Article 34: Bill McKibben Weighs in

[Barbara K]

Dear Town Meeting Members: As part of our effort to get feedback from the wider community, we reached out to LHS grad, author, and environmentalist Bill McKibben, who currently lives in Vermont. We provided him with the details of the proposed MBTA Communities article, and asked him to share his thoughts. You can find a recording of his Cary Memorial Library discussion of his book of personal remembrances of growing up in Lexington here.  

He wrote:

Since writing The Flag, the Cross, and the Station Wagon, I've heard from hundreds of present and former Lexingtonians, and I'd say the message is almost unanimous: people are ashamed that Lexington did not make more of an effort on multifamily housing decades ago, and very hopeful it will start to make up for that now. Rezoning for denser, transit-oriented housing not only allows the town to play a positive role in opening up to different kinds of people, it also can help play a serious role in cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Lexington has often talked a good game; now it's got a wonderful chance to actually walk the talk!

Barbara Katzenberg (Town Meeting Member, Precinct 2)

Jay Luker (Town Meeting Member, Precinct 1)

Tom Shiple (Town Meeting Member, Precinct 9)

Lexington Cluster Housing Study Group

[Courtney Apgar]

Beautifully said, and thank you to the Planning Board for working so diligently on a thoughtful, well thought out plan to improve housing options in Lexington.

I’ve spent years listening to Town Meeting Members argue that they were, of course, in favor of housing diversity, just not this project, not this location, not this neighborhood. It’s time for us to take action and stand behind the values we claim to hold dear. 

Courtney Apgar

Pct 3

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2023, at 12:38 PM, Barbara K <barbara.k...@gmail.com> wrote:



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAPqSDp%3DiN9nNB59UQryJfp4c%2B8f1dseq2HdvUqJUKtmL%2BHqepQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Avram Baskin]

Thanks to Barbara Katzenberg for posting these thoughts from Bill McKibben.

It’s time for the town to step up to the plate and put its zoning where its values are.  

It seems like every time something like this comes up, whether it's zoning changes to promote more affordable housing or solar panels at the new police station, there is always a group who spins a narrative like the following.  “We fully support the towns goals for xxx.  Now here are all of the reasons why xxx is inappropriate for our neighborhood.”  As someone so eloquently put it during our debate on gas powered leaf blowers, “change comes with pain”.  It’s time for change, and the entire town has to share in the growing pains that will go with it. 

Avram Baskin

Precinct 2

On Mar 7, 2023, at 12:38 PM, Barbara K <barbara.k...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAPqSDp%3DiN9nNB59UQryJfp4c%2B8f1dseq2HdvUqJUKtmL%2BHqepQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Avram Baskin
Be yourself, 
everyone else is already taken
Oscar Wilde

Donate to Support The Ukraine

[Dawn McKenna]

Thanks  for connecting with Bill. While I have tremendous respect for Bill (he and I were part of the LHS Debate team together), the devil is in the details.  and If he and I debated the issue it would be interesting to see how his opinion on the specific language being proposed might change.

Some questions to ponder on article 34:

1. What goal does the community believe we should try to achieve? Meet the multi-family zoning requirement as an MBTA community or go beyond the requirement?
2. Did the Select Board, Town Meeting or anyone else ask the Planning Board to exceed the parameters necessary to meet the MBTA Community law?
3. Is it the right approach to have the first step be to approve 4+ times the required acreage (50 vs. the 227 proposed)?
4. What is the maximum height that should be allowed in Lexington?
5. Are different heights to that maximum appropriate for different locations?
6. The law requires that this rezoning for density is required by right. Should we approve zoning with an assumption of what it would look like if it was fully built out; or with the hope only a handful will take advantage?
7. What is the economic and programmatic impact on the town for the proposed rezoning, particularly that which exceeds the requirements?
8. Given that the Center proposes unique challenges and proposed rezoning in this area will not count in the state calculations, should the Center be included?  
9. Should Town Meeting be able to vote on each proposed overlay district individually?
10. Would referring this back to the Planning Board help provide more opportunities for analysis of data that is just being provided so close to Town Meeting?
11. Should the Planning Board be asked to produce a proposal that complies with the MBTA communities for Town Meeting to consider and to provide context for the current proposal?
12. Do we owe our constituents the diligence to take additional time to ensure we are doing the best thing for the Town in the long-run? The deadline for compliance is December 2024. If it is referred back there would be at least three opportunities to refine and debate and still be in compliance. 

It is equally important that we take a hard look at article 36. While a couple of the parcels might benefit from a rezoning, current protections that town meeting put in place just a few years ago as government restricted parcels would open them up to the by-right multi-family zoning if article 34 is passed.  

On a separate note, pre-emptively as we have discuss the impacts of this particular proposal let's try to avoid the assumption that the concerns are based on stereotypical arguments like "NIMBY" or if you vote against this you oppose affordable housing.  I have faith that we are all acting in a way that each of us thinks is in the best interest of current and future Lexington residents. 

Dawn

Dawn McKenna

Precinct 6

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/E6A5091B-A99D-4B24-978C-2A30DB68F1B5%40gmail.com

.

[gjb...@rcn.com]

Dawn, I find your questions compelling.  They definitely should be answered before we rush to rezone over 200 acres to meet (exceed) MBTA requirements. I attended one of the community sessions of the planning board where groups of attendees were asked to identify any parcels that would meet MBTA requirements - not restricted to the approximately 80 acres required.  The group I was in identified over 200 acres, but we were NOT intending that to mean we wanted or approved of all of them being rezoned.  Furthermore, since the PB thinks it will be 20 years before all parcels are developed, no harm will be done by rezoning more gradually.

Among other problems, the MBTA rezoning is not to create affordable housing, it is to create "family friendly housing" (as yet undefined).  Some other towns require 25% of apartments be affordable in exchange for increased density - the MBTA limits it to 15%. 

The locations for rezoning are limited to proximity to the MBTA.  There are other locations in Lexington, locations that could be served by Lexpress, that may be better suited for the increased density. 

Perhaps we would like to have more age restricted housing, or studio apartments for young adults,  both are MBTA nonos.  Once you "upzone" parcels, you can't easily revert to previous zoning. 

I would support a motion to send the proposal back to the planning board for further consideration, and I suspect Bill McKibben would as well if he knew all the implications.  We can do better than the MBTA   plan.

Gloria Bloom, P4

[Noah Michelson]

let's try to avoid the assumption that the concerns are based on stereotypical arguments like "NIMBY" or if you vote against this you oppose affordable housing.  I have faith that we are all acting in a way that each of us thinks is in the best interest of current and future Lexington residents. 

Dawn,

I would like to challenge the point that you make in your last paragraph. While it is impossible to truly know the motives of others, with sufficient data there are inferences that can be made, especially with little to no evidence of the converse being true.

Seemingly whenever articles seeking to create affordable housing or create a large increase in housing stock, there is a chorus of voices in Town Meeting saying "I'm all for affordable/more housing, BUT". Even as plans get scaled back, many of these voices will persist. It is entirely possible that members have a princess-and-the-pea level of sensitivity to proposed projects and zoning bylaws. Or is it possible to entertain the idea that the beginning clause of this common refrain may not be entirely truthful. When the same voices come forward again and again claiming to be for something, speaking out against it, and either not giving realistic feedback (or any at all)  on what may make it tenable to them, I find it incredibly hard to take these individuals at their word. It only takes crying wolf two times for the fabled boy to lose credibility with the village, and the progressive posturing engrained in this town has gone on for much longer.

While what I have laid out here may not apply to you personally, I find the proposal to take discussion on this issue off the table entirely to be problematic. Ignoring the motives behind a position only empowers those who may be skilled at utilizing red herrings to suit their needs. The repeated use of these 'but' style arguments, combined with constantly sending issues back to committee and "Why do we have to do this now?", only seem to serve to delay and delay until the issue atrophies or the proponents are starved out and willing to accept the smallest possible scrap of a motion. I long to see the day when Town Meeting has more progress than posturing, and more action as opposed to acting.

I applaud the work of the PB on the articles they have brought forward to this ATM. After hearing for the entirety of my first TM term that we were waiting on the completion of the Comprehensive Plan for any major actions, I am incredibly pleased to see we are starting strong now that it has concluded. I plan to post a more substantive pitch for article 34 in the coming days, but I could not let this issue pass by without response.

-Noah Michelson, Precinct 1

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/805817278.699343.1678315727622%40mail.yahoo.com.

--

-Noah Michelson

[Barbara K]

Thanks for these thoughts, Dawn. With you and Bill McKibben on it, that must have been one heckuva debating team!  

I agree that it is a mistake to imply that those with serious questions are necessarily doing it through a "NIMBY" lens. I think most people in good faith want to see Lexington with more moderately priced housing, but also care that change doesn't happen too abruptly and would like to have as much control as possible over the character of the changes. 

The challenge for Lexington is how to balance the multiple goals we have. I do believe there is an opportunity for Lexington to show its creativity in reconciling these goals, and to be a model for other towns. 

I'm writing as an individual here, and not responding to your specific questions. But as a member of LCHSG, will continue to dig into some of the details that are needed to help TMMs make sound decisions around article 34. 

Barbara Katzenberg

Precinct 2

[Ruth Thomas]

I propose a third category--MIMBY.  Moderation In My Back Yard. 

Ruth Thomas, 4

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAPqSDpnk4eoapSWUGgBCqNpKwr%2Bvgs1NPz%3DJszVeJ-vQrQuehw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dinesh Patel MD]

Our minuteman thinks that Lexington town is his NIMBY 

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 9, 2023, at 10:41 AM, Ruth Thomas <rth...@bu.edu> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgxaJisz%2BdqmBEZNABVjWVhytr3-D3SgC3jeSRZ7vvu-%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jay Luker]

You probably have to spend a lot of time online to appreciate some of these definitions, but I really enjoyed this glossary of all the *IMBYs by Darrell Owens.

https://darrellowens.substack.com/p/whos-who-the-dictionary-of-in-my

I'm not totally sure what flavor of YIMBY I am but I welcome the label.

--

Jay Luker, Precinct 1

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgxaJisz%2BdqmBEZNABVjWVhytr3-D3SgC3jeSRZ7vvu-%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.