Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Unique-Public-8594 t1_itz05ep wrote

Briefly:

residents in Rockport fighting affordable housing being built near the MBTA stop.

3

bubalusarnee t1_iu04cu9 wrote

Not just in Rockport.

It's almost funny watching the nimbys freak out about growth being carefully directed towards where the services are.

3

PakkyT t1_iu4g9rm wrote

Maybe the state should try a new tactic of: "We want to build more housing (or even just a parking garage) near T-Stations. Towns who fight against that housing and get it rejected, we will respect their wishes... We will also be closing down that T-Station and will begin the process of identifying new stations in other towns where nearby housing will be accepted." Let's see how the NIMBY types feel about housing if they will lose their T-access and the associated property value bump on their houses because of nearby public transportation.

1

ak47workaccnt t1_itz151b wrote

>So last May, at a special town meeting, Rockport adopted new zoning bylaws that would put it into compliance with the Baker administration’s new rules aimed at increasing multifamily housing in the 175 cities and towns that are served by the MBTA.

>The plan, which passed...called for a 12-acre “transit-oriented village” near the Railroad Avenue commuter rail station

Yay! More housing! This is what we wanted. Public transportation is added benefit. Sounds great.

>the losing side filed a 10-taxpayer suit ... charging the administration’s regulations — and the entire Housing Choice law — are “unconstitutional.”

It's not unconstitutional, it non-constitutional. As in, nothing to do with the state constitution.

>The new rules, finalized in August, are expected to create an estimated 283,500 new units of housing statewide

>In the suit, the Rockport taxpayers allege that in adopting the law the Legislature “has attempted to coerce the municipalities to adopt MBTA zoning districts which it, itself, is not constitutionally empowered to draw. The coercion comes in the form of a statutory denial of access to specific grant programs.”

>MBTA communities that don’t comply will be shut out of the Housing Choice Initiative grant program, MassWorks, which provides grants for infrastructure, and the Local Capital Projects Fund.

Isn't this the same kind of coercion used by the Federal government to get states to have a 21 year drinking age in exchange for federal highway money?

3

somegridplayer t1_itz8em5 wrote

Rockport if people are spending money in town but leaving (scuba diver fiasco): "hooray! come visit!"

Rockport if people want to live affordably: "GTFO"

1

bubalusarnee t1_iu04kk9 wrote

Why can't they just build bunkhouses for their servants, and then they can work off their market rate rent for their masters employers.

2

somegridplayer t1_iu1ne67 wrote

They don't want the poors in their town. They know divers have money.

1