{shortcode-5520ad6d977d98c9e8585f7a5f7315dee4c28fa3}

Concluding 18 months of drafting, the City of Cambridge announced the final design of the Mass. Ave Planning Study at a Thursday meeting.

The study lays out four goals that will be implemented on a 15-year timeline, including to make Mass. Ave more “inviting” and “a destination,” and to increase housing options.

Implementation of this plan will extend from Alewife Brook Parkway to Cambridge Common, connecting neighborhoods, businesses, transit hubs, and cultural landmarks — a project that will “organically and incrementally” unfold until 2040.

The plan does not address the street design of Mass. Ave — which will be supervised by the City of Cambridge. The plan notably excludes bicycle infrastructure.

A working group of 14 stakeholders in Cambridge met nine times over the last year and a half to draft the study in collaboration with city officials and consultants. The 14 members were composed of residents, business owners, and other stakeholders, selected via an application process.

Among the four goals, attendees at Thursday’s MAPS community meeting said they were especially concerned with housing.

“I think the price of housing is by far the biggest one for me. It’s just really expensive for most places,” said Robert J. Bonney, who moved to Cambridge last year. “It almost prevented us from coming because it’s hard to find places, and we had to keep increasing our budget.”

To address rising housing prices, the plan encourages the simultaneous development of market-rate and affordable housing and adjusting zoning codes to build more housing and mixed-use development. This comes after the Cambridge City Council voted to eliminate single-family zoning in February.

Ruth A. Ryals, a member of the working group and president of the Porter Square Neighbors Association, stressed the importance of balancing historical preservation with development.

“I love historic architecture. Mine’s an old Queen Anne — 1890. So I hate to see people say, ‘Oh, I don’t care what it looks like. I don’t care if it’s historic. Tear it down. Build an 18-story,’” she said. “We can keep the charm and the historical character, and we can also build buildings that are different heights that work in some way to coordinate with the whole area.”

James G. Burns, a member of the group who works in commercial real estate banking, said his main focus is economic feasibility, which may require more efficient developments.

“Some of the feedback from some of the neighbors was to have lower maximum heights,” Burns said. “Just based on the land values alone, you kind of need higher density to have a project pencil out more feasibly.”

In addition to housing costs, residents also pointed to the need to support local businesses through affordable rent on retail spaces.

“Keeping the prices affordable for that retail is just as important as building,” William J. Skocpol said.

Despite continued concerns about housing, attendees frequently expressed their appreciation for Cambridge throughout the meeting.

“I do hope that they focus on affordability because that leads to diversity,” Bonney said of the city.

“It’s obviously a great place,” Burns said. “I love it, or I wouldn’t live here, but I think there is definitely room for improvement.”