An interesting thing happened at the City Council meeting on June 15th. Andrea Wilder of Arlington Street addressed the Councillors regarding the upzoning petition submitted by Lesley University. Ms. Wilder is concerned about proposed changes to the parcel of land containing the North Prospect Church at 1801 Massachusetts Avenue, increased density, local businesses and the character of her neighborhood. Among other things, Ms. Wilder’s street has a view that includes the historic church. The university wants to replace that view with the modern facade of a relocated Art Institute of Boston.

Ms, Wilder said she wanted her Councillors to help preserve and protect the neighborhoods of Cambridge. Then she mentioned a petition that she and some neighbors had circulated. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5 contains the following clause:

No zoning ordinance or by-law or amendment thereto shall be adopted or changed except by a two-thirds vote of all the members of the town council, or of the city council where there is a commission form of government or a single branch, or of each branch where there are two branches, or by a two-thirds vote of a town meeting; provided, however, that if in a city or town with a council of fewer than twenty-five members there is filed with the clerk prior to final action by the council a written protest against such change, stating the reasons duly signed by owners of twenty per cent or more of the area of the land proposed to be included in such change or of the area of the land immediately adjacent extending three hundred feet therefrom, no such change of any such ordinance shall be adopted except by a three-fourths vote of all members.

Ms. Wilder said that her petition in opposition was signed by the owners of at least twenty percent of the land within three hundred feet of the area to be affected by passage of this zoning change. According to this clause, it should now require three quarters of the Council to vote in favor of the zoning change in order for it to be adopted. That would be seven out of nine instead of the usual six. I don’t know if the neighbors’ petition has been filed with the City Clerk yet.

I am not taking a for or against position on this, but there are provisions in it that I do object to, namely the exclusion of any retail space in new buildings within the overlay district shown on the map from the Gross Floor Area as counted for zoning purposes. If the Councillors want to give bonus density it is their right. However, excluding it in this way makes a mockery of the zoning ordinance, makes discussion of the issues more complicated, and produces misleading density figures. It is a made-to-order loophole and a very poor way to write legislation.