Just A Town Planner

On The Front Lines Of Being Green

2009-10-12T08:02:00.002-04:00

We are all looking for ways to save on our energy bills. Sometimes all we need to do is to look to our past. How many of us remember fresh sheets or towels straight off the clothesline? Who would have thought these simple devices would wind up defining the battlefield over being green, energy savings, and property rights? The following articles from the NY times provides a little enlightenment:

Debate Follows Bills to Remove Clotheslines Bans

A Line in the Yard: The Battle Over the Right to Dry Outside

Recently, local energy companies have challenged us to reduce our energy use by 3%. Given both these aticles suggest that dryers consume 6% of household energy use, line drying would make this an easy to accomplish goal.

For years homeowners associations have been trying to enforce uniformity, establishing prohibitions on clotheslines, placing requirements on lawn cutting, etc. They see it as "protecting property rights." But whose rights are they protecting? In establishing these "protections" they are trampling all over the rights of individual property owners.

Clotheslines are just one restriction. Many also restrict solar panels and other energy savings devices that may change the look of the outside of the home. It is clearly time for homeowners associations to realize that the "rights" they are protecting are actually infringements on the rights of many.

Right Sizing

2009-09-30T23:06:00.000-04:00

Make the Motor City Smaller, I have seen several articles lately about how Detroit is changing. Much of it addressing how the city is adjusting to the loss of jobs and over a million residents. The changes taking place will be interesting to follow. Right sizing the city could create many new opportunities for promoting the greening of the city, urban gardening and new, urban, homesteading. However, the changes also could threaten many historical resources. Thereby losing much of what created the Motor City. You can look at some of our older cities here in Massachusetts at similar impacts, but on a smaller scale. The Valley Arena in Holyoke had a great history, hosting many famous boxers. It became vacant, burned, and was never replaced. Many of the paper and silk mills in Holyoke are also gone, or are barely shells of their old selves. As cities right size, we will all have to work towards preserving the history, through promoting reuse, that will otherwise be lost forever.

WOW! Harsh

2009-09-17T21:12:00.004-04:00

Saw this article last week, Appeal of 'illegal' Milford two-family house denied, there is one quote I found telling. The comment that the owners of the million dollar homes were the only ones who mattered when it came to the vision for that particular neighborhood. There is no denying the property owner in question violated zoning and was in the wrong. It is too bad though that the people who seem to have recently moved to the area believe that the people who do all the grunt work do not deserve to live near the water.

And We Thought The ANR Process Was Bad...

2009-09-16T19:52:00.001-04:00

It is not statewide, but can you imagine a zoning by-law that essentially gave family land transfers a free walk when it came to subdivision? That is what the following article suggests is allowed in Suffolk Virginia. From the tone of the editorial, the process if far more ripe for abuse than even our Approval Not Required process!

Developers chummy with family land law

Interesting Smart Growth Discussions

2009-09-02T21:50:00.003-04:00

A couple of interesting items on "Smart Growth." What makes them interesting is that they point out some of the flaws in the thought process.

New study shows promise and pitfalls of 'smart growth' planning

Smart Growth Policies

The Lincoln Institute Survey, and the New Jersey Conservation Foundation opinion piece point out that smart growth should not be taken up in a piece-meal fashion where everyone gets a piece of everything. The Pinelands, Meadowlands and Highlands regions of New Jersey are highlighted. I have been to a couple presentations on the Pinelands Commission and can recognize what they are doing, at the regional level, is far superior to some proposals currently floating around.

The idea of smart growth needs to start with the idea that not all areas are equal. Some areas should be seen for their value as recreational areas, some as farm lands, and some as urban nodes. Not every community will have all three. Certain parts of the state need to be recognized for their ability to meet a set of needs, and be protected against competing state interests.

For instance, housing is important in areas where there are jobs, transit facilities and pedestrian access. Housing replacing farmland because everybody must have more homes, simply is not smart growth. These policies cost us open space, increase the use of the automobile and places needy families into areas without job support. Hardly smart.

As the discussions continue on zoning reform, an emphasis needs to be placed on knowing what particular regions of the state are all about, and establishing a zoning reform package that can really achieve this. The Community Planning Act comes close to achieving these goals.

Pulling The Rug Out From Under The Recovery

2009-08-31T23:14:00.003-04:00

Mortgage deductions may change Scary story. Just as the housing market has begun to recover, changes are being contemplated to change the ground rules.

The mortgage tax deduction is a political minefield. On the one hand, renters are not provided an opportunity to deduct any portion of their rent from their income. Thus making the mortgage deduction an easy target in the name of housing equity.

However, the mortgage deduction is quite attractive to homebuyers and removing the mortgage interest deduction will make many by-pass home ownership. This in turn will eliminate many of the jobs that are just beginning to recover from the past couple of years downturn.

Just something to think about.

A Dangerous Affordable Housing Mandate Precedent

2009-08-25T23:19:00.003-04:00

I saw the article below and started to worry. We have towns that have met their Chapter 40B requirements in the state. We have already seen how the statute has been used to suggest that a community which has met its target can still be required to approve a project that came forward before they had achieved the target. Basically rendering the Chapter 40B attainment meaningless.

The entire Chapter 40B concept has followed closely the affordable housing policies and legal path that has occurred in New Jersey, the case discussed below puts a further burden on communities in New Jersey by establishing that, even though they may meet their mandate, that achievement means nothing and they are still subject to even greater affordable housing levels.

Nonprofit wins appeal to build low-income houses

I know the posts here suggest that I have a problem with affordable housing. That is not the case. We clearly need affordable housing. However, we need to see protections put into place for wetlands, appropriate design, and sustainable densities.

Several communities on the Cape are faced with a double whammy, pursuing Chapter 40B while also facing down sewer mandates that may be put into place under litigation. Chapter 40B clearly puts into place densities that are not always sustainable. We need to recognize this and protect our communities, in appropriate means. This can only be done with proper planning. The Community Planning Act provides such a mechanism for proper planning to achieve appropriate local goals - including appropriate levels of affordable housing.

When In Doubt Change The Rules?

2009-08-25T19:57:00.000-04:00

Base redevelopment is never easy. It is even more difficult when there are several communities involved. I grew up near Westover Air Force Base when it was closed. I would say that it has never met its full potential. When I worked in NH I got to see first hand the process with Pease Air Force Base. Even there, the redevelopment process has always been a challenge.

At Fort Devens the redevelopment process has three towns to satisfy. This is a real challenge. The process requires endorsement by all three communities. If one community says no, then a zoning action is vetoed. This recently happened:

BASE NEWS: Towns deadlock on ex-base redevelopment
Fort Devens' Vicksburg site abandoned since '96 closure

Now some may say that the action of one community should not be able to block the development desires of the other participants. It actually provides an interesting twist on home-rule, should one town be able to veto the vote of the other two participants in the process? However, should two communities be able to dictate to a neighbor? Clearly base redevelopment is tricky and requires agreement at the beginning of the process. That agreement appears to have been put into place at Fort Devens. However, as the article notes, the single town veto has raised the ire of those with particular development desires. Now they want to change the rules.

Without getting into the merits of a particular zoning plan, the idea that changing the rules when you cannot get what you want just does not sit well. Rules need to be agreed to at the beginning for a multi-community effort, otherwise, why should towns consider surrendering even a slice of their home rule powers.

Hopefully those at Fort Devens seeking to change the agreed to rules will reconsider and pursue a new development strategy that leads to buy in by all involved, rather than trying to force one community to do something the town does not believe to be in their best interest.

How Can This Be A Chapter 40B Project?

2009-08-21T23:24:00.005-04:00

Reading Boston.com and saw the following article:

His home for sale, Hastings says he’s fine

What struck me in this article was that the particular developer had a Chapter 40B project with "market rate" housing units selling for over $1 million while the affordable housing was selling in the $170,000 range. This seemed like quite the range of prices. The story below provides information on these affordable units.

Affordable housing available in Hingham

Looking further at the project the "market rate" units start at $825,000. These "market rate" housing units exceed the average household in Hingham's ability to pay by nearly doble what they could pay. The median household income in Hingham being $110,699 in 2007 which would qualify them for just under a $400,000.

In fact, this affordable housing project, if it could be called that, will mix households with incomes of about $60,000 with households of about $170,000 to almost $275,000 annually.

Chapter 40B is intended to provide "equivalent" housing, such that you cannot tell the difference between the Chapter 40B units in a project and the market rate housing units. In a project with and 800% difference in unit sales prices, it is hard to imagine that the units are equivalent on the inside and outside.

Perhaps, the project in question could have been of greater benefit to Hingham than the 5 units (as a Chapter 40B project 25% would require at least 12 of the units be affordable???) of housing described by the Patriot Ledger article had the developer been required to provide a local housing trust with 25% of the gross project value to be used for development of appropriate mixed income housing.

Scaling The Hill: 40-B Abuse

2009-08-17T18:28:00.000-04:00

I have posted a few discussions on Chapter 40B. This post is linked to a blog posting by the Massachusetts Senate Republican Caucus. It points out some of the problems. Their proposal will provide a start on reforming Chapter 40B, but there will still be a long way to go.

Scaling The Hill: 40-B Abuse

Farms and Residential Neighbors

2009-08-14T22:19:00.004-04:00

I saw the following two stories this week and they kind of brought me back to an earlier time. While in high school and college I worked on a farm in Hadley. Over the years some neighboring farms were converted to residential developments (some using Chapter 40B). These developments created conflicts for the remaining farmers as the new neighbors had many complaints. They were concerned with what we were spraying on the farms. They were concerned about the early and late hours of the farm operations. They did not like the dust that was kicked up during the spring and fall. They did not like the 7 day a week operations. It was quite clear that the proximity of the houses to the active farm operations were not a "marraige made in heaven."

So, I have to agree with the farmers in New country dwellers worry some regional farmers I believe that they are right. The new neighbors will be complaining about the farm operations. You only need to look at this more nearby story, Town To Keep Eye On Pigs' Stinky Situation, the farm operation has expanded, in the words of the neighbors. If you Google this farm, Krochmal Farm, and look at the cached pages (it looks like the farm took down its website) you find that the farm has been in existence for a hundred years. The houses clearly came to them.

Why am I going on about this? It simply once again points out that, without a comprehensive land use policy at all levels, we will continue to promote land conflicts. Chapter 40B, the Land Use Partnership Act and many other state growth policies conflict with our state's agricultural history and our needs to protect our farms and open spaces.

"Where Are We Going to Charge Our Cars?"

2009-08-13T20:21:00.004-04:00

Planetizen provided the following teaser for a Wall Street Journal story Where Are We Going To Charge Our Cars? I found the question interesting. Twelve years ago I left the Metropolitan Area Planning Council. At that time I had been working for several years through the Clean Cities Program to promote the development of electric vehicle facilities. The MBTA has located EV charging facilities in Braintree and Alewife Stations. These facilities were powered with solar panels.

The program was to be a model for all to follow. Boston Edison, one of the participants, and the MAPC were promoting the concept of electric vehicle recharging facilities at major employment centers and shopping centers. Opportunity recharge was a big part of preparing the Boston Region for the introduction of EV's. In addition, Boston Edison was working to promote paddle type electric vehicle chargers, known as fast chargers, at gasoline stations. The fast charge was intended to provide a five minute or less charge, in line with normal gasoline refilling. Unfortunately, the state backed off of the ZEV requirements (pushed by EPA I believe), if not, we would not be asking this basic question today.

I know after I left MAPC, the agency lost interest in the Clean Cities Program and the Electric Vehicle Pilot Program. The project was picked up by DOER and has moved forward cautiously ever since. The new push for EV's may be just what the Clean Cities Program needs to gain momentum once again.

In Massachusetts, the model is there for EV recharging. Just dust off the Electric Vehicle Pilot Program from the early and mid 1990's that was spearheaded by MAPC and DOER.

Why Propose A Development So Out Of Line With Zoning?

2009-08-11T21:15:00.002-04:00

This article from the Boston Globe is simply astounding. Zoning in this section of Boston allows for 15 stories, the proposal calls for 50 to 70 stories, almost five times the height limit. The article notes an 18 to 24 month review, why? It would seem that since zoning does not allow it, the project should be a non-starter.

While I know the City of Boston has its own zoning rules, the question clearly arises, why would a person buy a property with a zoning limit 1/5th of what he desires, unless he knew he could get around the limits? Just one of he strange things we all have to ponder.

"Instead of just waiting for the economy to come around, how do we shape our future?"

2009-08-09T20:48:00.002-04:00

Technorati Tags: Town Planning,Master Plan

The post title is a question posed by Governor Patrick that will be addressed at an upcoming State Economic Summit. The Governor states in the Boston Globe article he wants to "bring together key business, financial and state officials from important job sectors and different regions in the state." It is unfortunate that local government is being left out of this discussion. I know we could be a major asset to the process.

I think we could start by pulling together a comprehensive state wide planning process. Not the piecemeal right-hand not knowing what the left-hand is doing process that is currently in place.

The framework needs to look at all the required planning documents impacting local government and move forward from there. Every five years we are required to pull together an Open Space and Recreation Plan a major goal of which is to identify land preservation needs. We are now also required to prepare a Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan which requires us to identify areas at risk of flood, wind, fire or other hazards and to identify methods for reducing or eliminating the potential for risk to human life or property. We are also required to prepare a Local Housing Action Plan to address the creation of affordable housing.

It is interesting that while the above are required, the idea of having an up-to-date Local Comprehensive Plan is optional. Also, while some towns have created Economic Development Plans these plans are also optional.

So, "how do we shape our future?" It is a good question, lets start with the plan. We need an Office of State Planning. The Office would be above Housing and Economic Development, above Transportation, and above Energy and Environment. They would direct the activities of these other agencies and pull together the state comprehensive plan.

Local Comprehensive Plans would also need to be required. These local plans would need to address and pull together all the items we currently are required and encouraged to study. Open Space, Housing, Hazards, Economic Development, Infrastructure, Waste Water Management all need to be pulled into a single document.

This is taking a long term view, and will not address the immediate economic situation. However, the long term view will set us up for a stronger economic future.

Some Competing Editorials on Chapter 40B

2009-07-14T14:30:00.002-04:00

Here are links to a couple of competing positions by local newspapers on Chapter 40B:

http://www.dailynewstribune.com/editorials/x89169293/Editorial-Repair-dont-abandon-Chapter-40B

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090625/OPINION/906250331/-1/OPINION0301

http://www.patriotledger.com/opinions/x1795889435/COMMENTARY-Chapter-40B-is-misguided-and-beyond-repair

What do you think?

Erosion of Home Rule Redux

2009-07-14T08:52:00.002-04:00

Back in June I wrote about the proposal to modify wind energy siting, a proposal that has been likened to Chapter 40B for energy companies. The following link will provide you with more information on this proposal and provide you with the opportunity to speak out on the subject:

http://greenberkshires.com/

The petition has been signed by residents across the state from all walks of life. Simply put, wind power is an important part of our future. However, wind power must be properly and carefully sited so as not to detract from the overall economy of a region.

An Interesting Read...

2009-07-09T22:59:00.000-04:00

Found this article: Mass. development chief Bialecki on state, town relationship and tech. Unfortunately there are terms used, such as zoning is a hurdle, that only towns that seek high growth targets "get it" that are inflammatory and do not recognize that smart planning needs to look at the entire picture - open space, quality of life, resource protection along with compatible growth centers matched to a community vision and its place in the region and the state.

Smart Growth - By Special Permit

2009-06-07T23:22:00.001-04:00

Here is an interesting story from the Boston Globe last week, Town centers seen as ripe for growth. In particular, my attention was drawn to the comments of Marc Draisen, Executive Director of the Metrpolitan Area Planning Council. The recognition that, even in Smart Growth areas, towns may want to maintain some level of control is quite telling. I only hope that this position will carry over to the MAPC's on-going input to the Land Use Partnership Act discussions.

I firmly support Smart Growth, but also know that such growth patterns require continued local control to ensure it happens correctly.

Erosion of Home Rule

2009-06-03T14:54:00.000-04:00

I have spent a lot of time harping on how the Land Use Partnership Act infringes on Home Rule Authority of Massachusetts cities and towns. There is a second piece of legislation which is an equal intrusion into community affairs. This legislation has to do with wind turbines. The proposal calls for changing the review process at the local level for wind turbines of 2 megawatts or larger - the largest of the largest turbines. In areas identified by a state commission, these turbines will receive an expedited review by a committee comprised of one Planning Board member, one Zoning Board member and one Conservation Commission member. The proposal will be reviewed at the local level based upon criteria established by the state. While the proposal may be rejected by the city or town, such an action will be reviewed by the State Facilities Siting Board for determination as to whether the action is consistent with state plans. It has been referred to as a Chapter 40B for the utility companies. The following link will take you to a Cape Cod Times editorial on the subject:

End Of Home Rule?

When too Many Forces Collide

2009-05-29T11:40:00.003-04:00

Yet another article on the housing debacle in Florida. This article is clearly worth reading. It actually reinforces many of my thoughts on the contrasts between the Land Use Partnership Act and the Community Planning Act. The former, along with Chapter 40B, really espouses growth everywhere at all costs. While the latter espouses proper planning for local resources and capabilities.

The article is important in that it points out that, even in the greatest real estate failure on record, proper development in the urban core of Dade County, things are not so bad. However, in the uncontrolled sprawl areas disaster is a kind word when talking about the conditions.

Just something to think about

Proper Planning Is Making Some Progress Against All The Pushback

2009-05-26T21:14:00.003-04:00

Recently with all the discussions about the Zoning Act reforms, the entire discussion of whether planning is improving, and lasting reforms are being made. The Mass Audubon Society has released its latest report on land use which you can find here: Mass Audubon report.

The report illustrates that gains are being made to protect the state's critical resources. Even the Boston Globe has published a positive review of this report, Boston.com story, on the report. Given all the rhetoric recently, much of it covered far more extensively than the state's need to protect its resources, about how the state is not meeting its housing growth needs, it was actually a breathe of fresh air to see the Globe not make negative comments about how protecting open space will hurt the state's housing market.

Before the naysayers jump onto this report, or at least use the findings to attack communities on housing policy, it is important to look at this shift towards increased land protection as having occurred while the state housing supply has grown by 0.55%, a rate faster than its population growth, and added twice the number of housing units of any other New England state.

As a planner, I applaud my fellow planners for realizing that housing and open space preservation do work together, and, in spite of the ideas being espoused at the state level, planning and zoning in the state is not broken.

More Housing Information To Think About

2009-05-24T16:41:00.001-04:00

The focus for the past several months has been how cities and towns need to do more to spur housing. One particular area of the housing market that has brought much criticism of cities and towns has been the multi-family market. It seems that those who have been leading this discussion feel that cities and towns are discouraging the construction of multi-family housing.

Recently I asked my colleagues around the state for information on stalled housing projects. The results was that there were thousands of approved housing units, many in multi-family configurations, waiting for the applicants to request building permits. Even one builder acknowledged that units were approved, but the mortgage market was stalling the ability to construct the approved housing.

The following article, from Boston.com illustrates that this problem is not just a planner's wild imagination:

New rules on condo loans hindering some buyers

As the article relates, there are homes. There are buyers. The access to mortgages are not there.

While the article has many things to consider, one particular passage really illustrates a point I have been hearing from the home building community:

"Peter Milewski, an official at MassHousing, the state's afford able housing bank, said condos are considered more problematic to lenders because a few foreclosures can affect property values for an entire complex. Also, he said, they carry monthly fees and special assessments that can create massive collective debts if individual unit owners fall behind on payments."

Simply put, lenders are not willing to lend to home buyers due to the threat of foreclosures in other units. Thus constructed housing is going unoccupied. This unoccupied housing increases strains on builders and on the condominium complex. Carrying these empty units impacts the developers ability to make a profit off of the project, and limits their ability to undertake other permitted projects. Essentially, stretching the builder beyond their means. When the builder defaults, the banks expectations become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Many who are pushing for local planning and zoning to include housing construction annual targets, seem to forget that it is a much larger picture. What we really need is good land planning (as put forth in the Community Planning Act), good financial planning by the building community (which many I deal with seem to follow), and proper support for housing from the banking community (which means eliminating the risky mortgage practices of the past decade while not bailing out completely on the housing market).

The Latest on Using Recycled Tires for Play Areas

2009-05-18T18:09:00.004-04:00

Driving to work today I heard a radio news story from ABC Radio News on one of the local radio stations regarding on going concerns about the use of recycled tires on synthetic playing fields. In the following story concerns are raised about the ingestion and inhalation of rubber dust on synthetic fields which use crushed rubber.

Synthetic Turf Fields Kicking up Safety Concerns

Looking this story up, also led to finding the following archived news story I had heard about last summer, also on ABC Radio News.

Hot Park Equipment No Child's Play

I have to admit, while I was keenly aware of the risks associated with inhaling rubber dust, and had considered the fumes that might be generated by hot rubber surfaces, I had never thought about just how how these surfaces could get.

Just to wrap it up, here is one more ABC News story on Latex. Read the comments, they are eye opening.

Latex Lurks in Unexpected Places

Smart Growth or Not So Smart Growth?

2009-05-14T23:50:00.001-04:00

As we continue the discussion of the Land Use Partnership Act (LUPA) and Community Planning Act II (CPA II) there are many issues to think about. Here is one article that needs to be considered. A key quote to consider is "Just having the ability to walk or bike to recurring destinations, such as a food store, school or workplace, makes it more likely people will be more active...." Is Chapter 40B smart? Can LUPA make the grade? What about CPA II?

Are specified housing targets smart growth? Is a program to construct housing in every community to achieve 10% affordability promoting sprawl? Is setting a target for 5% housing growth in every community, every ten years smart growth, or is it promoting more automobile travel?

Is placing restrictions on a community's ability to require sidewalks as mitigation for development impacts improving people's health or promoting driving?

Just some things to think about.

Housing And State Consistency

2009-05-09T20:34:00.010-04:00

So the Land Use Partnership Act believes that communities are not supporting state goals for housing and economic development. The state establishes a 5% housing growth target over a 10 year time frame. The belief is that cities and towns are blocking the states ability to meet this goal. However, if the state believes that 5% housing growth over 10 years is the appropriate target, what do the numbers really illustrate?

The U.S. Census reports that housing has increased by 3.8% between the 2000 Census and 2007, for an average of 0.55% annually, exceeding this target set by the state.

Looking at the Northeast Region (New England/New York/New Jersey) the Census shows the following growth figures:

.........................7 Year Growth..Average Growth ..Units Added
Massachusetts .......3.8%.................. 0.55% .................100,201
Connecticut ............3.8% ................. 0.54% ..................52,461
Rhode Island ..........2.5% .................0.36% ..................11,047
Vermont ..................5.8% .................0.83% ..................17,052
New Hampshire .....8.6% .................1.23% ...................47,028
Maine .......................6.9% .................0.98% ..................44,710
New York ................3.4% .................0.48% .................260,539
New Jersey .............5.7% .................0.82% .................189,131

As the chart above illustrates, Massachusetts added nearly twice the number of housing units of the other New England states. The rates of growth are larger in those other states due to the smaller starting base. Another interesting figure compares housing growth to population growth.

....................................Housing to Population
.............................................Rate of
.....................................Growth Ratio
Massachusetts ..................2.4:1
Connecticut .......................1.3:1
Rhode Island ....................2.8:1
Vermont ............................2.8:1
New Hampshire ................1.3:1
Maine .................................2.1:1
New York ..........................2.0:1
New Jersey .......................1.8:1

Again, Massachusetts is around the high end for this analysis as well. However, California, Arizona and Florida have been held up as the yardstick for comparison. California has experienced a 1.28% annual increase in housing which relates to a 1.13:1 rate of growth ratio. For Arizona the relevant numbers were 3.12% and 0.92:1. Finally for Florida the numbers were 5.37% and 2.6:1.

So, what does all this mean? Housing growth in Massachusetts is not all that out of character with these other regions. Our housing growth rate in comparison to population growth rate is higher than in these other areas. While our population growth may be slower than some other region's, we are actually providing far more housing opportunities than Arizona or California for our population growth than these rapidly growing states.

Of course, numbers can be manipulated to support any cause. I personally look at these numbers and say things look pretty good. Others will try to say the numbers illustrate that somehow we are holding back growth. Draw your own conclusions.