By Katie Gradowski

(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries and letters to the Editor of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)

Union Square zoning passed in a 12:05 a.m, 9-to-1 vote on June 9^th. The vote ended a process that started nearly a year ago, including back-to-back midnight sessions over the previous two weeks as the BOA struggled to meet the covenant deadline. Now signed, US2 can begin the MEPA process and apply for a Coordinated Special Development Permit under the new zoning.

BOA goes to bat for the community

Big picture, the zoning review was a giant exercise in constituent services. The BOA spent the last two weeks taking a laundry list of concerns — revised definitions of building height, clarified definitions for green and commercial spaces, stronger language around affordable housing, notification standards, green roofs — and to the best of its ability, writing them into zoning.

It’s a testament to how badly the administration wanted zoning passed that many of these amendments went in without question.

The zoning overlay, as it stands, is a somewhat ridiculous document, specified down to the type of mulch that is allowed and placement of mechanicals on roofs. It’s a testament to the diligence of the BOA — and to the absurdity of the whole process — that they managed to craft a minimally acceptable zoning document on the face of some pretty flawed premises.

The final version went through dozens of amendments before it was signed.

“I have never seen zoning done like this”

This sentiment was echoed over and over again in conversations between those of us trying to read and parse this document. As it stands right now, this is an absurdly specific document.

Why so specific? Because it’s clear at this point that this zoning is being written for a set developer (we knew this, obviously) around a set plan. On the second point, I think a lot of people were surprised to see how specific that plan seems to be, given that the zoning was adapted to the plan rather than setting the plan’s parameters.

What we are doing, quite simply, is spot zoning an entire district. It seems clear at this point that the CDSP community meetings will be mostly window dressing, since US2 presumably will not update their vision if they have to go back to the Board of Aldermen to get it rezoned for a new plan. Foreseeing this, the Board of Aldermen took it upon themselves to write as many individual recommendations into zoning as they possibly could.

The result is a deeply weird document, reflective of community needs while remaining totally backwards in its founding premises.

Reaching the limits of the possible

US2 presented their updated plan on May 2^nd. Over the following thirty-eight days, it became clear that US2 had no plans to meaningfully revise either the green / open space percentages or the commercial phasing requirements, two big-picture points that have become rallying points for advocates across the board. Likewise, it became clear as the days wore on that there were no plans to update funding contributions, including funding for a Community Benefits Agreement.

Many of the late-stage amendments seemed designed to push the limits of the possible. On the second to last night Katjana Ballantyne proposed updating the office/R&D portion to 50 percent. The amendment was a follow-up to an earlier proposal, Bill White’s Mandatory Mixed Use Ratio (MMUR), which proposed raising the commercial residential split from 60/40 to 68/32 in favor of more commercial, but was dropped early in the process.

Katjana’s amendment would have required 50 percent office/R&D/design and 50 percent “everything else” (grouping residential, retail, and non-office uses and letting the developer figure out the rest). “We need more commercial,” she said pointedly.

To my mind, Katjana’s proposal was important not because of the proposed percentages, but because it attempted to challenge US2 to offer a vision — any vision — that showed that they were willing to come up with multiple drafts of a development plan. OSPCD argued that in order to do 50% commercial they would have to revise the plan to get rid of the hotel and lose 31 units of affordable housing.

Matt McLaughlin offered a similar amendment to push the open space numbers up to 30%, a point which advocates have been pushing almost since the beginning but which likewise fell by the wayside when it became clear that US2 wasn’t on board.

Both of these were last-ditch efforts to address big-picture issues that US2 has refused to budge on. Neither proposal passed, in part because the numbers would not have squared with what US2 is currently planning to build.

The role of the covenant

Don’t pass zoning until the CBA is funded. Don’t pass zoning without meaningful phasing guarantees. Don’t pass zoning without built-in sustainability requirements. Don’t pass zoning until a community center is adequately funded. Don’t pass zoning without revising the contributions.

Over the past two weeks dozens of people — self included — reached out to the Board of Aldermen and asked them not to pass zoning until the covenant could be meaningfully revised. Many of these changes could have been written into the covenant, but would have required US2 to substantially revise their plan and reengage with the community in a real way on proposed benefits. That didn’t happen.

As it stands right now, the covenant does not go far enough to meaningfully address displacement, and the newly added Section 29 strictly limits efforts that can be made in future. It’s not surprising that the BOA didn’t hold up the zoning for this. Still, it’s disappointing that there wasn’t more movement on the covenant, given the scope of opposition from various quarters.

To their credit, the Board of Aldermen went to great lengths to push US2 in the final meetings, proposing a series of amendments that have, in fact, made the document better. It still feels like a leap into the abyss.

What comes next?

At the end of the day, the threat of losing the $13.5 million MassWorks grant, the commercial tenant, and the impending deadline of budget season proved too much. The much amended zoning passed 9–1, creating winners and losers. Matt McLaughlin was the lone aldermanic hold-out. It’s a testament that the BOA can come out looking this good after approving a document with so many open commits.

“I’m not thrilled with this outcome, to be honest,” said Mark Niedergang on the final night. “This is minimally adequate. I can’t say I’m delighted and thrilled, but I’m minimally satisfied.” A minimally adequate document, and now the baseline for development in Union Square.

But then, politics is the art of compromise. The next battle will come soon enough, when the Comprehensive Zoning Overhaul goes before the Board of Aldermen this fall. In the meantime, get some sleep, thank your Aldermen, send a postcard to OSPCD, and get yourselves ready for budget season.