Giant Route 2 Apartment building sign going up on Route 2
Meeting February 18th, Community Development Senior Center

Send letters: Lpaden@cambridgema.us

Dear Ms. Paden or Dear Chairman Hugh Russell, Cambridge Planning Board, please transmit this to members of the Planning Board. BCC: c.burchardohare@att.net

FAR and Carol appeal to the following for letters before this Friday:

Calling Ward 9, North Cambridge Stabilization, Friends of the Mystic, Sustainable Arlington, Sustainable Belmont, neighborhood groups in North Cambridge:

Tenants may or may not be flocking to the new gigantic 230 unit residential building, who is represented by Rich McKinnon, and has a similar sized building on Cambridge Park Drive. So, a giant lit Route 2 sign proposal setting a serious pollution precedent is going to Community Development agenda on the 18th to speak about its advantages to the city. Surely Community Development will do its job to deny the variance request which sets a 20 foot ground limit and not 50 feet which is the request. Small signs could be permitted.

The Building Identification Sign Amendment was passed in 2010 by 18,000 in a petition referendum by citizens of Cambridge. Why would we go through this again? A reasonably sized ground sign noting its existence should be sufficient.

Over the top requests often lead to acceptance of an undesirable situation which is signage to distract drivers, light up the Reservation area against the woodcock nesting and other bird life that frequents the Thorndike Field and Alewife Reservation area. Even kestrel boxes are there.

Write to Huge Russell of the Planning Board, a very very long time CD leader who can determine the future of the city and has been permitting North Cambridge and the floodplain like crazy for the first time in 20 years. Let him know you care about our wildlife refuge, our floodplain and the importance of low lighting in that area, despite heavy traffic.

Do not show you support hotel, stadium or theater lighting signs, but try to present knowledge of this 'last of the natural resources' part of the city is our take. The rotary area (2 and Rt. 16) should not be subjected to these distractions, despite the fact that a widening process will soon take place by Mass Highway. The developers know that this area is being targeted for traffic expediency. We do not want it abused or fast tracked passage so that residents cannot weigh in.

Respect the present appeal by Friends of Alewife Reservation DEP pending appeal against a huge hotel to go up next door based on the city's climate vulnerability assessment to come out in June for this area. Legislators are weighing in and we appreciate the Arlington efforts. Much of this pollution affects East Arlington.

Cambridge Day: 10/11/13 M.Muckenhoupt article

Why is there not public comment, as we will be the ones who will be subjected to it, some on a daily basis. This chart gives part of the story.

Ellen

Background Facts re Proposed "VOX on Two" Signs:

The new apartment building abutting Rte. 2 near the Alewife Reservation replaces the unsightly, blighted Faces mess. Now that it's built and renting, the developers (home base Dallas, office in Waltham) are seeking a zoning variance for a lit-up sign >50' (5 stories) above ground level, when the legal max is 20'.

The Planning Board will review the developer's sign for the 3rd time during the "Business" portion of their Tues., Feb. 18 meeting. No public comment is permitted.

The Planning Board will then send its approval, no-comment or disapproval to the Zoning Board for its eventual consideration when the developer's apply for a zoning variance to permit their large, lit-up sign to be more than 20' above ground level.

Some Key Points (Please excuse typos & sloppy writing.):

• Oppose a large, lit-up VOX apartments' sign more than 50' above ground level, when the legal max is 20'. It doesn't matter that it may be well-designed.
• Neither residents nor their visitors and guests need such signs to get to their homes. Just try Googling "VOX on Two" and see what pops up first!
• If this sign variance is approved, it will set a new, even broader precedent or model or other Cambridge apartments, condo and coops – to apply for zoning variances for their zoning-prohibited signs. Dorms, too?
• It's obvious why hotels and motels are legally permitted to have such signs by both Cambridge and Boston zoning law. But, why do other residential buildings don't need them?
• 18,000 Cambridge citizens successfully defeated such signs in 2010 by referendum petition against the "Building Identification Sign Amendment" that would have permitted Microsoft and others install branding signs along Memorial Dr.
• Residential building-name and street number signs are traditionally and for good reason at street level where people can see them.
• Environmental and Dark-Sky Concerns: Cambridge's Zoning includes chapter covering Sustainable Design and Development and the City has a recently created Light Task Force and Net Zero Task Force. Yet again, a totally unnecessary, zoning-noncompliant sign has progressed so far. Is this friendly to the Alewife Reservation and our Rte. 2 neighbors?
• Will the Planning Board set stage for Zoning Board's sign variance by again ignoring our zoning laws for such a pointless reason, benefitting no one: naming a building as if it were a theater, a nightclub or a stadium? And, even if the developer agrees to turn the lights off late at night, most people aren't awake to notice.
• The developers do not even call out the more than 50-ft. critical distance – from ground level to sign top – on their plans and submissions. Other dimensions, like the sign's length and height, are printed on the plans.
• The proposed VOX sign fails the legal variance test because (i) it's not a "substantial hardship . . . relating to the soil conditions, shape or topography of the land and structures" to be barred from having a 5-story high, lit-up sign and (ii) the sign would "substantially derogate from the intent or purposes of" Cambridge's zoning laws.
• Why is no public comment permitted at these reviews?