Exactly this. I lived in a Harvard building once that had this deal with the city - we couldn’t have resident or visitor permits - for big buildings, like Market Central in Central Square, it would make sense. Then again charging real money for parking permits would make sense too

I feel like you're mistaking parking minimums (the city demanding a certain number of parking spaces per apartment) and the concept of providing parking in general which would still totally be legal and likely to happen in some form, just not required

I think this is a general step in the right direction. However, I'm sure that developers will do their best to come up with loopholes to overexploit this, and instead of building affordable homes, we,ll have something far from that.

Is street level parking really a better use of space than additional housing or retail? If the market demands the parking space it will still be built, but why should it be required in a city where a third of residents don’t own a vehicle and don’t need those spaces? Why should they subsidize the lifestyles of car owners?

I have no problem with onsite parking minimums. Many newer construction places parking on the first level. This reduces necessity for street parking and so makes for safer bicycling with fewer erratic driving cars searching for parking. Keep the minimums for onsite new construction.

People will still keep cars. While Cambridge is walkable, this state and country is not. Many jobs demand vehicle ownership. Unfortunately, onsite parking minimums for new construction residential housing is logical and necessary.

Nice try developers.

​

This only serves to help the developers, creating problems for whoever buys these properties. Look at how the 1 off street parking minimum came to be in the first place.

​

Keep the parking minimums! This has nothing to do with the cars, and abolishing it will create problems for residents.

[removed]

[removed]

The fear mongers are out with their lies. Don’t let them win. Abolish parking minimums. Cars don’t belong in cities. People do.

Does this include a provision that residents of those properties can't apply for parking permits?

[removed]

What you can do: email council@cambridgema.gov and CC clerk@cambridgema.gov to say you support removing parking minimums from our zoning code.

Roommates. You're searching for roommates.

1-beds for $1550 really don't exist in the area. If you happen to find one, you really don't want to live there.

You can find 2-beds for under 3k without any issues. Many are even a decent size in a decent location. That's $1500/person.

[deleted]

Hey so that’s a different apartment, if you keep walking away from Inman street there is a sidewalk that takes you back there. On the sidewalk the building will be on your left, a wooden fence on your right.

Once you pass the fence you’ll see a couple picnic tables and grill, and at the end of the yard there’s a dog play area

You never need a permit on Sunday or holidays in Cambridge. You just need proof of residency to get a visitor pass for guest parking. More info here: https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforaparkingpermit

The first street garage probably won’t be busy on Christmas either but maybe call them?

If you reside in Cambridge, just go apply for a guest parking pass for the street. You don’t need to have a car.

They do have a "Private Property, No Trespassing" sign on the gate.

https://i.imgur.com/h2jx4tm.png

That's why I said it was a long shot! Worth taking 10 seconds to make a post at least.

good luck finding someone with that big of a yard, in Cambridge , who is also on Reddit , who is also open to letting a stranger come use it lol

Yes. Provided we don't get a lot of snow, there will be ample street parking. If there was a big storm, maybe the garage being full would be an issue (and street parking a PITA), but you also have the Cambridgeside Galleria garage as an option.

Our dog is 55 pounds so he probably wouldn't fit in the small section haha. I mostly want a private space where I can keep a long line on him to grab him when it's time to go since his recall is awful, but it would be too dangerous to have it on him if there are dogs at the park

oh gotcha. I think technically you need some sort of pass to use the smaller dog park. if we're thinking about the same part of the park, it's also pretty small.

Yeah I know what you mean about Pemberton . Danehy is nicer but a little busier if you can go early / don’t mind the smaller section

We do sometimes go to Pemberton, but the gravel gets our dog dirty, the fence is sometimes broken, and there are burrs from overgrown bushes that get all over our dog.