Rep. Hynes State House Report May, 2003 Chapter 40B: The Governor has established a 24 member Task Force to review this 34 year old law and determine its relevance to today's affordable housing crisis. I am skeptical about this Task Force's makeup and its ability to achieve any real, sustainable reforms. Chapter 40B refers to the state law, enacted in 1969, which allows a developer to circumvent local zoning laws regarding property use, density, setbacks, etc. provided the developer agrees to set aside 25% of the proposed units for people making 80% or less of the region's median income provided that the municipality's total housing stock is less than 10% affordable as determined by the state. The Task Force is made up of those who have direct interests in this law - some benefit, some don't. Several of us feel that the composition of the Task Force is weighted toward those favoring the status quo and thus, will disallow any true consensus for change to emerge. Toward this end several of us have communicated with the Governor regarding our concerns. At any rate, seeing the reality of the Task Force's existence, I was determined to influence their consciousness and inform them of the South Shore's concerns with the law. Toward this end I was successful in wrangling an invitation to speak before the Task Force both for myself and several others, including Marshfield Town Administrator John Clifford, Scituate resident Louis Chin, and Duxbury Planning Board member Amy McNab. We all marched before the last meeting of the Task Force, joined by Senator Hedlund and Rep. Bradley, as well as by several spokespeople from communities such as Stoughton, Woburn, Georgetown, Wilmington, Merrimac, Beverly, Arlington, and many others. My statement made the following points: Massachusetts needs housing which ordinary families can purchase at reasonable prices. Yet, Massachusetts is the third most expensive place, in the country, to purchase a home, despite 40B's long history. In addition, the average household in the Boston area spends 44.9% of their income on mortgage payments. Thus, Chapter 40B is not working, it's broken and Massachusetts should scrap it. It's 34 years old and doesn't have a decisive impact on producing housing at reasonable costs. Massachusetts is the only state that has this kind of zoning regulation. 40B destroys planning and "trumps" zoning to the detriment of local concerns such as groundwater and wetlands protection. 40B causes anger and frustration in communities throughout the state. Communities deserve the opportunity to develop plans and strategies to create affordable housing consistent with their local character. Changes in Chapter 40A, the conventional zoning law, are also needed.Consideration should be given to requiring 25% of every new subdivision to be affordable. Planning Boards should be charged with negotiating comprehensive permits with the developer, rather than the Zoning Board of Appeals. Local Housing Authorities are the appropriate agency to oversee 40B developments once they are constructed. The 10% goal of affordable housing units for communities is unworkable and unrealistic. A moratorium on CH 40B should be established while the Task Force takes as much time as it needs to realistically deal with 40B and to also consider changes to 40A. In response to several questions by Task Force members I stated the following: I recently filed legislation to amend CH 40A which, among other things, will allow local Planning Boards to adopt regulations providing for balancing proposed subdivision plans with requirements for affordable units. Eligibility would be for those whose household income does not exceed 120 percent of the area median income. Task Force member Senator Dianne Wilkerson stated that she was convinced that towns are reluctant to build affordable housing and that no alternatives for constructing affordable housing are being suggested by municipalities. I responded that I hear frequently from South Shore residents of the need for affordable housing. Many of our teachers, firemen, policemen, town workers and young families, can't afford to reside in the same communities in which they work or in which they grew up. Furthermore, the Massachusetts economy can not grow and be sustained unless skilled and educated workers, attracted to the diversity and opportunities of Massachusetts business sectors, can find quality housing at affordable prices. Affordable units built under 40B represents just 7.5% of total housing built in the past 30 years, while at the same time housing costs today are among the highest in the country. The solution to this crisis is not more CH 40B but the state and local communities working together, recognizing the need to preserve the historic interests and character of a community, while encouraging planning boards, such has been done in Scituate, to establish realistic goals for the development of affordable housing with a clear pathway to achieving them. . Jeff Rhuda of the Homebuilders Association of Massachusetts, another Task Force member, challenged me to clarify why state standards are insufficient to protect local interests. I pointed to the issue of ground and surface water protection, which require local municipalities to adopt more stringent standards than the state imposes. Scituate and Marshfield, for example, need to protect their drinking water supplies from contaminants which more easily permeate through sandy soil to high water tables without adequate natural purification. Local density regulations and ground water protection zones are required to assure drinking water quality for today and tomorrow's generations. It does no good to push dense human use of fragile property while, at the same time, setting the stage for the ultimate destruction of a vital force necessary to their survival, namely their drinking water. The statements of concern made by many were compelling arguments to the Task Force to address the problems with CH 40B. We'll await their judgment but my skepticism on their willingness to learn, listen, and be informed remains. |