By Bob Katzen
House 32-126, rejected an amendment that would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to develop and promulgate regulations allowing a city or town affected by the zoning provisions of the MBTA Communities Act to appeal for relief from those provisions. Any appeal would have to be based on at least one of the following criteria: the community’s inability to meet the drinking water supply or wastewater requirements necessary to support the housing units authorized by the law’s zoning provisions; the inability of municipal transportation infrastructure to safely accommodate the increased population attributable to this housing development; any adverse environmental impacts attributable to the development of housing units under this act; and any adverse impacts on historic properties.
“This amendment would have provided communities with some flexibility in dealing with the MBTA Communities Act by offering an appeals process based on a narrowly defined set of criteria that reflect legitimate concerns about the law,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “This was a very modest request to assist communities impacted by this law. While it would not have guaranteed a successful appeal, it would at the very least have allowed municipal leaders an opportunity to make their case for relief from the law’s zoning provisions.”
Rep. Ruth Balser (D-Newton) urged rejection of this or any amendment that at this early stage in the implementation of this law, undermines it. She noted we should give it a chance to work. She said that 70 communities have already figured out how to make it work for them and other communities should be given a chance to do so.
(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment allowing an appeal. A “No” vote is against the amendment.)
Rep. Christine Barber No Rep. Mike Connolly No Rep. Paul Donato No Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven No House 32-126, rejected an amendment that would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to develop and promulgate regulations allowing a city or town affected by the zoning provisions of the MBTA Communities Act to appeal for relief from those provisions. Any appeal would have to be based on at least one of the following criteria: the community’s inability to meet the drinking water supply or wastewater requirements necessary to support the housing units authorized by the law’s zoning provisions; the inability of municipal transportation infrastructure to safely accommodate the increased population attributable to this housing development; any adverse environmental impacts attributable to the development of housing units under this act; and any adverse impacts on historic properties.
“This amendment would have provided communities with some flexibility in dealing with the MBTA Communities Act by offering an appeals process based on a narrowly defined set of criteria that reflect legitimate concerns about the law,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “This was a very modest request to assist communities impacted by this law. While it would not have guaranteed a successful appeal, it would at the very least have allowed municipal leaders an opportunity to make their case for relief from the law’s zoning provisions.”
Rep. Ruth Balser (D-Newton) urged rejection of this or any amendment that at this early stage in the implementation of this law, undermines it. She noted we should give it a chance to work. She said that 70 communities have already figured out how to make it work for them and other communities should be given a chance to do so.
(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment allowing an appeal. A “No” vote is against the amendment.)
Rep. Christine Barber No Rep. Mike Connolly No Rep. Paul Donato No Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven No