Ordinance committee backs limiting AHO height increases in Residence C1 outside corridors

The Cambridge City Ordinance Committee voted to report favorably a zoning petition that would limit additional height allowances under the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) in Residence C1 districts to parcels that are on AHO corridors or within AHO squares, effectively capping non-corridor C1 AHO projects at nine stories.

Vice Mayor McGovern, chairing the committee, opened the public hearing and said the petition includes cleanup edits and clarifications to Article 11 (section 11.207) of the Cambridge zoning ordinance. Jeff Roberts, director of zoning and development in the Community Development Department, introduced the staff team and turned the presentation over to Evan Spatrini, the senior manager for zoning and development.

Spatrini told the committee the AHO was amended in 2023 to create corridors and squares and to allow projects that preserve existing contiguous green area to exceed base height limits by up to three stories (subject to a cap and GFA constraints). He said the 2025 multifamily zoning changes raised base zoning heights across the city and that the petition before the committee adds a fourth condition to 11.207.5.2.1(e) to require that an AHO project in a Residence C1 district be located on an AHO corridor lot or within an AHO square to be eligible for the additional-height allowance.

"What the petition does is it adds a fourth condition ... which effectively means that AHO projects not in an AHO corridor, or square in the Residence 1 district are capped at 9 stories," Spatrini said during the presentation.

Members of the public raised objections. Marilee Meyer of Dana Street said the council—s February vote did not include the corridor/square caveat and called adding it afterward "misleading to the public." Heather Hoffman of Hurley Street said she and other residents heard a "blanket promise" that heights in the new C1 district would be limited without caveats and urged the council to honor that commitment.

Councilors pressed staff for technical clarifications about the open-space preservation incentive. Councilor Susie asked whether the preservation threshold is 5% or 30%; staff said the AHO incentive requires preserving at least 5% of the lot as contiguous green area to qualify for the additional three-story allowance, while the project still must meet the ordinance—s overall minimum open-space requirement (30%). Jeff Roberts said the 5% preserved-area threshold was intended to prevent trivial claims of preserved open space and to encourage redevelopment on existing building footprints rather than reconfiguring or removing existing greenspace.

Council discussion focused on corridor definitions and implementation tradeoffs. Several councilors said they support the petition as a way to clarify what was intended after the 2023 and 2025 changes, while noting some corridors vary in character and might merit more nuanced treatment in future work.

On a motion by Councilor Azim to accept the CDD edits and report the petition with a favorable recommendation to the City Council, the clerk recorded seven members in the affirmative and two absent; the motion passed. The packet noted the Planning Board held a public hearing on April 15 and staff expected to transmit a report to the council the following Monday.

The committee adjourned after the vote. The petition will move to the full City Council with the ordinance committee—s recommendation.