Cambridge Under Construction
I walked to the gym the other day, a pleasant walk of 1-1/2 miles or so along residential streets. I counted eleven houses under renovation. Not just homeowners getting a new furnace, landscaping, or applying coat of paint. Major renovations, many of them gut jobs. This phenomenal amount of construction activity speaks of the spring weather. But also, in this time of economic uncertainty and looming recession, to the peculiar and fortunate nature of Cambridge.
A hundred years ago, Cambridge was another Massachusetts industrial town. The home base of Lever Brothers soap and lots of candy manufacturers. Squirrel Brand. Necco wafers. Haviland thin mints. Cambridge whipped up all sorts of sweets. Sure, Harvard was always here and MIT arrived in 1916, so there was the pointy-headed element. But working-class folks far outnumbered academics.
World War II came and went. MIT became a scientific juggernaut. Harvard became the pinnacle of collegiate cache. But Cambridge itself remained doughty. American culture was enamoured by the suburban shift out of the gritty city, and the disincentives of rent control kept housing stock border-line dilapidated. In the 1960’s, an intrepid urbanite could pick up a 2- or 3-family house in Cambridge for ten grand. Maybe less.
In the 1990’s, rent control got the boot, city living became cool again, and housing prices started to climb. Fast. That acceleration continues, independent of dot.com bust, Great Recession, or Trumpian panic. So many more people want to live in Cambridge than our seven-square miles can contain. Especially since Harvard and MIT—the reason so many folks want to live here—own 20% of the city.
Today, just under 120,000 people live in Cambridge’s 60,000 residential units. 8,600 of them are permanently affordable in some way. The rest is very pricey real estate. Which is both a point of pride and an issue of concern.
No matter how one defines, “progressive” Cambridge covets the title. The city fancies itself having an outsize influence on the rest of the world. Therefore, it’s all well and good that Cambridge is such a great place to life that people are willing to pay up to $1000 per square foot to own a piece of it. But it’s embarrassing that Cambridge has become a poster child for how real estate prices highlight society’s inequalities. Aside from the 8,600 low- and moderate-income families who live in the city, and a smattering of old timers who hand their houses down to their kids, the rest of us are basically rich. House rich, at the very least.
Last month the Cambridge City Council adopted the most “progressive” zoning in the US. I set off the term in quotes because a hundred years ago, when zoning was implemented throughout much of the US, so-called progressive zoning partitioned our cities into discrete areas of density and function, whereas today, progressive zoning means just the opposite. Cambridge got rid of one- two- and three- family zoning designations and allows, by right, anyone to build up to a four-story residential building (six stories if the lot is over 5000 square feet and the units are 100% affordable.) There are some set-back and open space parameters, but no parking requirements. In theory, this will stimulate residential development, supply will increase, maybe even prices will float down. In fact, the new zoning will create at least some more affordable housing (there’s a 20% affordable requirement for any projects over 10 units) and likely a lot more private housing. I’m in favor this change because, as a city blessed with excellent infrastructure and oodles of jobs, making Cambridge denser, more pedestrian, is the sustainable thing to do.
Today, I walk along our city streets and see lots of money poured into top tier residences. The question remains: what kind of construction will we see two years from now? Will the new zoning code create enough incentive to alter the exclusive nature of Cambridge’s private housing stock, or will we just continue to get more high-end projects? Will incentives be enough for builders to tear down our traditional 2- and 3- family houses and replace them with small apartment buildings? Will developers aggregate lots and build even larger buildings? We don’t know.
One thing that I know for sure. Zoning notwithstanding, there will still be lots of construction in Cambridge. The place is too desirable to stand still.
