Cambridge residents oppose zoning amendment affecting religious institutions and housing density

The Cambridge Planning Board meeting held on May 20, 2025, focused on significant zoning amendments that could impact the city’s residential neighborhoods. The discussions primarily revolved around the implications of the proposed changes, particularly concerning the Dover Amendment, which has historically exempted Cambridge from certain zoning regulations related to religious and educational institutions.

The meeting began with a speaker highlighting the historical context of the Dover Amendment and its relevance to Cambridge's zoning laws. The speaker emphasized that the city was granted the authority to regulate institutional growth due to concerns about housing loss caused by institutional encroachment in residential areas. This concern remains pertinent as Cambridge continues to face a housing crisis.

Doris Jurison, a resident of the Cary Corner neighborhood, expressed her opposition to the proposed zoning amendment, arguing that it would allow for increased density and diminish the city’s ability to manage residential development effectively. She warned that the changes could lead to a loss of housing stock and greater institutional encroachment across Cambridge, undermining the health and safety of neighborhoods.

Marilee Meyer echoed these concerns, pointing out that the proposal could eliminate essential neighborhood notifications and oversight, potentially leading to oversized structures without proper regulation. She raised questions about the implications of the proposed changes on the city’s zoning process and the potential for increased institutional activity at the expense of residential units.

The board members engaged in discussions about the broader implications of the proposed amendments, questioning whether the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) would allow for any zoning regulations related to religious uses. The proponents of the amendment argued that while RLUIPA could override certain local regulations, it would still permit reasonable zoning practices that align with the principles of the Dover Amendment.

As the meeting concluded, the board acknowledged the need for further legal opinions regarding the proposed changes and their potential impact on Cambridge’s zoning landscape. The discussions underscored the ongoing tension between institutional growth and the preservation of residential neighborhoods, a challenge that Cambridge has grappled with for decades. The board plans to continue reviewing public comments and legal perspectives before making any decisions on the proposed zoning amendments.