pump or Not Inspectod 22 Inspection Resulls tran 1898-2301 som Jan Santary Sewer Santary Sewar Manhole Combited Sewer Manhoe At Haron A Huron 8, and Corcart Are Hichaut Buyardy ¡HURON A FRESH POND No. of Ma. of No. of No. ad Bulldines Bulletings Bulldings wath Bull dines with with : Stomp Primp. Sump Pump Summer Pump Sump Putto * HURON B UR NOWI comecoon connacon to Canned An Connection Jump Pump to stom Sanitary to Sartaro org Draln ¡Project Area Drywell Start! 16 Huton 3 ConcorDA 215 pinna!

1041= Figure 12 - Roof Drain Connectivity :Huron A, Huron B & Concord Ave Project Areas Legend CONCORD AVE! MILE Fact Lester Connectan to Stem Desin i.r: RE Root Leader Corecson la Sariay Sewer 22l Roof Loader Connecion la Combined Seror ¡ Flatticol Drain Coupston lo Stann Dran Flat Roof Oraln Cornacticuto Baritory Gener Flat Root Drant Connestim to Centertal Soner • Ruling wnt Root Grain to Surtaçe or Drywall or Not wagede TReats tron: 1959-2001 aspecton 5tomm Brain .... Sanitary Semet Comtered Seror S4arn Drain Manholo Sanilary Sewer Mersole Combinad Sear Harlie Iron A, Huros R. and Concos Ava Hidravic Boundarios Notes 1. Conditons from 1$99.2001 bullng inspection resuits ara 2. utspoclions results may Includa buäfings outside of Hurn A. Muron B and Concord Aur, moject a tas FRESH. EE SES+** HURON A POND 65089 garrera No.ct No. of Na. ot * 5981 No. of No. of No. of ВИНИЛАС Bulldinge Buttino Bussdingg Building with with with with wish Flat Road Acol Leader Rootleadar HURON B Drain Drain Drain 25. Connection Connertionto Connection Connecton Connaction Cornertion! Sanitary 10 Storm to Combined to shamm to Sanitary to Combined * 24, DrEn SoWAr Sewer Sewer 2940s 37 ... 219*37

ATACHMENT B of peripheral planters Gutters harvest rain water for irrigation - Zoning Ordinance Amendment 5.55 Residential flat roof conversion proposal allows heat in winter keeps cool in summer (vine, morning glories...) basic vegetative coverage

ssions Goal A: Minimizes greenhouse gas Objectives for 2020 Committee Goals and emissions from all measurable sources 14.1% of Cambridge's greenhouse gas emissions are from residential buildings Climate Protection Action http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD/climateandenergy/greenhousegasemissions/communityemi

by: for the costs of roof construction drains and the buildup of snow and ice flat roofs, thus cutting greenhouse gas FLAT ROOF AMENDMENT 1. Protecting roofs from frozen center roof storm Entices residential property owners to insulate 2. Providing extra FAR and/or height to compensate emissions associated with heating and cooling,

roof conversion Protects neighbors by: natural paths "without direct 1. Requiring a Special Permit prior to any encumbrance onto abutting properties" 2. Retaining stormwater onsite or following FLAT ROOF AMENDMENTS

• damaging flooding accumulated ice and snow *There are different schools of thought on this Currently... • snow and ice buildup on the roof and Insulated flat roofs are likely to result in* associated ice dams in the center drain • structural challenges due to the weight of

drain into sewer roof = clogged roof: snow melts Well insulated flat Poorly insulated flat insulated 5 days after snow storm, insulated roof: 3~4 inches of frozen snow cover 4" solid ice Uninsulated Roof Day 5 Central drains clog when a flat roof is

Climate change: frozen drain = snow overload and associated roof shoveling dangers

Concave roof with cen all roof water Roof drain collects waste water lines (kitchens & baths) water from local ecosystems Combined Rain and Sewage showers, etc. Tie-in to toilets, our MWRA treatment load and removing that combine rain with sewage, adding to Additionally, flat roots have center drains

experience 6,000cf/yr of rain* A single Triple Decker gathers And 1/3 of sewer input for a three-family building could be RAIN! (Nicolai Cauchy's *Ref.: 1500s.f. area; 4' annual rainfall; 7.5gals/c.f.; sewer tax $8.3/Ccf (Ccf=100c.f.); Typical Triple Decker consumes 130Ccf/yr (FY2010)

- Heat islands in summer • Liability for homeowner • Disincentive for ecology Concave roofs are bad! - insulation in attics causes drain to freeze • Costly sewer input for City and residents sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

construction costs ice/snow buildup return it to local ecosystems insulation of residential flat roots by - Create FAR/height options to compensate for • Incentivize greenhouse gas reducing • Eliminate rainwater from sewage and Purpose of ZO Amendment 5.55 - Reducing concerns about clogged drains and

- Entice ecological use of roof area • PROVIDE relief for homeowners: - "Lightweight" structure, "translucent" • AVOID proliferation / development: - Shed snow and eliminate central drain - Added space is not a separate floor or unit Scope - who to help and avoid

- Water: 3.24/3.19 $/Ccf =>1.5% - Sewer: 8.32/7.71 $/Ccf =>7.9% FY 09-12 (Block 2, typical triple decker): increasing! Cambridge sewer rates increasing 5 times faster than water Cost of rain dumped into sewer sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

but maybe Sources: Cambridge BZA at Variance Appeal 12 Apr., 2008 "Cambridge has over 2400 triple deckers" 2400 <TplDkrs in Cambridge= COSTS $1,4M/yr @ "tax payers rate" City=7.13 sq. mi.; estim. 60% of flat area residential buildings (10% business/univ.; 30% green + streets); 10,000 resdnl.bldgs.; 2% TpIDkr at least $200K/yr @ "MWRA rate" sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

Xpert Building Solutions *- TripleDeckerficor Design Concave roof with g Engineering Construction loads Liability to homeowners: numerous cases • Frozen drain snow off edge [phone removed] increasing snow overload on roof • "Global warming" => ERTIRED F • Liability when shoveling CAD SAFE • Pipes crack inside walls • Causes overflow and Licensed G.C. M.I.T. engineer

3. Bad for ecology 2. Liability to homeowners Flat roots are 1. Cost to the City >5200K/yr (maybe $1.5M?) sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

City gains Owners gain • increases property tax revenue? • Reduced rain water into sewage • Usable roof with many green opportunities • Peace of mind from risk of failure, snow, etc... can solve these problems! A small relaxation of height limit • Improved insulation & ecological temperature control sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

Xpert Building Solutions Rainwater (gutters at diverted to the ground eliminated! gambrel) or use on roof recycled for Central Drain Design Construction Illustration of one design option cooling heating [phone removed] shading enhance seasonal High-level cover with pollination Convective Passive solar ventilation and Vegetative roof SEPA RTIFIED T flowering plants LEADISARE Licensed G.C. M.I.T. engineer

2. Zoning • Roof height 3. Increase in population density Concerns about relaxing Z.O. limits 1. Impact on neighbors and visual aspect • FAR (floor area ratio ~= living area/lot size) sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

Front view from 40ft away green plants Visual representation: minimal impact Side view from 15ft away

currently: higher than 387 flat 391 Huron Ayé. (approx, contour) Proposed 387~3 higher than 391 387 Huron: Height perspective overhang perception space between • INVISIBLE from neighborhood (all buildings & crown • New roof being set • Pitched roof design pitched except one brings harmony with sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into back offsets the height neighbor due to narrow

ed root line Stovepipe no impact on natural light equidistant lines from Even adjacent to a third floor dormer, for light/view No impact on neighbor's natural light or view In other City areas where triple deckers are sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into concentrated the crown overhang determines angle

• FAR existing FAR and 6' (front) • VISUAL IMPACTS • Maximum roof height • ZO 5.55 limits height gain to 10' • ZO 5.55 suggests a limit of 20% over Addressing zoning concerns • Setback requirements of 3' (sides and rear)

+ increased snow load Shallow slope, ice dams incentive for owner Expensive and little Alternatives that have been suggested Snow load still an issue sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Central drain not eliminated Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

BUT gardens) • Eliminates rain drain • Addition is costly for homeowner, • Owner gains functional, usable space (third floor residents don't use street level Z.O. §5.55 entices ACTION • Has incentives for grass-roots green innovations sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

• City earns tax $$ • City saves sewage $$ • No intrusion on neighbors • Multiple safeguards against abuse • Reduce risk of leaks for homeowner • Incentive for innovative/green design Win-win situation! Z.O. §5.55 Benefits all parties sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

architects Concord area rain/sewer separation survey) rain/sewage water on their flat roof. Support Z.O. §5.55! Support from several Cambridge and Huron homeowners to take on the cost of separating do the work for all it would save us!" "The City should PAY owners willing to (Engineer Dennis Carr, lead Engineer for the City regarding this proposal in the context of Huron sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Z.O. §5.55 saves the city $$ at zero cost, by inciting Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

Gutters harvest rain water for irrigation of peripheral planters adjustment windows for seasonal (lattice + vines) at all vegetative sun shades allows heat in winter keeps cool in summer (vine, morning glories...) basic vegetative coverage ZO 5.55 is good common sense Innovation, Ecology, and Economies design scale - Drawings not to exact primarily for suggestions

front/street-side of building, season enclosed porch within the following limitations ZO 5.55 • Additional FAR* not to exceed 20% of the existing FAR of the building Additional height not to exceed 10 ft. above the existing roof line of the building •Side walls and roof shall be mostly translucent above 4 feet from existing roof, and said rain water is either recycled or led down to the ground to follow its natural path, the use of natural light, and harmonization of the new roof profile with surrounding buildings. • entirely eliminate rain water entry from the concerned roof into said sewer line and that Furthermore, in enhancing sustainable development and alternative energy sources (Article 22), additional a Special Permit may allow the construction of a partial light-weight structure such as a greenhouse or 3- sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] positive consideration will be given to "sensibly green" projects that improve the use of passive solar heating, convective cooling, seasonal shading with natural plants, harvesting and/or using rainwater at the roof level or a flat (concave) roof, on which a drain pipe collects water from the roof and combines it with household waste- Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into In an effort to further the City's storm-water management, and to alleviate hardships resulting from heavy snow loads, modifications to the applicable dimensional requirements of this Article 5.000, in particular regarding FAR • Footprint to be no closer than 3 feet from either long edge or rear side of the building, no less than 6 feet from water, discharging into a single outflow pipe to the municipal sewer line, provided that the resulting construction floors below, planting flowering bushes and vegetation attractive to pollinating insects at the roof level, maximizing and height limitations, may be authorized for eliminating rain-water from sewer lines on residential buildings with

• 4-level homes in Cambridge antin far eliminatina rainwater Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: Supporting Amendment 5.55 to • Ice damage & snow load/ice load liability Annex/Additional material

(some were apparently allowed in 1973 oil crunch) A few of many Cambridge residences with 4 levels

regards, of the roof area." covering, as well as access to passive solar heating and concentrators. Regards" Neighbors who wrote directly to PB • Peter Wilson, 451 Huron Ave.: " wanted to express my support amending the height limitations so that owners of flat roof homes can make senseful ecological conversions, Tancredi Botto, Broadway: "with this letter I wish to express my support for Policy Order including separation of rainwater from sewage, small roof gardens, greenhouses and vegative 2016#84, to amend zoning ordinance 5.23 in order to allow exceptions to the maximum height of allowing exceptions to the maximum height in Z.0.5.23 as may be decided by the Ordinance Brian Thompson, Appleton St.: "My wife, Marie-Claude, and I have been homeowners at 168- Committee, and in particular for erecting light weight structures with an ecological function within 170 Appleton Street since 1969. I would like to add our support to Policy Order 2016#84 in favor the parameters proposed under Z.0.5.55. Thank you in advance for your kind consideration. Best restrictions in Z.0.5.23 to allow building a lightweight structure like a greenhouse on a percentage

on 4/2/16 • Andrew Hartness, Huron Ave. I'd appreciate your taking note of my support. Best regards, • Peter Wright, Larch Rd., designer and builder of Larch Rd Playground Condos Cambridge Architects in support of ZO 5.55 • John Altobello, Reservoir St.: As a Cambridge architect and resident in the Huron Avenue neighborhood, I'm writing to express my support for 205.55, which would enable flat root owners to gain relief from height and FAR in order to build a lightweight structure, such as a greenhouse. sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] • Harry Irwin, Gurney St., member of Cambridge Historical Society - wrote directly to Donna Lopez Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

your consideration, • James Prescott, 85 Trowbridge St.: solar heating and other grass-roots ecological options. supporting ZO 5.55 Other triple decker owner with problems Dear Ms. Lopez, I am a home owner in mid-Cambridge (85 Trowbridge Street, Cambridge, MA conversions. The exception options include the possibility of raising a lightweight structure which would eliminate rainwater dumping into sewage lines by building a greenhouse, providing passive ammend zoning ordinance 5.23 in order to allow sensible and rational exceptions to the maximum that accumulate on the roof, resulting in water accumulation on the roof, and providing breeding for height limitations, so as to allow owners of flat roof homes to make sensible and rational ecological mosquitos. Enabling ecological (i.e. green) roof conversions would minimize heat absorption in the debris from entering the sewer lines. The drain grate is prone to blocking from leaves and acorns 02138). The building, which was built around 1890, is a triple decker with a center-pitch flat roof that third floor can be extreme. (The building does not have air conditioning, and so we rely on window air conditioning units.) And, the drain on the center pitch roof has a grating to prevent leaves and roof use of temporary air conditioning units. In addition, roof plantings will provide an efficient consumption In our specific case, the rubber membrane roof is black, and in the summer months the heat on the summer months, resulting in cooler temperatures in the building and, possibly, in the elimination of the drains into the sewer system. I and am writing in support of Policy Order 2016#84, which is seeking to of rain water and provide for a healthier and environmentally friendly living arrangement. Thank you for sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

2016 2011 and the Ordinance Committee in 2013 • A scan with over 50 signatures was emailed to Ms. • A larger number yet had been filed with the original Neighbors signatures of support Lopez in anticipation of the Council meeting in March variance application (2008) as well as with hearings in sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

existing Bft height differe requested: 3ft more ce Note wide angle distortion (building is set back 15ft) existing 1ft height difference increase specific to 387 Huron reduce visibility Simplified illustration of relative height • Represents 11ft • Setback from front height increase i.e. and sides will largely greater than ZO 5.55 sewer from residential flat roofs (typical triple-deckers) - Nicolai Cauchy [email removed] Supporting Amendment 5.55 to Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: option for eliminating rainwater dumping into

Lakeview Ave Map-Lot: 3073 [phone removed] Map-Lot: 234-166 234-18 (Map-Lot: Map-Lot: [phone removed] Map-Lot: 234-167 accurate graphic rendition). 4141 (signed letter of support with not opposed X=supporters of initial request Map-Lot: 234-105, Map-Lot: 234-158 2 of 3) Huron Ave 3047 reiterated their support after posting in yard 234-169 Map-Lot: 4000 Cambridge Zoning Ordinance: antion for eliminatina rainwater Supporting Amendment 5.55 to -Map-Lot: 234-112 (234-66 Map-Lot: 4000 234:111 Map-Lot: Map-Lot: [phone removed]-67 Map-Lot: Abutter support for 387 Huron

circumstances: municipal sewer line height limitations, may be authorized under the following In an effort to enhance the City's commitment to mitigating Language- background water management, modifications to the applicable dimensional requirements of this Article 5.000, in particular regarding FAR and namely so-called "triple-deckers", while improving the City's storm- Flat Roof Zoning Proposal's household waste-water, discharging into a single outflow pipe to the Residential buildings with a flat (concave) roof which may have poor environmental impacts of certain older types of residential buildings, on which a drain pipe collects water from the roof and combines it with effects, or may suffer from the secondary effects of over-insulation, and upper-level thermal insulation and/or contribute to important heat island

abutting properties sewer system, and that Provided that the resulting construction will • significantly increase the thermal efficiency of the building Language- requirements per square foot of roof area, with the remainder dispersed at the Flat Roof Zoning Proposal's ground to follow its natural path without direct encumbrance onto • entirely eliminate rain water entry from the concerned roof into the • said rain water is harvested on the property at the rate of 1/8 gallon

building. the building building, and and height limit may be permitted within the following limits • Additional FAR not to exceed 20% of the existing FAR of the side of the building, no less than 6 feet from front/street-side of Language- new allowances Flat Roof Zoning Proposal's • Footprint to be no closer than 3 feet from either long edge or rear the construction of a partial structure relieved from the applicable FAR • Additional height not to exceed 10 ft. above the existing roof line of

the architecture. with natural plants, insects at the roof level, and • using rainwater at the roof level or floors below, • harmonization of the new roof profile with the neighborhood Language- considerations • installation of solar panels (impractical on residential flat roofs) Furthermore, in enhancing alternative energy sources (Article 22), Flat Roof Zoning Proposal's • planting flowering bushes and vegetation attractive to pollinating additional positive consideration will be given to projects that improve • use of passive solar heating, convective cooling, seasonal shading

ATTACHMENTC Proposal for converting flat concave roofs to a kind of greenhouse/glass porch Z.O. 5.55 In an effort to enhance the City's commitment to mitigating environmental impacts of certain older Formatted: Strikethrough types of flat roofed residential buildings, namely so called "triple deckers", while improving the City's Formatted: Strikethrough storm-water management, modifications to the applicable dimensional requirements of this Article 5.000, in particular regarding FAR and height limitations, may be authorized via special permit by the Planning Board under the following circumstances: Residential buildings with a flat (concave) roof which may have poor upper level thermal insulation Formatted: Strikethrough and/or contribute to important heat island effects, or may suffer from the secondary effects of everinsulation, and on which a drain pipe collects water from the roof and combines it with household waste-water, discharging into a single outflow pipe to the municipal sewer line Provided that the resulting construction will: • significantly increases the thermal efficiency of the building or maintains the thermal efficiency of an existing insulated roof • entirely eliminate rain water entry from the concerned roof into the sewer system, and that • results in said rain water being stored on site or is harvested on the property at the rate of 1/8 Formatted: Strikethrough gallon per square foot of roof area, with the remainder dispersed at the ground te following its natural path without direct encumbrance onto abutting properties, the construction of a partial structure relieved from the applicable FAR and height limit may be permitted within the following limits: with the following requirements: Formatted: Strikethrough • Additional height not to exceed 10 ft. above the existing roof line of the building • Footprint to be no closer than 3 feet from either long edge or rear side of the building, no less than 6 feet from front/street-side of building, and • Additional FAR not to exceed 20% of the existing FAR of the building. • Approval by condominium or homeowners' association as appropriate.- Furthermore, in enhancing alternative energy sources (Article 22), additional positive consideration will be given to projects that improve the: • Possibility of installation of solar panels (impractical on residential flat roofs) Formatted: Strikethrough • use of passive solar heating, convective cooling, seasonal shading with natural plants, • using rainwater at the roof level or floors below,