Please support the main, original Article #34 motion and oppose the Article #34 amendments-thank you

[Betsey Weiss]

Dear TMMs, 

 

 I support the original, main Article #34 motion and I am against all the #34 amendments. 

 

Lexington’s professional planning staff: the Planning Director, Abby McCabe, Assistant Planning Director Sheila Page, Planner Molly Belanger, and our elected Planning Board wrote the original, main motion and have been working on Article #34 since May 2022. In addition, there were more than 23 meetings and hearings in the community since October 2022 on Article #34. 

 

The Boston area is in the middle of a severe housing crisis. We also need more affordable and workforce housing as soon as possible. Our teachers, DPW and municipal staff, and retail workers cannot afford to live in Lexington. From April 2020- July 2022, 110,000 people moved out of Massachusetts citing high cost of housing plus other issues. (Boston Globe Sunday Feb. 19, 2023, pages A1 and A15.)  

 

Reasons that I am against the Working Group Amendment (WGA): 

 

1.      The WGA allows 98 acres plus 36 Special Permit acres for inclusion in the MBTA bylaw.   

• Article #34 allows 227 acres which is less than 3% of total town acreage and 207 acres not including the Center which will continue to require commercial so may not be counted in the state MBTA count.  
• The Center Committee states in their letter of support for inclusion of the Center in Article #34 that the Center Committee understands that multifamily housing in the Center is one of the most important areas to have it in town, if we want foot traffic and a vibrant commercial Center. Please read the Center Committee’s thoughtful, compelling reasons in their letter under Article #34 to include the Center. 
  
   

2.      The WGA cuts the number of districts to less than half from 12 to 5 (plus 2 districts with special permit). 

• Two districts in the WGA require the Special Permit process so that with every project/every development, there is uncertainty, time, effort, and expense for both landowners and the Planning Staff and Planning Board.  Special permit process depends on the composition of the PB which changes with elections. Site Plan Review is a predictable, thorough review process.  
•  In the WGA, since two districts are Special Permit and five more districts were removed in the WGA, the potential for multifamily housing is reduced by approximately 50% with this amendment. 
  
   

3.      The five remaining WGA districts have poor locations. 

• The location of four of the five remaining districts is near Hartwell Ave. which is far from the Center (shopping and restaurants) and the Stop and Shop area.  
• The fifth district, Waltham and Concord district is located near retail but not close to a bus line. 
•  We would not be integrating our MBTA multifamily housing into the Lexington community. 

 

4.      The WGA modifies the height in the VO district from the main motion. 

•  If heights are reduced, then it is likely only housing will be built in the VO districts and Lexington will lose our small commercial areas.
• Three stories are enough for housing, but four stories may not be enough to allow mixed use, first floor retail and housing above. 

  

 

Mr. Schanbacher said at the 3/29 PB meeting, “We can do the minimum for multifamily housing, or we can do the right thing.”  

 

I support doing the right thing. 

  

I support multifamily housing in Lexington and multifamily housing near bus routes is long overdue in Lexington. 

 

I also support the original main motion and will vote against the amendments. 

  

Thank you, 

Betsey Weiss 

Precinct #2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dinesh Patel MD]

Honorable town members 

   Here is what 

Mr. Schanbacher and Betsey Weiss states

Mr. Schanbacher said at the 3/29 PB meeting, “We can do the minimum for multifamily housing, or we can do the right thing.”  

 

I support doing the right thing. 

  

I support multifamily housing in Lexington and multifamily housing near bus routes is long overdue in Lexington. 

This PB article means well but the reality has been that many well meaning citizens and town members have concerns and are proposing their thoughts — it appears that family feud is taking place — all well meaning for ultimate objective but different thoughts

I have suggested and  requested to many that in order to achieve ultimate goal we need family to work in unison — not peice meal or only one or the other way 

Betsey is right

Planning board members have spent enormous time for which we are very grateful but equally others who are bringing thoughtful amendments 

Question

Can we accomplish ultimate objective now ? 

I think as I have suggested that we should have blue ribbon task force 

Get all input and more

Bring to fall meeting 

Some will say why delay

Some one will say what more we are getting from delay 

We have done enough 

But the way things are moving means some thing is lacking and family feud is obviously taking place 

So let us set up Blue Ribbon Task force 

Be proud of accomplishing the goal by dialogue debate conciliation with the task force 

Of course some one will say that mini task forces have formed — few amendments coming

Either way hopefully this gets formed? 

All for good reason 

Last date for submission is dec 2024 

Best wishes

Happy Passover to my Jewish friends

Dinesh Patel 

Precinct 6 tm 

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 5, 2023, at 9:56 AM, Betsey Weiss <betse...@hotmail.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/IA0PR14MB6260CE4D6F702E79EB1C6199A8909%40IA0PR14MB6260.namprd14.prod.outlook.com.

[Andrea Fribush]

Reading the many constituents' emails and petitions that we have been receiving, my impression is that their greatest concerns are:

-why we would offer many more acres than the State requires

-building height in the Center

Andrea Fribush

TM Pct 6

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/1C898584-8F92-43FB-8A4A-34BA3ED804B5%40me.com.

[Goldberg, Rita]

Thank you, Betsey, for arguing so cogently in favor of Articles 33 and 34. 

I’ve supported the original articles from the beginning and will continue to do so.  It’s up to us to make these changes. We shouldn’t try to cut and paste ourselves out of our responsibility:  to our professed values (diversity, equity, inclusion); to those who need affordable housing NOW; and to future generations.  

Rita Goldberg 

Pct 2

Get Outlook for iOS

---

From: lex...@googlegroups.com <lex...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Betsey Weiss <betse...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 9:56:46 AM
To: lextmma <lex...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [LexTMMA] Please support the main, original Article #34 motion and oppose the Article #34 amendments-thank you

 

[sj....@verizon.net]

Amen!

Sandra Shaw

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/MN2PR07MB663817E33FD28D8635FF35EB92909%40MN2PR07MB6638.namprd07.prod.outlook.com.

[Courtney Apgar]

I agree with Betsy. This is simply the right thing to do, and I believe it will help create a better, more vibrant town. Single family houses being built in Lexington are simply not within reach for average families. While the multi family projects resulting from article 34 won’t all be “affordable”, they will be much more accessible and keep homes in Lexington from only being available to the super wealthy. 

I’ve heard from many constituents that are in favor for article 34 as it stands, and I will be voting for it.

Courtney Apgar

Precinct 3

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 5, 2023, at 12:56 PM, sj.shaw via LexTMMA <lex...@googlegroups.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/005001d967df%249824d960%24c86e8c20%24%40verizon.net.

[Goldberg, Rita]

Thank you Sandra! No one else has responded.  We’ll see what next week is like.

Elbow deep in cooking, and I do mean elbow, ahead of the Seder tonight. The weather is so dank, a good day to stay inside.

Peggy, how did the meeting last night go?

Oh and Nancy. the church articles passed, though the Follen one with a much smaller margin than First Parish. I have no idea why.

Happy Easter to those not making chicken soup and brisket!

XX Rita

Get Outlook for iOS

---

From: sj....@verizon.net <sj....@verizon.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 12:56:40 PM
To: Goldberg, Rita <gold...@fas.harvard.edu>; 'Betsey Weiss' <betse...@hotmail.com>; 'lextmma' <lex...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: RE: [LexTMMA] Re: Please support the main, original Article #34 motion and oppose the Article #34 amendments-thank you

 

[Bridger McGaw]

I too support the strategic intent of zoning by-right more than the 50 acres required by the MBTA law, but not in Lexington Center without a lot more analysis, engagement, and planning.  I have considered the many notes Our Precinct has received in support of our overall goals to increase opportunity to create the conditions under which more multi-family housing, and affordable units too, can be developed. BUT these same notes of support for that strategic goal also note that there is a substantial amount of uncertainty injected into the effort when things are done "by right."   Lexington Center development should not be by-right.  We spent 10 years and $10M dollars planning the streetscape and we should spend more time making sure we have the plan right.  The Amended Motion incorporates the strategic goals of adding opportunity for development of housing now, meets the statutory requirements, AND also is sensitive to areas where a little more finesse will be useful to support development of more multi-family housing in Lexington.  I would urge further review of the benefits of this alternate motion as worthy of your vote.

thank you,

Bridger McGaw

Precinct 6  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAOooGK6BD1%3D%2BzLJeZiaRs9%3Da6qAA-8hr7kNZmWmqRaHD5MEUvg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Tom Diaz]

I agree with Betsey Weiss.

The Planning Board is the responsible planning body and is elected by the entire town.  And in this matter I believe it has acted responsibly.

I disagree with the removal of the Center from the proposal.  

Also, I disagree with the removal of my own neighborhood, which is the Bedford & Worthen area.  I would like to see the property owners in that area have an incentive and opportunity for mixed-use development.  

It's not clear to me why my nearby commercial area is removed, and no doubt there are many other questions of a similar nature.  I assume I will get some answers at Town Meeting.

Also, I hope everyone will listen and will keep an open mind.  If you are part of the "working group" who developed the amendment, I hope you are still open to support of the original article, if your amendment is voted down.

Tom Diaz

Precinct 8

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/BFFAE32D-8036-4A35-BA30-DDC79D5A6105%40gmail.com.

--

_______________________
Thomas R. Díaz

13 Lois Lane

Lexington, Massachusetts 02420

Text: (781) 454-9946

[RODNEY COLE]

I suggest that folks not try to amend zoning articles.

Zoning is a very complicated business. It takes many months to craft a zoning article. There are many trade-offs to think about, possible unintended consequences to consider, potential benefits and potential pitfalls to balance. 

One unintended consequence of trying to amend has already popped up. We have the email from the business owner regarding leaving the Center Business District out of phase one puts the Center Business District at a distinct disadvantage when attracting new development funding, leaving it behind to get ever more tired. There is no time to evaluate that or other issues not even yet contemplated due to trying to restructure the articles on the fly.

We have seen over the years the mess we can get into by trying to modify zoning articles last minute.

I strongly suggest folks vote yes or no. Refer back to the Planning Board for more work is another reasonable option. Please do not try to rejigger them last minute. That is not likely to lead to good zoning. 

FWIW: I will vote no on the amendments, and yes on the original articles. If it gets referred back to the PB, that is not a horrible outcome, better than a last minute amended article that have had pretty much zero review.

 

Thank you,

Rod Cole

Precinct 9

[Pam Hoffman]

The Article 34 Amendment Working Group has promised to answer posted questions and share our rationale for creating this amendment. Since we are a large group, it is taking us some time to draft answers that reflect and respect all of our thinking. 

Many of us in this working group put in as many hours as the Planning Board on this project, and perhaps in some cases even more. This includes attending every Planning Board meeting/public hearing, meeting with constituents, discussing alternatives in small groups, and analyzing the districts and parcels through MapGeo and drive-bys. We may only be elected as Town Meeting Members, but we have done the work.

Tom Shiple will post our response when completed. Thank you for your patience.

Pam Hoffman

On behalf of the Article 34 Amendment Working Group

[Frank Smith]

I agree with Rod. We cannot meaningfully amend  Article 34 on Town Meeting Floor.

Sending it back to the Planning Board or voting it down will only further delay our steps towards addressing our regional housing crisis. I also think we should be doing more than just meeting the State's minimum requirements. 

I intend to vote in favor of the original Article 34 and against amending or weakening it. I hope you will join me. 

Frank Smith

Precinct 3

--

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/671857855.1214016.1680715960430%40connect.xfinity.com

.

[Irene Dondley]

As I read through the proposed amendment, I can't help but think that too many cooks spoil the pot. I'll put my trust in the hands of our professional staff and the Planning Board. For all the reasons stated by Tom Diaz, Betsey, Rod and others, I will be supporting Article 34 as written.

--Irene Dondley

  Pct 5

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/1202994788.3459767.1680798332802%40mail.yahoo.com.

[rdpe...@rcn.com]

Thank you, Bridger and one counterpoint that I'd like to offer is that regardless of the investment in the Lexington Center Streetscape, development in Lexington Center is in fact 'by right' to the extent that a land owner could tomorrow decide to apply for a permt to redevelop their property under the conditions of the CB district. What we've learned from experience from the past decade or more is that no one is willing or likely to do that due to the limits of the CB district.

If the main motion under A.34 passes, the Planning Board and Planning staff are well aware of the need to review and update the regulations in Ch. 176 for Major Site Plan Review, and we will do that as we did last year after TM approval of OSRD.

Thank you.

Bob Peters

Chair, Lexington Planning Board; TMM P7

---

From: "Bridger McGaw" <bridgerfo...@gmail.com>
To: "Andrea Fribush" <afri...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Dinesh Patel MD" <dgpa...@me.com>, "lextmma" <lex...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 1:22:58 PM
Subject: Re: [LexTMMA] Please support the main, original Article #34 motion and oppose the Article #34 amendments-thank you

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAD9ViUNJHZAs5W%2BMNY1HhnpshMPKqpuJB%2BM_SX_938jV0%3D_Xxw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Harry Forsdick]

Folks,

I have read, discussed with others, and have been thinking about all that has been said about Article #34.

I start off by supporting Article #34, which I believe is about conforming to the MBTA-Communities Law, as well as implementing a variety of commitments we have discussed, debated, and approved in various Town Meeting Articles over the past 20 years.  These decisions have been reached only after the issues have been discussed and debated in public meetings by people with many different opinions.

People frequently ask for projections about the impact of Article #34 on the town.  At the least it has an impact on the following issues that Lexington has discussed and embraced over the past 20 years -- in principle, if not yet in implementation.  These include:

• Unhappiness with what it takes for retail stores in Lexington Center to be viable in the 2000s.  A lot has been said about this at Town Meeting, on the Lexington List, and elsewhere.  Some progress, like the Lexington Center Streetscape Project, has been accomplished.  One of the possible improvements for the retail environment in the Center -- more customers shopping for their day to day goods -- is still lacking, but will be enhanced with development that will now be possible to increase housing in the Center.
• Concern about Mansionization in Lexington.  It seems to many that continued building of extremely large houses is antithetical to Lexington contributing to increasing affordable housing in Massachusetts.  Another Zoning change, allowing building two family houses by right throughout the town on lots that could hold mansions, would be a welcome change that is missing from any of the proposed changes.  
• Support for diversity of the population in Lexington in all dimensions.  In Lexington we have committed ourselves to Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion.  From the standpoint of housing and people moving to Lexington, these commitments are dependent on one common characteristic:  Economic Diversity, which starts with creating houses that cost less than the $1.6M average cost of houses in Lexington today.
• Commitment to a building code that eliminates our continued contribution to climate change.  In ByLaws that have already been adopted by Town Meeting, we have committed to building all new structures (residential, commercial and municipal) to be free of burning fossil fuels.  We have already committed to generating the electricity that will power our new or refurbished municipal town buildings by solar power generation.  These commitments will be honored in the proposed Zoning changes.
• Continued interest in preserving the history of Lexington.  In the current Annual Town Meeting, we have voted to restore and improve two historic buildings -- The Stone Building and the former Munroe School now occupied by the Munroe Arts Center.  Lexington's interest in preserving our historical past is backed up by several Historic Districts where changes are regulated by a Commonwealth mandated Historic Districts Commission.  The changes to the Lexington Zoning ByLaws do not make any changes to the Historic District ByLaws which have been instrumental in establishing and preserving the look and feel of Lexington.
• Oh, and yes, Conformance with the MBTA-Communities Massachusetts Law.

My point about listing what people think is the primary reason motivating this Zoning ByLaw change  last is to point out that in fact, in addition to adopting the changes needed to satisfy the MBTA-Communities Law, we are also trying to make changes that help in the implementation of many laudable pieces of Town legislation we have previously adopted.  

This is the right time to act on all our commitments.

Regards,

-- Harry Forsdick

    Precinct #7

Harry Forsdick Lexington Photo Scanning Town Meeting Member Precinct 7 ha...@forsdick.com www.forsdick.com

46 Burlington St. Lexington, MA 02420 (781) 799-6002 (mobile) meet.jit.si/HarryForsdick (video) Click to see my other websites

[Edward Dolan]

I plan to vote for Article 34 in its original wording.

--
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/CABKvzKrb_oxWtXCu07nL7UPwkHqSUgiR%3D8zat%2BBJEuzq%3D-wCLw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Edward Dolan

66 Potter Pond

Lexington, MA  02421

617-312-6646