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 16, 2018 to discuss a petition filed by Randy Kasten for the Pizzuto Family Limited Partnership to amend the zoning map along the easterly side of New Street from Danehy Park continuing southwesterly along New Street to rezone Industry A01 to create a new overlay zoning district entitled “New Street Overlay District” and further amend section 20.900 in Article 20.00; amend the Table of Regulations by creating a new self-storage facility line, amend Section 4.37 in Article 4.000 ad Section 6.36.7 in Article 6.000 to add a new category entitled “Self-Storage Facility.”

PROPOSED OVERLAY DISTRICT New Street

20.94.1 by Section 3.20. adaptation goals. permitted in the applicable base zoning district. ZONING PETITION 20.900 NEW STREET OVERLAY DISTRICT 20.94Dimensional Standards in the New Street Overlay District Special Permit is issued by the Planning Board pursuant to Article 20.900. The building and land uses within the New Street Overlay District shall be regulated by the Maximum Height. The maximum height of any structure in the Overlay District shall be that 20.92Purpose. It is the purpose of this Section 20.900 to augment base zoning regulations in the District in 20.91 Establishment and Scope. There is hereby established the New Street Overlay District which shall be order to enhance the development of low traffic generating uses that support the multi-family dwellings in the adjoining Alewife Overlay District and surrounding Residential Districts and City's climate mitigation and 20.93Applicability. The New Street Overlay District shall be an overlay district on the zoning map established which shall apply in addition to regulations imposed by the base zoning district designations. Where the base zoning regulations differ from the requirements of this Section 20.900, the stricter provisions shall apply, unless a governed by the regulations and procedures specified in this Section 20.900. It is the intent of this section that these regulations will apply to that area along the eastern side of New Street currently zoned as Industrial A-1. provisions of the applicable base zoning district except as modified by the requirements of this section 20.900,

2. 3. 20.94.2 20.95.1 management, and net zero energy standards. Planning Board shall give consideration to the following: Overlay District shall be that permitted in the Industry A-1 District. 20.900 NEW STREET OVERLAY DISTRICT (CONT.) Provisions for affordable short-term storage for low income households." reasonably accommodated on the site without generating significant negative traffic. are greater than 300 feet in depth, but do not have street frontage in excess of 150 feet. 1. Public benefits that will enhance and benefit the use of the adjoining Danehy Park. The sustainability elements of the building including the use of solar energy systems, stormwater Minimum Required Setbacks. The minimum required front yard setback for any structure in the floor area is intended to allow for the construction of a commercially viable self storage facility on lots that 20.95Special Gross Floor Area Provisions. The Floor Area Ratio for a self storage facility (Section 4.37.n) may In granting the Special Permit, the Planning Board shall find that the additional GFA proposed can be be increased to 3.0 of the lot area by issuance of a Special Permit from the Planning Board. The additional Criteria for Granting Special Permit. In Granting a Special Permit for a Floor Area Ratio of 3.0, the

JAMAICA PLAIN • LOCAL OWNERSHIP • 12 YEARS IN BUSINESS SSG DEVELOPMENT • 2 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF CLASS-A STORAGE DEVELOPED • MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENTS IN SOMERVILLE, WALTHAM, NEWTON, EVERETT, BRIGHTON, DEDHAM, WOBURN, COHASSET AND

STREET OVERLAY NEW STREF™ BAY STATE ROAD NEW STREET OVERLAY DANEHY PARK

NEW STREE BAY STATE ROAD PROPOSED SITE PLAN DANAHY PARK

City of Cambridge Alewife District Plan utile Envision Cambridge Alewife Public Meeting-May 16, 2018 Alewife: Bike/Ped Connectivity - Proposed connectivity at Envision plan for subject property Existing Paths envison.cambridgema.gov Recommended Crosswalks Separated Bike Multi-use Paths Pedestrian Paths PROPOSED BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY

(See Detail) L=125.00 Kº14/9.06 4=4'50'32"- PROVIDE AUTH AN COPER OFFICE PROVIDE AND INSTALL •AC Г 2 KL AREA 438.12' 54311'04°E LOADING LOBBY -5 г N45'04'21 W 35,088 SF PROPOSED 28,115 S.F: (ST FLOOR) 4-STORIES - 126,402 S.F 28,115 S.F. (2ND FLOOR) 35,086 S.F. I3RD FLOOR) 14TH FLOORI BELF STORAGE FACILITY PROPOSED BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY Proposed Bike/Pedestrian Pathway 162.00 577'26'33 W

drainage system. PUBLIC BENEFITS neighborhoods, as per Envision Cambridge. between 52 New St and Danehy Park, reconnecting two The largest private solar array in Cambridge (765 panels). Creation of a new bike/pedestrian path, with tree canopy, The largest Net Zero Energy building in Cambridge (130K/sf). Traffic mitigation..(i.e. according to the guide for International commercial us, self-storage i the lowest traffic generator of any

housing. utilizing Danehy Park. for losing possessions. along bike/pedestrian path. PUBLIC BENEFITS (Cont.) Storage space for athletic equipment for the Storage space for the homeless (tod with City) Approximately $2M in linkage fees for affordable Opportunity for community art wall for mural artists Storage space for low income families in transition, at risk Cambridge Recreation Dept. and Youth Athletic Leagues

Retry is, Ward 10 Committee Abu Rubieh family, Brookline Lunch Civic support for project's public benefits (sample): Cambridge Youth Lacrosse (serving 200 athletes) Camp Rain Pow serving a needs childres Al Centofanti, former head custodian, Cambridge Rindge & Latin Environmentalists supporting project's Net Zero Energy and Solar array: Mike Green, Executive Director, Climate Action Business Association Youth athletic groups supporting project's storage for athletic equipment: PARTIAL LIST OF SUPPORTERS Support for the New Street Overlay district and proposed storage building: Bob Zimmerman, former President, Charles River Watershed Association George Mete,, HMM architects, Past President: Boston Society of Architects

Exit Enter Total Enter Total Total Peak Hour Enter Source: Table 3 TRAFFIC Saturday Midday Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour Weekday Morning Peak Hour Existing Site (Evolve Fitness)" Based on Based on ITE LUC 492 (Health/Fitness Club) for the existing 20,436 sf building Peak Hour Trip Generation Comparison Proposed co fur w self-storage facility" • Peak Hour Trips will be reduced by 53 cars Existing Evolve Fitness vs. Proposed Self-storage Facility co his in Difference • Traffic Generation for the proposed use is 20% of the current use •ITE classification for min-warehouse is one of the lowest impact uses

casework) Net Zero energy building Low flow plumbing fixtures Daylighting in office spaces. SUSTAINIBILITY LEED gold equivalent construction Rain water harvesting for irrigation Dark sky compliant exterior light fixtures High recycled content building materials Heat island effect reduction using white roof SOLAR ARRAY ... 745 PANELS, 307.7 MWh/year On site green energy product (PV array on the roof) Low emitting materials (low and no VOC interior finishes and Inverter PV Array Project: PV modules setter pack System Production Simulation variant: Main simulation results Matey tom Parameters PVSYST V6.67 New simulation variant Cambridge MA Storage Mode Model No of modules Unlimited load (gnd) Performance Ratio PR 40 FE34 3 Grid-Connected REC 350TP25 12 PVI 50TL 2-22-2017 Grid-Connected System: Main results COMMERCIAL SOLAR WORKS Pnom total Specific prod Prom 350Wp 268 kWp Prom total 200 kW ac 25/04/18 1149 kWh&Wpiyear Page 3/5

STORM WATER DISCHARGING TO STREET SYSTEM. • SITE TO BE DEVELOPED TO 2070 COMPLIANCE • EXISTING SITE IS PREDOMINATLY PARKING FIELD AND DRAINS DIRECTLY TO STORM DRAIN WITHOUT STORAGE OR FILTRATION AND COOLER RUNOFF. NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL INCORPORATE • NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL BE PREDOMINANTLY ROOF WITH CLEANER STORMWATER STORAGE BELOW FIRST FLOOR AND FILTRATION BEFORE

RENDERING STUDY PROPOSED SELF STORAGE FACILITY 52 NEW STREET CAMBRIDGE MA FEBRUARY 12. 2018 Companter

NE SIESTORNGE, RENDERING STUDY CAMBRIDGE SELF STORAGE FEBRUARY 12 2018 PROPOSED SELF STORAGE FACILITY 52 NEW STREET, CAMBRIDGE MA BL

ATTACHMENTB To: Planning Board From: CDD Staff Date: August 3, 2018 Re: Pizzuto Family Limited Partnership Zoning Petition (Self Storage / New Street) This memo provides an overview of the petition and a brief summary of relevant planning and zoning considerations. Petition Overview The petition has two major components: Adding "self storage facility" to the Table of Use Regulations, which would be permitted as-of-right in all zoning districts with an Industry classification, and would have parking requirements similar to a "wholesale business and storage" use and no explicit requirement for loading or bicycle parking facilities. Establishing the "New Street Overlay District" over a portion of the Industry A-1 (IA-1) district abutting Danehy Park, mainly to allow the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to be increased to 3.0 by Planning Board special permit for a self storage facility. Planning and Zoning Considerations Area of Rezoning The proposed New Street Overlay District, as depicted on the map attached to the petition, is a portion of the IA-1 district that abuts Danehy Park. The petitioners appear to own all affected lots. The IA-1 district allows residential, institutional, office, laboratory, and limited light industrial and retail uses, with a height limit of 45 feet and a higher FAR allowed for residential uses (1.50) than non-residential (1.25). The current uses in the proposed overlay district include a fitness studio, auto repair shop, rental car agency, restaurant, and dance studio. The IA-1 district as a whole is characterized by surface parking and low-scale buildings containing a variety of non-residential uses. In the past decade, two larger-scale multifamily residential buildings have been permitted on former commercial sites, one of which has been completed. The character of the area has been evolving to a more mixed-use character since Danehy Park, formerly a City landfill, was created in the 1990s. The proposed district is within the study area for the Envision Alewife planning process, which is expected to be completed this year. While the recommendations are not finalized, the study anticipates continued growth of residential uses in this portion of the area, with amenities such as ground-floor retail and improved public connections.

Pizzuto Family Limited Partnership Zoning Petition (Self Storage/New Street) The key objective that has emerged is to create an identity and sense of place for the whole Alewife District in the following ways: Better integrate the district with the rest of the city through new walking and biking paths, streets, and open spaces. • Ensure that both new development and existing infrastructure, neighborhoods, and community resources are prepared for climate change, in particular the challenges of flooding and heat. • Encourage forms of development, a mix of uses, and a range of improvements that will facilitate and encourage walking, biking, and transit use and reduce the growth of vehicular trips. Ensure that new development benefits the adjacent residential neighborhoods by introducing new amenities and services and creating neighborhood destinations. The petition includes special permit criteria for approving the increased FAR for a self storage facility, including enhancements and benefits to the use of Danehy Park, sustainability elements of the building, and affordable short-term storage for low income households. It would be helpful to learn more about specific measures that could be taken to meet these criteria, along with other Alewife planning objectives, within the area of the proposed rezoning. Self Storage Facilities Storage buildings that rent space for personal use have become prevalent types of new development across the country in recent years, but they have not been built recently in Cambridge. There are some older buildings that serve a similar function, including Cambridge Self Storage on Concord Avenue (close to the area of proposed rezoning), and the U-Haul near Central Square. The Zoning Ordinance currently classifies storage buildings as "wholesale business and storage in roofed structure" (4.37-j.) or "storage warehouse, cold storage plant, storage building" (4.37-k.), neither of which have an explicit definition. Both categories of use are allowed in Industry-zoned districts, except in the former case a special permit from the BZA is required in IA-1 and IA-2. There is no proposed definition for "self storage facility" and so it is not immediately apparent how it would be distinct from other types of storage buildings. The petition proposes similar parking requirements to other types of storage buildings, and incorporates language indicating that the special permit granting authority would determine loading and bicycle parking requirements on a case-by-case basis. However, under the proposal, the use would be allowed as-of-right except where a special permit is being sought for increased FAR in the New Street Overlay District, so the requirements would be undefined in an as-of-right scenario. In current zoning, storage buildings are included in "Loading Category A," requiring one loading bay for a facility with at least 5,000 square feet of GFA, a second bay for a facility with at least 40,000 square feet, and an additional bay for every additional 50,000. Bicycle parking for other types of storage facilities are required at rates of 0.08 long-term spaces and 0.06 short-term spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.

Pizzuto Family Limited Partnership Zoning Petition (Self Storage/New Street) Incentivizing Self Storage Facilities on New Street Because storage facilities have not been identified or discussed through any of the city's planning efforts to date, and have not been considered in planning for the Alewife / New Street area, it is difficult to assess whether it is desirable to significantly increase the allowed density for such a use. The main benefit of this use would be to provide an amenity to area residents with smaller living areas who need flexible storage space. Regarding transportation impacts, though a self storage facility might be expected to generate fewer overall trips than other non-residential uses (more specific information would be needed for the Planning Board and staff to fuliy assess transportation impacts), those trips might predominantly favor personal automobile use and provide few amenities to pedestrians, bicyclists, or transit users, which are prioritized in the Envision Alewife planning. Regarding sustainability, more information would be needed to evaluate expectations for energy use, renewable energy generation and/or distribution, flood protection measures, and urban heat island effects. There are also many urban design issues to be considered. A self storage building typically does not provide activation or transparency along the streetscape in the same way as a residential or commercial use, which is one of the Envision Alewife planning objectives. The proposed increase in density would also affect built form. In IA-1, there is a 45-foot height limit and no required setbacks for non-residential uses, except where a lot abuts a residential or open space use or district (there is a required formula setback based on the height and length of the façade, which may be reduced to 10 feet by the Planning Board). A building with 3.0 FAR would likely have 3 or 4 stories with a footprint occupying most of the lot; if there is a lower floor-to-floor height for a self storage facility, there could be more stories with a smaller footprint. Site design features such as open space, permeability, landscaping, vegetation, and treatment of parking and loading are also potential concerns, as no standards are proposed. Questions for Further Consideration Based on the above issues, the following questions may help guide future consideration: • How is a "self storage facility" defined, and how is it distinct from other indoor storage uses currently listed in the Zoning Ordinance? • What is the anticipated demand for a self storage facility, and who are the users that will benefit? • What are the anticipated transportation patterns of a self storage facility? Will there be benefits for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-auto users? • How will the loading and bicycle parking requirements be determined in cases where a self storage facility is established as-of-right? • What is the expected urban form of a self storage facility at an FAR of 3.0 and height of 45 feet? • How will a self storage facility address other urban design objectives such as street-level activation, open space, landscaping, transparency, sustainable design, and overall urban character? • How does the petitioner anticipate providing public benefits that are suggested in the proposed special permit criteria and the Envision Alewife planning to date?

ATTACUMENTC CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL Craig A. Kelley City Councillor MEMORANDUM To: Councillor Craig A. Kelley From: Mark Gutierrez, Council Aide William MacArthur, Harvard Square Homeless Shelter Date: May 21, 2018 Subject: Storage Options for People Experiencing Homelessness 1. Introduction Americans have 2.3 billion square feet of rentable storage space across roughly 50,000 locations' and an average home size of over 2,600 square feet, providing ample room for storage of personal belongings. Storage is something we grossly underappreciate, and people experiencing homelessness lack access to these extensive options. Storage can be transformative for people experiencing homelessness—-bringing stability, security, dignity, and peace of mind. It allows one to securely store clothing, sentimental items, medications, and important documents like birth certificates. Given the various challenges associated with some people experiencing homelessness, including mental health issues and lack of access to mobility, managing a storage facility that specifically serves either transitional or permanent homeless residents poses its own challenges. As with affordable housing, the need will be greater than the supply, requiring a storage unit assignment process beyond traditional market access. This memo reviews the benefits of providing storage options to the homeless and examines what actions other municipalities are taking. While the challenges of creating and managing suitable storage options for our homeless residents are significant, they are not insurmountable and the City should immediately focus on this issue for near-term solutions. CITY HALL, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139 [phone removed] FAX: [phone removed] TTY/TDD: [phone removed] EMAIL: ckelley@cambridgoma.gov

2. The Case for Providing Storage "If you carry around your belongings every day, there are just so many things that are not available," says Heather Forbes, communications and resource development coordinator for First United Church, a service provider in Vancouver that runs a storage program for people experiencing homelessness. "You can't go into a grocery store, you can't go into a publish washroom, you can't go into a job interview. Can you imagine, if you brought all your belongings to a job interview? Things open up for you that wouldn't be possible."3 Storage provides benefits both to people experiencing homelessness and to the cities in which they live. Restrooms are more accessible and properly utilized and trash and waste is reduced. Loads of personal belongings are taken off the streets, providing cleaner and clearer public spaces and reducing the risk of loss of personal property through clean-up efforts, theft, or damage. Far from putting the problem of homelessness out of sight and out of mind, transitional storage helps people reclaim autonomy, reducing a major obstacle to work, savings, the housing search, interactions with existing service providers, and advocacy. This aligns with the mission of existing service providers, such as the Cambridge Continuum of Care who strives to provide "assistance toward self-sufficiency" and "a continuum of housing and service options."4 Storage is an unmet need for people experiencing homelessness in Greater Boston. There are no shelters in the area that offer year-round guaranteed storage units for their clients. Transitions from homelessness to housing require stability, and the absence of affordable and secure storage can be crippling. Lack of storage is a destabilizing influence that can eliminate progress toward housing, especially if people lose access to critical documents. Income spent on storage can detract from savings for housing-related expenses, particularly for people who don't receive housing assistance. Cambridge has a large homeless population and a fairly comprehensive set of services for them here, here, and here. Storage is an unmet need in this service landscape and models in other cities have indicated that providing storage lowers barriers for people who wish to access transitional services that Cambridge already provides. Few emergency shelters have the capacity to provide storage except for their current clients, and such short-term storage fails to provide meaningful stability, since many people migrate between shelters. At-Risk Populations Percent of • Latino and African Americans in Percent of General Homeless Cambridge are disproportionately affected Population® Population by homelessness, continuing the persistent African crippling inequities along racial and ethnic 11% 29% lines. Americans Latino 9% 18% Americans 2

• Among adults (18+), 77% of people Serious Mental Illness 22% experiencing homelessness struggle with Substance Use Disorder 39% substance abuse, severe mental illness, HIV/AIDS 3% HIV/AIDS, and/or domestic violence.° Victim of Domestic 13% • Families can benefit from storage even Violence more so as it's extremely difficult for a parents) to carry and keep track of an entire families' belongings and year-round supplies (accounting for seasonality demands, like valuable winter clothing). Harvard Square Homeless Shelter A trial storage policy at the Harvard Square Homeless Shelter granted 49 locker compartments to clients on a seasonal basis between November 1st, 2017 and April 15th, 2018 and was broadly successful. • The compartments were used by 59 people, 5 of whom voluntarily gave up compartments after moving on to other housing situations. • Utilization averaged 77%, but was heavily skewed due to the ramp-up period from being the first program of its kind in the area. The average reached 87% after December 15, and was at 100% for the last 4 months. • Feedback was positive. • Abandonment of property in compartments was low. 3. Storage Models for People Experiencing Homelessness in North American Cities San Diego: Transitional Storage Center This storage facility has 304 storage lockers and about 130 wheeled bins (similar to curbside bins), each of which is less than 10 cubic feet. It served 530 total clients in 2016' and is operated by a non-profit called Think Dignity with funding from the City of San Diego and supplemented by fundraising. It is open weekday mornings and evenings and Saturday mornings year-round, and clients retain their bins until they choose to vacate them. Its average total expenses are $33,235/year.® This is the 4-year average from 2013 to 2016 due to fluctuations in expenses for capacity improvements. The figure may be lower 3

because not all staff time spent on the project was required to be reported. The service is in high demand and has a waiting list of over 100 people.? Vancouver: First United Church This storage facility offers 60 bins for residents of an affiliated shelter, 95 bins for people experiencing homelessness city-wide, and 50 spaces for shopping carts and larger luggage. The program allocates storage by weight and caps it at 50 pounds, but there is no time limit on storage. It also offers day-storage for people attending court, and this service was used by 120 individuals in 2016? As a whole, the facility served 690 total clients in 2016. It's operated by the First United Church and open seven days a week, morning and evening. First United connects clients to other programming, and its annual report notes that "storage continued to generate much interest from city leadership locally and abroad since it serves as a gateway toward accessing other services and programs. Denver: Iwo Pilot Programs Denver is currently piloting two approaches to storage. The first model, a multi-agency partnership, grants 30-60-day access to street-based storage lockers. '° Notably, these units cost $3,000 each, and only 10 have been built. Ray Lyall and other advocates for people experiencing homelessness have criticized the pace of the effort." The second model more closely resembles models in San Diego and Vancouver-the effort is a public-private partnership run by the Saint Francis Center, expanding on their existing storage program, to place an additional 200 units of storage on site at an employment office. These units supplement similar storage offered by the nonprofit at their Day Center, which allows clients to store one 30-gallon bag for a 30-day with an option to renew. 4

Los Angeles: The Bin This storage facility offers 1,462 storage bins.!? It is operated by a non-profit called Chrysalis which aims to support people in their transitions out of homelessness. A client named Monica Rodriguez reports that the service is important "Because our stuff isn't just junk. It's our important papers. Like Social Security papers. Or legal documents."I2 Emily Chin, the Operations Manager of the program, corroborates this, stating "Many of the clients have to use the service to keep their job. They have somewhere to store their property so they can go to work every day."2 Washington, DC District law requires the City government to fund storage for people for the first 90 days after they experience an eviction.' The program is managed by the Department of Housing and Community Development. Evictees are entitled to storage assistance that include "the moving a tenant's items out of the rental unit, loading, transportation, delivery to a storage facility, unloading at the facility, and paying the storage fees."4 Small units Large units Capital Operating Term Management cost (<50 gallons) (>50 gallons) cost 304 130 San Diego Perm. City/ Nonprofit $39,757 $137,978 Vancouver 50 155 Nonprofit Perm. UR UR Denver 10 200 Temp. City/ Nonprofit $99,000 $130,000 Los UR UR Perm. 1462 Nonprofit - Angeles 4. Feasibility in Cambridge While a greater feasibility study may be necessary for Cambridge's context, the City appears uniquely capable of providing this service effectively. In Cambridge, the city could lease storage in a privately managed facility for this purpose. • Cambridge's population of 517 individuals experiencing homelessness could be fully 5

accommodated by a single facility on the scale of successful models in San Diego and Vancouver or largely accommodated by additional units in existing service providers as piloted in Denver. • Based on these models, capital expenses would reach between $100,000 and $150,000 if the site were incorporated in an existing city property. This expense could be covered either through Participatory Budgeting or through an appropriation. • Some models could require additional staffing capacity. Two staffers working 35-hour weeks could cover 7am-9:30am and 4:30pm-7pm drop-in times with two staffers on shift at all times. At least one of these positions should be reserved for a person who has previously experienced homelessness, and staffing capacity from the Office of Workforce Development could support the efficient operation of any facility. References https://www.sparefoot.com/self-storage/news/1432-self-storage-industry-statistics/ 2http://www.aei.org/publication/new-us-homes-today-are-1000-square-feet-larger-than-in-1973-and- living-space-per-person-has-nearly-doubled/ 3 https://www.citylab.com/solutions/2014/08/cities-can-ease-homelessness-with-storage-units/379073/ 4 http://cambridgecoc.org/ 5 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/cambridgecitymassachusetts/PST045216 6 https://www.cambridgema.gov/~/media/Files/DHSP/Documents/2016/HomelessCensus.pdf?la=en http://www.thinkdignity.org/sites/default/files/documents/2016_AnnualReport.pdf 8 http://www.thinkdignity.org/annual-reports-financials 9 https://firstunited.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/16551-FU-2016-Annual-Report_Spread-002.pdf 10 https://www.denvergov.org/content/denvergov/en/mayors-offfice/newsroom/2017/city-increases- storage-options-for-people-experiencing-homelessn.html " https://www.denverpost.com/2017/05/23/denver-storage-unit-pilot-program-homeless/ 12 https://www.marketplace.org/2015/06/26/wealth-poverty/skid-row-storage-helps-put-order-lives- homeless 13 http://app.cfo.dc.gov/services/fiscal_impact/pdf/spring07/120707_1.pdf 14 http://www.dctenants.com/sites/default/files/D.C.%20Code%20%2042-3505.01.pdf 6

ATTACHMENTD CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL Jan Devereaux Vice Mayor August 15, 2018 Dear Councillors Kelley and Carlone and fellow members of the Ordinance Committee, First, I would like to thank the committee co-chairs for agreeing to my request to participate remotely in the August 16th hearing regarding the Pizzuto (New Street) zoning overlay petition. I am writing this in part so that I do not need to make a long speech during the hearing, which can be awkward to do over the phone. I am strongly opposed to this petition and have used my public blog to explain at length why I think it should be rejected: http://jandevereux.com/2018/08/10/how-should-new-street-evolve/ I want to emphasize that while Evolve has been an important part of my own daily health and wellness routine since it opened in 2010, my opposition is not motivated by a desire to "save the gym" or to prevent the club's landlord, the Pizzuto Family LP, from selling the property. Rather, I feel the site should be redeveloped for a more broadly beneficial use. Housing is the use the Envision Alewife planners and working group envision for the parcels included in the petition. Its proximity to the park and the Tobin/Vassal Lane School makes the site attractive for affordable housing. With a comprehensive planning study nearing completion, I simply cannot support what appears to be "spot zoning" to make help a developer improve the financial return on a project that undermines our planning goals for the area. Further, I would like to correct an inaccuracy in the CCD staff memo regarding the ownership of the parcel adjacent to Pizzuto/Evolve lot that was also included in the petition. The site next door (22-48 New St) is not owned by the petitioner. Nor was its owner consulted prior to having his land included in the re-zoning petition. In fact, none of the nearby property owners supports this petition. Given the collective opposition, 1 believe that a super-majority vote of the Council ultimately could be required to adopt this zoning. The City of Cambridge is also an abutter. I can think of no overriding public interest for us to allow a 44,000 sq. ft. lot next to our largest park to become a storage center rather than a bullding that would complement the park and enhance the burgeoning residential and mixed-use area around it. While I appreciate that the sports leagues that practice and play at Danehy Park could use space to store equipment, this is a longstanding need that the City could provide on CITY HALL, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139 TEL: [phone removed] FAX: 617.349,4287 | TTY/TDD: [phone removed] | EMAIL: jdevereaux@cambridgema.gov

Page 2 (continued) land we own (either in the parking lots at Danehy, or in the empty city lot at end of New St opposite the parking lot entrance). The many emails we are receiving from residents opposed to the proposed storage use highlight the hunger for spaces that bring together people of all ages and all walks of life. Planning for the City's future population growth in a changing climate must account for obvious need for such community gathering spaces, including the demonstrated demand for indoor exercise facilities. Not only is our climate cold in the winter, it is becoming increasingly hot in the summer and wetter throughout the year. Exercising outdoors will become less possible, even unhealthy, for many people. The popularity of Evolve as a relatively affordable fitness center that offers childcare, classes and training for all abilities has already shown the popular demand for such a place, even in an area where some of the new residential buildings provide small fitness rooms as amenities. Finally, I would like to comment on the desirability of what has been described as a "low-impact" use for this site. A storage center would house no one and would employ very few people in relation to its substantial cubic footprint. A largely windowless and featureless building of that scale and sited with minimal setbacks would not be low impact from an esthetic standpoint for any of its neighbors or passersby. Viewing impact only through the lens of a building's energy use or tratfic generated seems myopic to me. I want to reiterate that this is a large site within steps of the City's two largest public open space assets. Items stored in such a facility would not enjoy the proximity and views of Fresh Pond and the playing fields at Danehy, as people living or working in a different type of building there could. Thank you for hearing me out. Obviously, it is a topic I feel strongly about, and I hope you will agree that this zoning petition is not a step forward in our planning efforts. Sincerely, Jan Devereux Vice Mayor CITY HALL, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSEȚTS 02139 TEL: [phone removed] FAX: [phone removed] | TTY/TDD: [phone removed] | EMAIL: jdevereaux@cambridgema.gov

ATTACHMENT E The following e-mails were received concerning the impact to Evolve regarding the proposed zoning to New Street: Robert Kinerk, 21 Grozier Road Leslie Shelman, 55-61 Montgomery Street Condo Association Sara Suchman, 54 Concord Avenue Margaret Desjardins, 261 Lake View Avenue Joyce Singer Ann Sweeney, 87 Lake View Avenue Janet Randall, 64 Granville Road Veronica Leger, 92 Fayerweather Street Leah Beidler Elissa Ely Jenna Epstein-Santoyo Pamela Steiner, 28 Madison Street Constantine Chinoporos N. Murray Paul Beaulieu Manish Patel Keya and Tom Dannenbaum Susan Polit Stu Richards, 136 Fayerweather Street Christine Sahagian Armond Cohen, 9 Fenno Street Balazs Felesuti Sue Donaldson, 187 Harvey Street Sabrina Giese David F. Roger O'Sullivan, 1105 Massachusetts Avenue Dudne and Gail Breeze Sean Barnacoat Christopher J.Roof, 465 Concord Avenue Lordy Libaridian Matt DiFrancesco, Norris Street Peter Glick, 6 Donnell Street Peter Langer, 548 Huron Avenue Alex Dvorkin Marissa Levenson A resident at 25 Vassal Lane Mark Bohlman, 32 Copley Street Jason Goodman Deborah Peterson, Watertown, MA Rachel Henke, 17 Donnell Street 13

Claire Messud and James Wood, 214 Lexington Avenue Michele Sprengnether, 31 Chilton Street Suzanne B. Hopkins, 9 Corporal Burns Road Patty Palanza Paynter Leah Archibald Robert M. Camacho, 24 Corporal Burns Road Kim Griffis, 512 School Street, Belmont, MA Susan M. Sachs, 11 Appleton Road Maxwell A. Sherman, 115 Clifton Street Georgia Orcutt, 165 Upland Road Jonathan Lucas, 470 Franklin Street Vitally Ablavsky, 603 Concord Avenue Meredith Moore, 16 Alpine Street Nick Haddad Gautam Narayan David Peterson F. Preffer Rebecca Nuzzo Larry Childs, 22 Corporal Burns Road Joe Grasso Jennifer Craft, 30 Holworthy Place Aimee J. Moreno, Garden Street Lois Solomon, 12 Corporal Burns Road Anita M. Harris, 53 Fresh Pond Place Raquel Ortiz, 64 Reed Street Maria Rangers, 17 Normandy Terrace Ann Sweeney, on behalf of the Fresh Pond Residents' Alliance Rozann Kraus Purba Gupta, 87 Park Street Genri Hayward, 20 Traymore Street Jane Cole-Polz, Richdale Avenue Katie Irvin-Micheis, 700 Huron Avenue Mark S. Gerstel, 33 Kirkland Street Elaine McCarthy Zoe Anderson, 36 Walker Street Calvin Heyliger Roberto Loriga Elizabeth Henry, Fayerweather Street Adam Yousri, 12 Sherman Street Sarah Thomas, Belmont, MA Kristen Galfetti Leah Giles John Ravenal, Executive Director, deCordova Sculpture Park and Museum Marc Gedansky Sharlet Trilling Chris Vrotsos 14

Tony Piccione Carter Epstein, 1 Tremont Place, Somerville, MA Mark Boswell, 105 Walden Street Ann Barker Hannum, 9 Walden Mews Sharon Lozada, 208 Peari Street Alyssa Le Stefan G. Tuilis, MD Jennifer Smith, 69 Griswold Street Harvey Mendelsohn, 24 Bay State Road Joel Rosenzweig Dawn Peters, MD Thomas J. McGraw, 33 Moulton Street Marc D'Amours, 87 New Street Brian Folkins-Amador, 199 Pemberton Street Jana and Peter Dublin, 24 Chilton Street Felipe Andrade-Santos Jenny Mitchell, Belmont, MA Henrietta Keran, 25 Chilton Street 15

ATTACHMENT F Lopez, Donna From: Don Giller < donald. [email removed]> Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 10:14 PM To: City Council Lopez, Donna Subject: New Street rezoning proposal before Ordinance Committee 8/16 Dear Councilors, I urge you to override the proposal to rezone several parcels on New Street to accommodate long-term self-storage. This purpose is literally the antithesis of how Cambridge envisions its future in Fresh Pond. The last use that makes sense for the "new" New Street is a large, lifeless building that bring zero value to the neighborhood and ironically abuts the city's largest park in a neighborhood that's especially being developed for a residential lifestyle. Please convey your support for the evolving New Street neighborhood by voting to deny the rezoning petition. -Don Sent from my iPhone

Lopez, Donna ATTACHMENTA From: Hannum, Hurst <[email removed]> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 11:57 AM To: Lopez, Donna Subject: FW: New Street zoning exemption FYI Hurst HANNUM Professor of International Law Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Tufts University Medford, MA 02155 USA email hhannum@tufts,edu Selected publications available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/results.cfin From: Hannum, Hurst Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 10:28 To: council@cambridgema.gov Subject: New Street zoning exemption Dear Council Members, I am writing to object to the request to alter current zoning regulations to allow construction of a self-storage facility on New Street, on the property currently occupied by Evolve Fitness. As a resident of Cambridge for nearly 30 years who shops regularly at the Fresh Pond Mall, I have been pleased to see the gradual changes coming to the area, including badly needed residential housing. The sterile, deserted character of a storage facility is precisely the opposite of what is needed in the neighborhood, and it goes against the positive development trend in the surrounding blocks. Just as objectionable is the manner in which the Pizzuto petition has been filed, since I understand that it includes property not owned by the Pizzutos whose real owner actually opposes the requested variance. Zoning regulations are adopted for a reason, and variances should not be granted merely because someone wants to make more money. The Pizzuto petition does not offer a compelling argument for an exemption from current regulations, and the proposal itself would be an unwelcome step backward for a neighborhood that seems to be in the process of gradual, but steady, improvement. I urge the Council to reject the petition. Sincerely, Hurst Hannum 9 Walden Mews Cambridge 02140 Professor of International Law Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

Tufts University Medford, MA 02155 USA email [email removed] Selected publications available at http://papers.ssm.com/sol3/results.cfin 2

ATTACHMONTH Lopez, Donna From: prailler <[email removed]> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 5:19 PM To: City Council Cc: Lopez, Donna Subject: New Street Rezoning Proposal Dear Councilors, I was shocked to learn of a proposal to rezone several parcels on New Street to accommodate long-term self-storage. residential lifestyie. Please convey your support for the evolving New Street neighborhood by voting to deny the rezoning Thank you. Pamela R. Giller Pemberton St. resident

Lopez, Donna ATTACHMENT I From: Laura Lynch < [email removed]> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 8:29 AM To: City Counci! Cc: Lopez, Donna Subject: Zoning Petition for 52 New Street Dear Councilors, L urge you to deny the zoning petition change for the proposed development of 52 New Street. I urge you to protect the prospect of the neighborhood that is growing along New Street, the vision that was started with the leadership of Jan Devereux. Like Jan states: "a walkable and residential mixed use area" "with new, ADA accessible sidewalks, narrower travel lanes, painted bike lanes, buried power lines, and room for street trees". What Jan and the community began is the right vision for this area, giving residents access to a park, a shopping center, and public transit, also giving those of us outside New Street a vibrant area to come to. A lifeless storage facility does not fit this vision of a neighborhood, rather it cuts off that section into a space not used in daily life. Respectfully, Laura Lynch 105 Walden Street, Neighborhood Nine, North Porter Square, Cambridge

Lopez, Donna ATTACNMENT I From: Phil Terzis <[email removed]> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 8:57 AM To: City Council; Paden, Liza Cc: Lopez, Donna; [email removed] Subject: New Street Rezoning Dear City Council and Planning Board Members, I am writing on behalf of Acorn Holdings LLC. We are the developers and owners of 87 New Street, ("Park 87" apartments) and 77 New Street, ("Park 77" apartments). Park 87 consists of 54 existing residential apartments, and Park 77, which is under construction, will soon have 93 residential apartments. We at Acorn Holdings are opposed to the Zoning change proposed for New Street. When we began our first project on New Street in 2009, the area was overwhelmingly a light industrial area with poor pedestrian amenities. Much of the streetscape consisted of blank, windowless walls right at the sidewalk. The area felt somewhat unfriendly and unsafe. Since then, The Fresh Pond Residents' Alliance has worked tirelessly with the City of Cambridge to redesign the streetscape, provide safer pedestrian zones, bike lanes, striping, signage and curbing. The result is that the area no longer feels like a trucking zone, but more like a desirable residential neighborhood. The difference between 2009 and now is striking. The residents in our Park 87 building feel safer and more at home on the "new" New Street. We would certainly support increased density for an active use, but we feel that the "self storage" use runs counter to the City's goals for the area. A self storage facility would do little to enliven the streetscape, activate the park, or enhance the neighborhood. It would be a step backward and a missed opportunity for the site and for the City. It seems that in these days of "pods" and other mobile storage services, the actual location of a storage facility could be flexible and needn't necessarily be in an area that is increasingly residential in character and use. We feel that the City should encourage a more active, vibrant use for the New Street site. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Phil Terzis Phil Terzis AIA, LEED AP VP Project Planning Acorn Holdings LLC One Gateway Center, Suite 805 Newton, MA 02458 Office: [phone removed] x 202 Cell: [phone removed] www.acornh.com

Lopez, Donna ATTACHMENT K From: James Butler < [email removed]> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 8:00 PM To: Lopez, Donna Subject: New Street Overly comments James Butler Council members I've had the pleasure of being on the Envision Alewife Working Group for 16 meetings and have found the endeavor to be worthwhile, informative and hugely beneficial to the community. As a member of the Lyman Real Estate Trust, the opportunity to be involved in this process has allowed us to better understand and supporting our community by helping to build a framework for the long-term success of the area. However, I have recently noticed the New Street Overlay Zoning Amendment to accommodate a new self-storage center, contrary to the proposed residential/1st floor commercial districting for that property. I see this as a break with the zoning process and the stated aims of the planning department, and want to express my concern. Given our past experiences with redistricting, we feel it is important that the zoning process be fair and equitable and that all parties be held to the same standards in all situations. I would encourage you to vote against this redistricting proposal and to instead stand with the planning department's efforts to build a robust and community-driven plan. If you would like to discuss, please don't hesitate to reach out to me at [phone removed] James Butler -- James Butler Director of Marketing Cambridge Self Storage [email removed] [phone removed] 445 Concord Ave, Cambridge MA 02138