This November, Vote for Housing and Bikes

In Cambridge, two issues seem to dominate the political landscape — housing and bike safety.

Two weeks ago, two major advocacy groups — the Cambridge Citizens Coalition and Cambridge Bicycle Safety — endorsed slates of candidates for the Cambridge City Council election in November. While the CCC appeared to endorse candidates largely based on their stances on aspects of housing policy, candidates’ bike policy stances unsurprisingly dictated the CBS’ decisions.

We understand the divisive nature of the two issues, both in Cambridge and across the country. Nonetheless, for the sake of a better and more livable Cambridge, we urge our neighbors to support pro-housing and pro-bike policies.

Cambridge is a beautiful town. To many, it has also been a painfully expensive one. The housing that will be built after the end of exclusionary zoning should allow Cantabrigians of all stripes to call Cambridge home. The argument for reform is simple: multi-family zoning lets more families live in the same square footage, increasing the housing supply and driving down prices.

We’ve previously noted the need for such housing reform in Cambridge. Just last year, we called for the end of single-family zoning, and we welcome the February petition that offered increased opportunities for multi-family housing construction.

While the petition is sure to bring benefits, we would be remiss not to acknowledge the significantly reduced oversight in the housing development process brought on by the measure. The curtailment has fostered sincere criticisms of the policy change from residents who particularly value the character of their neighborhoods.

Yes, it is nice to live in a beautified Cambridge. But all things considered, the benefits of permitting multi-family housing city wide far outweigh the consequences of laissez faire development oversight. Cambridge should take every opportunity to expand its housing supply, and should the circumstances require it, the City Council can reconsider reintroducing stricter review post hoc.

On biking, the imperative is even more urgent. After three deaths in the last year alone, the stakes are a matter of life and death. The benefits to increased bike safety reforms, delivered in the form of added lanes and protective barriers, are myriad: Cycling is environmentally sustainable, affordable, and healthy. Yet it is difficult to encourage residents to bike when the city has failed to deliver the basic protections it promised. The total twenty-five miles of separated bike lanes remain unbuilt, their deadlines delayed, leaving cyclists exposed and vulnerable.

Of course, tradeoffs exist. Bike lanes can reduce already-scarce parking and have raised concerns among some businesses about car traffic. But these fears are overstated, and none outweigh the fundamental need for safe streets.

As students, our years in Cambridge are limited. But the problems of housing insecurity and unsafe roads are not. Cantabrigians should vote with their neighbors in mind — those who struggle to secure a home and those who bike daily in fear of injury.

Though only a few of us can claim Cambridge as our birthplace, the challenges it faces — from housing to bike safety — echo across communities nationwide. Cambridge is our home-away-from-home, and once we depart, it will serve the same function for future generations of Harvard students. We want this city to pursue policies that are not only fair and sensible, but that also reflect the values of safety, accessibility, and community. Come November, Cantabrigians have the chance to choose just that.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

Have a suggestion, question, or concern for The Crimson Editorial Board? Click here.