by Jonathan Rich in Development and Zoning - Posted on January 21, 2010 at 9:47 am
loading…
The following is a press release from Somerville Residents for Sensible Development, as it appeared in www.boston.com yesterday:
Fueled by a growing dissatisfaction with the city’s zoning review and approval process for development projects, especially those that encroach upon the neighborhoods, a group of concerned residents have joined together to initiate what they are describing as, “much-needed and long-overdue reforms of the zoning ordinance aimed at making the key decision-makers more responsible for their actions,” stated Teresa L. Swartzel, spokesperson for Somerville Residents for Sensible Development (SOME SENSE).
SOME SENSE today filed with the city clerk, a package of five (5) proposed zoning ordinances for consideration and action by the Board of Aldermen. According to Swartzel, SOME SENSE has taken advantage of a little-used section of the Massachusetts zoning law, which allows ten (10) registered voters to propose zoning ordinances.
Among the proposals is an ordinance that would require a developer to submit to the city a traffic and a water and sewer study prepared by an independent consulting engineer, for any proposed residential project of at least twenty (20) units or a commercial project of at least ten thousand (10,000) gross square feet; and an ordinance that would require the full disclosure of the name and address of the owner of any interest in every applicant for a zoning approval.
Also included among the proposals is an ordinance that is sure to generate a great deal of discussion and debate in the aldermanic chamber. It would remove from the zoning board of appeals and place in the Board of Aldermen, the authority to grant special permits for development projects. “We have watched the board of appeals up close over the past year and one-half,” said Swartzel, “and one thing has become abundantly clear to us during this time: the membership of the ZBA is completely indifferent to the real-life interests and concerns of the residents who often appear before them to protest developers’ continuing encroachment into their neighborhoods, commented Swartzel.
“There is no doubt whatsoever, that the five-year terms of ZBA members contributes to a belief on their part that they can act however they choose because they don’t have to respond to the voters at the polls,” she said. “If we entrust the members of the Board of Aldermen to make decisions about what city services are going to be funded; about who the members of our police and fire departments are going to be; about how much the school department budget is going to be; about who is going to head our health, inspectional services, police, fire, public works and other key city departments, then most assuredly, we should be able to entrust them with the authority to decide which development projects should be approved,” Swartzel concluded.
loading…
As someone with some experience in the zoning process, I personally would never want to see a directly elected body like the Board of Aldermen be responsible for enforcing and interpreting the zoning ordinance. The ZBA may not be perfect, but they are not directly affected by the next election cycle. Citizens should focus on making sure that ZBA appointments are made on merit rather than patronage, not on changing that part of the system.
Activists should concentrate on making sure that beneficial interests in projects are clearly stated, not in giving quasi-judicial power to a legislative body.
If anyone wants to see an example of how it works (or doesn’t) to have zoning power with a Board of Aldermen, check out how it works in Newton.
loading...
I agree with you, Jeff. I would never trust the BOA with handling zoning issues.
loading...
I think SomeSense is trying to link the responsibility of making proper zoning decisions with the reliability of being re-elected year after year. It’s not a bad strategy, but if you take the opposite approach, I don’t think someone should be campaigned for because a developer needs their vote. Nor, because someone is trying to stop a development from happening. Basically, I don’t want zoning issues/questions to be someone’s sole campaigning platform.
Funny thing is, Alderman Bill White proposed 10 years ago that the BOA take on the zoning responsibility of Assembly Square. I’ve always thought him to be one of the most level-headed members of the BOA.
loading...
I remember that proposal. If I remember correctly it was only done as a way of making the Mayor pay attention – he didn’t really want to have to be responsible for zoning review.
loading...
There are a couple of reasons why I find unappealing the proposal to make the BOA the special permit granting authority.
One is that the Aldermen simply don’t have the time or expertise to make fact-based decisions. The work part time and don’t have staff of their own, so they will have to lean entirely on the planning staff. How is that an improvement on the current situation?
Another is that making the BOA the special permit granting authority legitimizes the politicization of zoning decisions. Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals decisions are supposed to be fact based and professional. If in fact developers can bypass the process by going to politicians and getting them to pull strings, we aren’t fixing that by changing which politicians developers have to go to.
If we don’t think that zoning decisions are being made competently, we should propose better candidates to the Mayor and the BOA Committee on Confirmation of Appointments and push hard for them. After all, the Mayor has to run for election just as much as the Aldermen do.
loading...