Cambridge Is Nearing a Massive Zoning Overhaul. Here’s What That Means.

Cambridge officials are considering a dramatic change to the city’s zoning code in an effort to spur housing development and address what local politicians and advocates have described as a severe and far-reaching housing shortage.

The proposal would fully eliminate single-family zoning across the city, instead allowing developers to construct apartment buildings and condominiums of up to six stories anywhere in Cambridge. Currently, almost one-third of residential land in Cambridge only allows for one- or two-family homes.

If Cambridge moves forward with the proposal, it would be among the most ambitious zoning reforms approved in any American city.

Local officials have framed the change as an antidote to the city’s housing crisis, granting developers more freedom to pursue larger-scale projects containing many more apartments. They have also said low density zoning is a relic of exclusionary and racist housing policies that barred residents of color and low-income residents from parts of the city.

But the rezoning has met fierce blowback from some residents, who said the city has been unclear about what the proposal entails and worried that it will permanently disfigure Cambridge’s urban fabric. It has quickly become one of the most hot-button issues facing the City Council, which is expected to take a final vote on the proposal in the coming months.

“We all realize that we need to build more housing and affordable housing. I think we’re unified in that,” said City Councilor Catherine “Cathie” Zusy in a November meeting of the Council’s Ordinance Committee.

“The question is how to do it in a way that is in keeping with our city and less destructive to our city,” she added.

As the Council draws nearer to the crucial vote, The Crimson broke down the rezoning to explain what it means for Cambridge, and why, exactly, it has generated such controversy.

What Does the Rezoning Entail?

Nearly one-third of residential land in Cambridge is zoned for single- and two-family housing, significantly limiting the number of units that could be developed in a large part of the city. For developers to exceed these limits, they are required to secure special permission from the city in a long and often contentious process.

The zoning proposal on the table would eliminate these limits, with the goal of allowing and promoting the development of more multifamily housing — buildings with at least three units — across Cambridge. Though multifamily developments currently comprise only 35 percent of all residential buildings in Cambridge, they contain nearly 80 percent of the city’s total housing units.

In addition to allowing multifamily developments in any area of the city, the rezoning would significantly loosen height restrictions, letting buildings stretch up to six stories at a 75-foot height limit. Advocates say relaxing zoning regulations is crucial to incentivizing more housing development.

“We are in the midst of a nationwide housing crisis driven mostly by the fact that we’re just not building enough housing, largely due to our restrictive zoning laws,” said Casey Szilagyi at a December Committee meeting.

22 and 24 Inman Street Street is a multi-family home located in Cambridge. By Jina H. Choe

In a September interview, Harvard Economics professor Jason Furman ’99, a former chair of the Council of Economics Advisors under President Barack Obama, said the proposal comes amid an increased nationwide focus on housing availability.

“You’re seeing more YIMBY enthusiasm from Democrats nationwide and just an increased focus on supply, and you can’t have supply without building, and you can’t have building without zoning reform,” Furman said.

But increasing the size of developments without the need for special permission from the city has set off alarm bells for some residents, who say the city needs to better regulate the size and style of new buildings.

“I think design review is an essential part of the process, both for residents, for zoning administrators, and for the planning department to each have a say in what is built,” said John LaFreniere, who has worked as an architect in Cambridge for more than 30 years.

Though fewer developments would have to file for a special permit, Community Development Department Zoning Director Jeff Roberts stressed that there will still be project oversight from the city under the proposed zoning.

“I think there’s a misconception that everything that gets built is subject to design review, which usually it’s not,” Roberts said, adding that many often conflate having to apply for a special permit from the city with “design review.”

Instead, developments will fall under the CDD’s project review process, which requires an advisory development consultation with city staff.

The proposal would also loosen a number of other requirements — including the amount of space between a building and its property line — to allow for “rowhouse” style developments. Instead, space between buildings would be regulated by building and fire codes.

How Will It Impact Cambridge?

In interviews, city officials said they project that the change will lead to roughly 1,600 new units by 2030. That projection amounts to a 2.76 percent increase to the city’s total housing units, which currently number roughly 58,000.

“It’s a small fraction of our total housing stocks, so I think that to put that in context is really important for folks,” said CDD Chief of Planning Strategy Melissa Peters.

But Peters acknowledged that the city’s estimates are somewhat shaky, and that the true impact depends on where developers choose to buy land and break ground.

“It’s difficult to know where that will be and in what neighborhoods and how fast that will happen, but that is our estimate to give people an idea of the impact.” she said.

Unlike Cambridge’s last zoning overhaul — a policy, known as the Affordable Housing Overlay, allowing for even taller buildings containing only affordable housing — this change makes no explicit mention of affordability.

Still, the city’s zoning code requires all developments with at least 1o units to set aside a fraction for income-restricted affordable housing.

City staff said they are trying to strike a balance between allowing for market-rate developments, which tend to be far more profitable, while still incentivizing developers to build affordable housing under the AHO.

Wendell Street is located in Cambridge. Local residents sparred over a proposed eight-story affordable housing development during a community meeting in November 2024. By Ellen P. Cassidy

“As we have worked on developing the zoning for multifamily housing that is encouraging market rate development, we have tried really hard to make sure that we are not making things problematic for AHO developments,” said Assistant City Manager Iram Farooq.

Why Are Some Residents So Upset?

Though Cambridge residents agree for the most part that the city needs more housing, the proposal has been met with fiery resistance from some quarters, who’ve said in lengthy public meetings that the city is moving too fast without considering the rezoning’s impact.

Chief among their concerns is the fear that indiscriminately allowing six-story buildings anywhere in Cambridge would disrupt the low-density character of much of the city.

“Everybody will agree that maybe we should have some multifamily housing everywhere, but it should fit the character of the neighborhood,” said John Hanratty, a member of Cambridge Voters for Good Government, a group that has largely voiced opposition to the zoning.

But Justin N. Saif ’99, a co-chair of pro-housing advocacy group A Better Cambridge, said it was a small price to pay to address the city’s housing crunch.

“​​I think a little bit of inconvenience or not wanting to see a tall building pales in comparison to the importance of Cambridge families having stable housing,” Saif said.

Other local advocates have raised concerns that the proposal — rather than increasing and preserving specifically affordable housing — would displace residents living in market-rate housing whose rents happen to be affordable for a range of incomes. Many of these units exist in smaller buildings, often in neighborhoods that are currently zoned for single- and two-family.

“The biggest concern that we have is that it would encourage tearing down older, existing, so-called ‘naturally occurring’ affordable housing,” said Lee Farris, president of the Cambridge Residents’ Alliance.

Jeremey Mendelson, a member of the Boston Democratic Socialist of America’s Cambridge Working Group, echoed this sentiment, stressing that there needs to be increased support for residents who are displaced as a result of this zoning.

“Let’s say you tear down a triple decker, and there’s three families living there. Then you build a building that is going to have more than three units,” Mendelsen said, “But those people, what happens to those people?”

But though the city has not projected the proposal’s impact on naturally occurring affordable units, officials say that these units will not remain affordable forever.

“Those properties will eventually turn over, and high housing costs provide an incentive for developers and investors to renovate and reposition this housing at market rates without affordability protections,” CDD staff wrote in a Frequently Asked Questions document, noting that these units have continued to decline.

What’s Next?

The rezoning, which has already been discussed in a series of public meetings, still has to jump through several hoops before it is finalized.

The Cambridge Planning Board will convene on Dec. 17, where it is expected to vote on a nonbinding recommendation to give to the City Council. In previous meetings — despite substantial pushback from some attendees — the board members seemed tentatively sympathetic towards the proposal.

The City Council’s Ordinance Committee met Wednesday, where public comments skewed positive. The committee will discuss the proposals and residents’ feedback at a follow-up meeting on Dec. 19

The Council has until Feb. 17, 2025, to take a final vote on the proposal.

—Staff writer Laurel M. Shugart can be reached at laurel.shugart@thecrimson.com. Follow them on X @laurelmshugart or on Threads @laurel.shugart.

—Staff writer Grace E. Yoon can be reached at grace.yoon@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @graceunkyoon.