Rejections and cuts for proposed affordable housing plans in Cambridge

EDITOR’S NOTE: 570 NewsRadio previously reported that council had approved the plans, but in actuality, council solely approved a motion to receive the report itself.

In a proposal that would have seen city-owned lands in Cambridge developed for future affordable housing projects, city council has rejected and made considerable reductions to the overall plans, cutting out close to 150 potential future affordable units.

The meeting was held Tuesday evening as Cambridge City Council met to discuss various projects, including one focused on city-owned sites and affordable housing concepts. This comes following initial property reports being submitted back in August of 2020, with an official city-owned land report being submitted the next year in April of 2021.

The project was originally designed to aid in the city’s current push for additional affordable housing options, with the proposal working to get construction companies faster access to lands to develop their properties.

“Staff have been approached recently by a developer, in the affordable space, and asked why the City doesn’t provide more “shovel ready” land for affordable developments,” said Matthew Blevins, Senior Planner of Reurbanization with the City of Cambridge in a report submitted to council. “Staff believe that pre-zoning land for partners is the most efficient path.”

The four properties introduced during the presentation included 10 Ethel St., 1580 Queenston Rd., 0 Grand Ridge Dr., and 25 Chalmers St.

The presentation also discussed properties that were considered during the planning process, but would no longer be considered due to restraints making the lands too challenging to develop, this includes both 0 Bishop Street North and 0 Dando Avenue. Each planned property included multiple potential options for housing developments ranging from low, medium, and high-density potential.

One of the properties which was questioned by councillors prior to any voting was 25 Chalmers Street, which currently has a pool located on the premises, with councillors asking what would happen to the current building. Similar to the other lands, multiple considerations were provided for its potential.

“One involves leaving the pool essentially as-is and building the affordable units. The other shows an option where a new pool or community facility could be constructed within a later-phase building.”

While none of the specific plans that were pitched for the properties are official, Blevins says the presentation was given to create the initial push to develop the lands before developer involvement.

“What staff are trying to do is help council understand clearly what the implications could be for applications coming forward as we work towards, not only our housing accelerator targets but also our housing pledge targets.”

After the presentation was given, council had a brief recess, before returning with separate motions to differentiate the city-owned lands from one another. This was done in order to vote on each property individually rather than as a collective group.

The results for the presented motions include:

• 10 Ethel St.: Plans were rejected, with an 8-1 vote in favour of denying the motion. The lands are now set to be sold.
• 1580 Queenston Rd.: Plans were rejected, with an 8-1 vote in favour of denying the motion. Nothing further will be done with the lands.
• 25 Chalmers St.: Plans have been reduced, with an 8-1 vote in favour of the changes. Plans have been reduced from 9-storeys of affordable housing down to 4 storeys.
• 0 Grandbridge Dr.: Plans were approved, with a 9-0 vote in favour of approving the motion.

The lone councillor who voted in favour of advocating for the affordable housing plans was Ward 7 Councillor Scott Hamilton, who was the only councillor to vote against any of the presented motions. The decisions made by council to reject and make reductions to the proposal means close 150 possible future affordable housing units will no longer be possible.

The two projects approved can now officially move forward, with city staff being able to develop further recommendations for the lands and potential projects for them, including the ability to now initiate public meetings to receive feedback. Cambridge city council would still need to approve the projects themselves once the final plans are brought forward in the future.

The full details on the proposals given to council, along with the presented concepts for affordable housing options, can be found thorugh the Cambridge City Council website.

---