Aerial View Of Harvard Square In Cambridge, Massachusetts

The YIMBY movement has a major win in Cambridge, even as many neighbors cry foul

Eliminating single-family zoning was a massive win for those who cheer: "Yes in My Backyard!" Still, skeptics abound.

 

Spencer Buell February 15th, 2025, 3:48 PM

Listen

CAMBRIDGE — It was a great night to be a YIMBY.

 

Spirits were high here after dark as officials passed a sweeping new ordinance that will end single-family zoning in the city and, its extremely enthusiastic backers say, point a firehose of developer money at the city’s most burning need: new housing in one of the priciest places in the world.

 

It was one of the “Yes in My Backyard” movement’s most ambitious projects to date, one backers hope can trigger a deregulatory spree in other cities big enough to put a dent in a housing market that has spiraled upward and out of control. It was also one of its most controversial, greeted with skepticism by those who see this approach as a massive giveaway to private real estate and doubt it can actually make Cambridge, already one of the densest places in the state, more affordable.

 

 

At City Hall, there were the young YIMBYs, like those among the 10 Harvard students from a group called the Harvard Undergraduate Urban Sustainability Lab, or HUUSL (pronounced like “hustle”), who had come to watch the vote.

 

There were casual YIMBYs who called in to say they hoped new housing would make it easier to get a Cambridge apartment or keep rents from spiking every year.

 

And there were the more hardcore YIMBYs, like the chatty and zealous members of A Better Cambridge, the city’s most visible and best organized YIMBY group that has pushed, very hard, to make it easier for developers to build bigger.

 

 

YIMBYs of all stripes.

 

“The door has been opened,” said Fred Watts, a 33-year-old data scientist who lives in Kendall Square, and who came to City Hall to see the ordinance passed. “There’s going to be a hundred city councils hopefully seeing our demonstration saying this is possible and worthwhile.”

 

The YIMBYs are coming, to the suburbs

 

 

The ordinance, which has been tweaked over many months, is something of a compromise. It will allow developers to build six-story residential buildings citywide, including in places where only single-family homes had been allowed, without needing a special permit. But they can do so only if they agree to allot 20 percent of the units in them for “affordable” housing. Otherwise they can build up to four stories.

 

Other rules were added during months of debate, including minimum amounts of green space needed in the developments, and a rule that six stories can only be built under the law on lots that are at least 5,000 square feet.

 

A hotly debated effort among councilors earlier this year to allow only three stories, and an additional three only if developers added the “affordable” units, failed by a one-vote margin in January.

 

 

Last week’s version passed 8-1. Only Councilor Catherine Zusy opposed it, calling it a “recipe for random development at the whim of developers.”

 

Debate over the sweeping zoning reform, which all sides agree is likely to set in motion a major change in the cityscape, had been contentious, even as it played out largely among the most passionate advocates on either side. (Even city councilors who voted to pass the ordinance lamented that too few low-income residents had been consulted, or even knew, about the zoning-reform options on the table.)

 

Some of the critics feared giving developers this much freedom to build would do little to make Cambridge more affordable, and might only drive home and apartment prices higher, while lining the pockets of investors or people who already own homes.

 

Residents evacuated Cambridge condo building amid structural issues. Now they’re worried it may have to be demolished.

 

“It hurts my heart when I hear people who are renting say they want this proposal to maintain their rent,” said Sara Nelson, a 52-year-old Cambridge resident who is a pediatrician in Chelsea and works with families who are being battered by the housing crisis.

 

“It’s not realistic. It’s a dream.”

 

She has tried to convince officials to use public funds to, for example, offer zero-interest loans to low-income families looking to buy in the city or pay to build affordable housing directly.

 

“Prices aren’t going to go down unless there is a non-market influence put into it,” Nelson said, adding, with a laugh, “My family thinks I’m a socialist, but that’s OK.”

 

To others, the solution offered by loosening zoning was just common sense.

 

Emma Bouton, 27, said she felt lucky to have found an apartment at all in Cambridge when she moved into her unit near Fresh Pond last summer, given how competitive the market is.

 

She’s getting married this year, and thinking about raising a family here, but can’t imagine doing so with rents rising every year and too few less-expensive options nearby. Walking her dog in the neighborhood, she has been struck by the number of big lots occupied by only one home.

 

“I just think about what it would mean to be able to have a multi-story apartment building there,” Bouton said. “What would it mean for more families to be able to live in Cambridge and have more supply bring the cost down for all the renters here?”

 

The vote last week had come with somewhat of a deadline, as failure to pass it might have meant having to wait months to try again.

 

Councilor Patricia Nolan said, before the meeting started, that she thought there was still more room to refine it, but that there was enough momentum, and pressure from the YIMBY movement, that waiting longer to tweak the rules wasn’t feasible.

 

“I am really excited and thrilled that we’re going to do something. It’s just unfortunate it’s not the best proposal that we had on the table,” she said.

 

What’s next for the Cambridge Brewing Co. brand after brewpub’s last call?

 

As the votes came in, a crowd of YIMBYs in a gallery viewing area leaned over a railing to record it on their phones. There was halting applause and a single, “Woo!”

 

An after-party was held across the street, at 730 Tavern, although it hadn’t been planned ahead of time. Actually the whole thing had been “organized by private developers,” one of the revelers said, grinning.

 

It was a joke, but distrust in the industry and a belief that the YIMBY movement overall is too much in the thrall of real estate investors has been at the center of the debate here as the movement began zeroing in on Cambridge.

 

Clara Wellons was one of those skeptics.

 

Born 38 years ago in a house on Green Street in Cambridge — literally in the house, as her mom favored a home-birth — she said she and her parents have for her whole life been battling with what she described as rapacious building developers intent on turning Cambridge into a hub for luxury high-rises. She worried about neighbors having less say in what gets built and where that might lead.

 

“What I see happening to not just my neighborhood, but to Cambridge, is Kendall Square,” Wellons said, referring to a neighborhood where large glass towers have sprouted. “It’s kind of a mini-New York City. I love New York, but my parents came to Cambridge to have a family. They wanted to have clean air and a healthy environment.”

 

To the YIMBYs, though, many concerns about the law during its drafting were at best misguided, or at worst, disingenuous.

 

“They’re always coming up with arguments that at the end of the day are meant to just stop anything from happening,” said Dan Eisner, a Cambridge resident who strongly supported the up-zoning push.

 

“People have this inherent distrust of developers. You see that in places like Cambridge because there’s this anti-business mentality in progressive communities. They don’t trust people who make a lot of money,” Eisner said. “They don’t want to see developers make money. Well, that’s kind of what makes the world go round.”

Done