Make your own free website on

Citywide Growth Management Advisory Committee

Meeting Notes - May 6, 1998

Attendance: List attached

Staff: S. Dash, R. Boothe,

Consultants: L. Bluestone, P. Herr

Stuart Dash presented to the committee the schedule for the Residential Open Space Rezoning Petition. The major topic of discussion for this meeting was review of the draft publication to be distributed to the public. Phil Herr raised the question regarding the title used on page 3, "Are You Concerned About Backyard Development?" and suggested the title should be changed; an example was "Should We Prevent Parking & Paving In Backyards?". It was also suggested that the drawings of Illustrative Issues B & C should have headings. In B of Illustrative Issues the word "Development" should be replaced with "Units". There was much discussion around the placement of articles on page 1 and the reworking of the layout. The front page of the publication should be re-worked all articles should be transferred to the back page except for - Residential District Open Space and Backyard Development.

Some members of the Committee expressed an interest in including a citywide map that shows what residential areas are under consideration. The question was raised as to whether a statement should be included such as that "under current zoning, Community Development estimates there are number of dwelling units that can be built".

suggesting a presentation should be made by Phil Herr to explain basic issues.

Should the Committee consider mailing to all non-subscribers of the newspaper? Distribution to the schools was thought to be a good idea.

There was concern expressed that this Committee is an advocacy group, and that the publication misses that point. Clarification from committee members that this is not the role of the committee, it is intended to help the public understand the issue not to serve as an advocate one way or another. Another member stated that advocacy was not the committee’s charge; rather it is an idea group which develops options as a whole, than recommends to the Planning Board. It is not the goal of the committee to reach conclusions.

Should there be a short recap of what the Growth Management Rezoning Committee proposed? No.

Phil Herr noted that this process is starting from the position that there is a problem, let’s go out to address it.

Committee members strongly felt that a Mission Statement is needed, to have a clear understanding of what this group is about. it is important to have records of what we have done, so that it can be built upon. It was noted that the City Council will act on this in September, something will be done.


A committee member felt that it needs to be stated very clearly in the publication that any increase in open space requirement may be in conflict with affordable housing.


Any mission statement should include the Council Order.

Facts not stated here, include 50-100 word summary of what was learned, explain why it is structures this way. Nature of study key conclusions.

Note that it’s the City’s first use of the GIS mapping system in publication.

The Committee reviewed the scheduled of events and made modifications.

A Committee member requested that the committee move to the next phase at the end of June.

Clarification was requested as to the Planning Board’s role. The committee will supply the Planning Board options ranges - alternatives to consider, and also will make a recommendation. In the report to the Planning Board, include what the committee did, outreach efforts, and review analysis.

Outreach efforts that were discussed included:

There are two full committee meetings on 5/21 and 6/3. The agenda for these meetings should deal with the format for the large public meeting to be scheduled during the week of June 8th. It was noted that the Library Committee has a large meeting scheduled for June 11th and we should try to avoid a conflict. The meeting will be held at the Cambridge Senior Center, 806 Massachusetts Avenue.

Ideas generated for the meeting: