At member Jon Henry’s request during Monday night’s public meeting, the Marion Planning Board debated the town’s inclusionary bylaw that requires developers of housing projects to include a percentage of affordable units or pay the town a compensation fee as an escape clause from the requirement.
Now that Steen Realty has pulled its first permit to begin construction on a 120-unit rental development off Route 6 near the Wareham town line, Marion has technically broken past the state-required, 10% affordable-housing threshold.
With that, Henry thinks the inclusionary bylaw should go away, incentivizing developers to build market-rate housing that would produce more water/sewer ratepayers and bring much-needed tax revenue into Marion’s coffers.
Member Andrew Daniel supported Henry’s contention, provided he sees “a shovel in the ground.” Steen’s comprehensive permit, vetted in Marion only by the Zoning Board of Appeals, has a timeline built in.
“He doesn’t have to build the whole thing, we won’t know until he builds it,” said board member Tucker Burr.
Daniel pointed out that in the 20 years of the bylaw’s existence, it has never worked according to the town’s intentions.
“I think this bylaw deters,” market-rate developments, Daniel said, citing Sherman Briggs’ dormant site off of Spring Street. “It’s a major expense to have to put three or four affordable ones there. What I think this does encourage is 40B (affordable housing) instead. It’s created zero (market-rate developments) so far. What has it been, 20 years?”
Citing zoning restrictions, board member Eileen Marum said that Marion will never be overrun by affordable housing. She said the cost of housing is astronomical and distorted.
Marum recalled how the Select Board reduced the amount of payment in lieu of taxes from $200,000 to $75,000 but still wants to know how former member John Waterman calculated the lower number.
Marum further recalled growing up in New Bedford with the diversity in its neighborhoods and school system. “The new thinking is you should have mixed housing … so you can have a vibrant community, because the middle class has been hollowed out of our gateway cities. Everyone has gone off to the suburbs,” she said. “This (proposal) is not for affordable housing, this is basically for middle-income housing. … Something needs to be done to bring back the 35 gateway cities.”
Burr suggested that the lack of large developments might be seen by some people in Marion as a successful outcome of the bylaw.
Member Alanna Nelson expressed concern that without the bylaw, Marion could wind up with a friendly 40B development.
“I think it’s pretty tough when you can’t afford to live in town. … I hope that we can provide a variety of price points to live in Marion,” she said.
Henry noted that at age 77, he still works. He said he bought his father’s house and sold it to his son at half its value because otherwise, his son would not be able to afford to live in Marion.
“We need more taxpayers,” he said.
Planning Board Chairman Norm Hills took a cautionary approach toward “sunsetting” the bylaw.
“We talk about the 10% goal. The real thing it does is put us in the driver’s seat … we can deny 40B (proposals),” he said, noting that cutting off at 10% is “not a good idea. … We don’t even have the 2020 census data yet. … Personally, I think we need this, the town needs this. … Right now, we’re facing a declining school enrollment, that’s the sign of a dying town.”
While member Chris Collings only insisted that any bylaw containing a numerical threshold necessary should be sunset-ed upon reaching said threshold, his focus in the discussion was geared toward the rising cost of living.
The members agreed on one thing, and that’s the necessity for a more-substantial discussion on the bylaw. Nelson pitched for a brainstorming session at the next meeting.
When the floor was opened to the attending public, a citizen said Henry is trying to create downsizing homes for million-dollar homes, but seniors need much smaller homes. She suggested such people will be pushed out of town and into Wareham.
“There are a lot of seniors who can’t stay in their homes, and there’s nowhere else for them to go.”
Citizen Barry Gaffey said, despite going from 3,000 square feet of living space to 1,700, he has been struggling the last five years to “live my dream. … Nothing’s affordable in Marion. That’s the point, I’ll leave it at that.”
Marum suggested bringing an expert from the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District (SRPEDD) to moderate a more comprehensive discussion of the board.
“I can talk to them and find out and let you know. Their goal is to definitely help us if they can,” said Hills. Town Planner Doug Guey-Lee offered his assistance.
Gaffey took issue with the lack of a sidewalk on Converse Road as a safety concern when the board discussed the town’s Open Space Recreation Plan. He also said that the Planning Board cannot adjudicate access issues regarding property he said belongs to a private association.
Hills said he was waiting on Henry’s written comments on the Village Style Smart Growth District, and four members asked for time to read the Adoption of the Housing Production Plan before the board votes to approve.
The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, April 3, at 7:00 pm.
Marion Planning Board
By Mick Colageo