 |
Auchincloss challenges the status quo
As the final hours before the deadline for many towns to comply with the MBTA Communities Act tick down, some are still holding out against the state’s requirements.
The MBTA Communities Act requires cities and towns served by the MBTA to have at least one zoning district where multifamily housing is allowed by right. Its goal is to make it easier for developers to create new housing, relieving pressure on the expensive local housing market.
In a January ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the law as constitutional and mandatory. However, the court said the compliance guidelines had not gone through the correct legal process and were, therefore, unenforceable.
Soon after, the state has released new, emergency guidelines, giving the 28 towns that had not met their original deadlines until July 14 to comply. They were required to submit an action plan to achieve compliance by Feb. 13, which three towns — Halifax, Marshfield and Middleton — still have not done.
After the deadline, noncompliant communities will be ineligible for many state grants and could also see further enforcement action. Previously, Attorney General Andrea Campbell sued the town of Milton to force it to comply, though she has repeatedly said she does not want to use legal action to force compliance.
Milton has since approved a new zoning plan meant to follow the guidelines, though according to the state’s tracking page, the town had not officially submitted the plan as of Friday. Of the 27 other towns given the July deadline, Duxbury, Georgetown, Ipswich, Middleborough, Millbury, North Reading, Raynham, Rowley, Saugus and Wenham have all approved zoning meant to satisfy the law’s requirements. In addition, Norton has been deemed fully compliant.
In February, State Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s office released an opinion that the MBTA Communities Act fell under this law. Though DiZoglio’s ruling was nonbinding, it prompted the suits from Duxbury, Hanson, Holden, Marshfield, Middleton, Wenham, Weston and Wrentham, along with another by residents of Hamilton.
“The Superior Court confirmed what has long been clear: a state law requiring multi-family housing districts in communities served by public transportation, but leaving the details and location of those districts to the municipalities themselves, permissibly addresses our housing shortage while still preserving substantial local discretion,” Campbell said after the suits were dismissed.
Since then, the Wrentham Select Board and town manager Michael King have indicated they intend to follow the law, though the town has not yet passed new zoning.
Weston is also working on zoning, with the Select Board writing in a letter to Secretary of Housing and Livable Communities on Wednesday that they were “diligently working to achieve compliance” and intended to bring a proposal to town meeting in October.
Hamilton is expected to vote on its zoning proposal Monday night, giving it the chance to comply just in time for the deadline.
But still, other towns are holding out. Town meeting voters in Dracut, East Bridgewater, Freetown and Wilmington all turned down zoning proposals drafted to follow the law, while in Tewksbury, the town’s Planning Board voted not to even bring a zoning proposal to a town meeting vote. In Winthrop, the Town Council failed to support the Planning Board’s proposal with a split 4-4 vote on June 17.
As recently as Tuesday, voters in Marblehead narrowly overturned the new zoning map that had already been approved in a town-wide referendum, with 52% voting against it, according to unofficial results.
“This is not the outcome we were hoping for today, but our work is not finished,” Marblehead Housing Coalition Chair Peirce Law told the Marblehead Current. “Long-term noncompliance is not an option, and we fear for the repercussions that Marblehead may soon face.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.