Protests May Defeat Sheraton's Parking Lot

Neighbors' protests may succeed in defeating the Sheraton Commander's proposal to demolish three 19th-century residential buildings in order to open a new parking lot on Garden St., city officials said yesterday.

The hotel's proposal, which includes demolishing 22, 24 and 26-28 Garden St., faces strong opposition from both neighborhood residents and the Cambridge Historical Commission.

The Cambridge Historical Commission voted at a meeting on March 2 to delay a scheduled demolition of the buildings, located at the Concord Ave. and Garden St., for at least six months.

About 150 local residents, a record number, attended the meeting to express almost unanimous opposition to the plan, according to City Councillor Kathleen L. Born.

The commission recommended that the buildings be protected under Chapter 2.78 of the city code which protects buildings which are deemed "significant." This designation would permanently halt the hotel's plans.

The hotel's proposal may be the first of several property owner controversies which have result from the dismantling of rent control in Cambridge.

The three buildings eyed by the Sheraton Commander for parking lot space had been protected under rent controlregulations. But with the end of rent control, theAdams Realty Trust, which owns the SheratonCommander, submitted a proposal to raze thebuildings.

According to Cambridge preservation plannerSally Zimmerman, "We would acticipate there beingmore proposals coming forward on demolition inthat rent control is no longer in place. Rentcontrol laws kept a lid on demolition across thecity."

"Rent control substituted for zoningregulations in many areas of the city," said CityCouncillor Francis H. Duehay '55.

The three Garden St. buildings in contentionare surrounded by, but not part of, a historicdistrict which protests several of the buildingsalong Garden St.

But according to Zimmerman, when the districtwas created the three were left out specificallybecause they were already protected by rentcontrol.

Brion A. Bickerton, a resident of 26 Garden St,said, "I expect it will be quit a fight at theCity Council level. It is pivotal in planningissues as it will be the first in a number ofattempts at demolition."

This debate has far-reaching ramifications forzoning in Cambridge.

"There are a number of areas which could bedeveloped more intensively due to the removal ofrent control," Duehay said. "Cambridge Streetbetween Inman and Cambridge and MassachusettsAvenue between Central and Harvard Squares arejust two examples of where major building couldtake place because of the change."

In an attempt to stem potential building inCambridge, the City Council is already consideringmeasures to protect structures formerly covered bythe rent control policy. The proposal would delaybuilding until January of next year to allow theCambridge zoning board more time to considerbuilding proposals.

Meanwhile, the three buildings on Garden St.are deemed relatively safe from being replaced bya parking log.

"The legal likelihood of the proposal goingthrough in my judgement going through isunlikely," Duehay said.

The council also voted on Monday night to senda letter to Adams Realty Trust's general partners,Walter and Edgar Gulesarian, to express thecouncil's opposition to the demolition and to urgethem to explore other options for increasingavailable parking.

Both Gulesarian brothers could not be reachedfor comment yesterday.

In order to build the parking lot, there areseveral more legal hurdles that the SheratonCommander would have to jump once the six monthdelay expires:

A zoning variance would have to be approved inthe area which forbids parking lots.

Permits for Cambridge's limited number ofparking spots would have to be obtained from theInterim Parking Control Commission.

An evaluation of the parking lot's effect onpublic safety would also have to take place.

"Those are three pretty big hurdles," Bornsaid.

And there remains the possibility that the CityCouncil will deem at least one of the threeproperties eyed by Sheraton "historicallysignificant."

According to Charles Sullivan, executivedirector of the Historical Commission, 22 Harvardprofessor John White Webster, who was tried andconvicted in 1850 of murdering, dismembering andincinerating George Parkman in the famousCommonwealth vs. Webster court case.

The buildings' location on the main throughwaysof Concord Ave. and Garden St. gives them acertain prominence.

"The three are part of a huge gateway intoCambridge. People and tourists see our building asthey go into Harvard Square," said Alexander O.Feldman, a resident of 24 Garden St.

Bickerton said: "Removing the buildings wouldupset the buffer they provide between residentialand commercial areas. It would destroy theequilibrium.

According to Cambridge preservation plannerSally Zimmerman, "We would acticipate there beingmore proposals coming forward on demolition inthat rent control is no longer in place. Rentcontrol laws kept a lid on demolition across thecity."

"Rent control substituted for zoningregulations in many areas of the city," said CityCouncillor Francis H. Duehay '55.

The three Garden St. buildings in contentionare surrounded by, but not part of, a historicdistrict which protests several of the buildingsalong Garden St.

But according to Zimmerman, when the districtwas created the three were left out specificallybecause they were already protected by rentcontrol.

Brion A. Bickerton, a resident of 26 Garden St,said, "I expect it will be quit a fight at theCity Council level. It is pivotal in planningissues as it will be the first in a number ofattempts at demolition."

This debate has far-reaching ramifications forzoning in Cambridge.

"There are a number of areas which could bedeveloped more intensively due to the removal ofrent control," Duehay said. "Cambridge Streetbetween Inman and Cambridge and MassachusettsAvenue between Central and Harvard Squares arejust two examples of where major building couldtake place because of the change."

In an attempt to stem potential building inCambridge, the City Council is already consideringmeasures to protect structures formerly covered bythe rent control policy. The proposal would delaybuilding until January of next year to allow theCambridge zoning board more time to considerbuilding proposals.

Meanwhile, the three buildings on Garden St.are deemed relatively safe from being replaced bya parking log.

"The legal likelihood of the proposal goingthrough in my judgement going through isunlikely," Duehay said.

The council also voted on Monday night to senda letter to Adams Realty Trust's general partners,Walter and Edgar Gulesarian, to express thecouncil's opposition to the demolition and to urgethem to explore other options for increasingavailable parking.

Both Gulesarian brothers could not be reachedfor comment yesterday.

In order to build the parking lot, there areseveral more legal hurdles that the SheratonCommander would have to jump once the six monthdelay expires:

A zoning variance would have to be approved inthe area which forbids parking lots.

Permits for Cambridge's limited number ofparking spots would have to be obtained from theInterim Parking Control Commission.

An evaluation of the parking lot's effect onpublic safety would also have to take place.

"Those are three pretty big hurdles," Bornsaid.

And there remains the possibility that the CityCouncil will deem at least one of the threeproperties eyed by Sheraton "historicallysignificant."

According to Charles Sullivan, executivedirector of the Historical Commission, 22 Harvardprofessor John White Webster, who was tried andconvicted in 1850 of murdering, dismembering andincinerating George Parkman in the famousCommonwealth vs. Webster court case.

The buildings' location on the main throughwaysof Concord Ave. and Garden St. gives them acertain prominence.

"The three are part of a huge gateway intoCambridge. People and tourists see our building asthey go into Harvard Square," said Alexander O.Feldman, a resident of 24 Garden St.

Bickerton said: "Removing the buildings wouldupset the buffer they provide between residentialand commercial areas. It would destroy theequilibrium.