David Smith, founder and CEO of the Affordable Housing Institute, has written an analysis of Milton’s affordable housing efforts that is heavily researched and reflects a strong point of view. It is a multi-part feature. It was posted in September and certain issues are out of date (e.g. The Milton Mews project on Brush Hill Road is not longer in development). The first section can be found here.
Talk about truth in journalism. I have previously posted on this page that Milton practices economic discrimination. This is worse than I thought, 10 years and no progress on affordable housing. Have never a built a house through “Habitat for Humanity.” They do not offer METCO education. Host an annual “Celebrate Milton,” but don’t practice what they preach. Remember how they fought the new Temple on Lodge Street. Disgraceful.
David Smith gets a lot wrong in his eight-part series on Milton and affordable housing. His blog, quite obviously to the Milton reader, contains inaccuracies and it misses the nuances of how many of these housing issues have played out over the years. He also suffers from not understanding local geography – never having been stuck in traffic on Route 138 near Brush Hill Road, for instance.
BUT, once you step back from some of these important details, Mr. Smith nails it. It is hard to argue with his premise that Milton has “fiddled and diddled” on the issue of affordable housing, as the late Johnny Most would say. In my twenty years in town, we have added two (2) affordable homeownership units for first-time homebuyers and a vocal portion of town residents have repeatedly resisted efforts to add more stock at the affordable end of the spectrum (Town Farm, neighbors to 40B developments, rejection of the Community Preservation Act).
We are not learning from the 158 other communities that have passed CPA or the many communities that have figured out that housing, including affordable housing, can help revitalize our neighborhood commercial districts and even help save some of our historic resources. Yes, it will mean change and that is scary to many. But smart, well-planned development can enhance Milton and ensure that we provide affordable options for renters, first-time homebuyers and seniors alike. Many, but not all, of our current crop of town elected officials get this and are working to correct some of the errors of our past. Let’s hope our actions in the next few years can result in real housing opportunities and not just more planning documents.
I just read the whole 8 parts. It does not make me feel good about our town.
Well said, Tom Callahan. I remember watching a meeting on cable some years ago, regarding a mixed-use development proposal at Central Ave. A woman got up and expressed her concerns to the effect that “people will move in who we don’t know” and that it might have the negative effect of “urbanization.” That’s an example of the kind of attitude and code language that delays and kills development. Yes, it’s changing but not quickly enough, IMO. It’s ridiculous for Hendries to sit like that for so many years. Come on!
This issue is not about if we should have affordable housing but affordable housing for who( elderly, current residents , families etc.) , where and how to pay for it.
METCO, are you serious ? And who are the “they” ? Are you implying that the objectors to the temple are the same people who are objecting to affordable housing ? Not sure you have the facts, or any facts, to substantiate your statement.
Let’s admit there is a problem and work together to fix things. This blog might help us do the first part. David A Smith encourages anyone to post on his blog – “good, bad, or indifferent” comments. If afraid of town-bullying or ostracism when one speaks one’s mind he said “I can take pseudonymous comments on the blog site; I’ll publish full name if it’s sent.”
Thanks to those of you who read the post, either in brief or in toto, and particular thanks to anyone who posted either here or at the AHI site. Affordable housing doesn’t happen by itself, and yet it is essential urban infrastructure. Ironically, one a community *has* affordable housing, the abstract ‘those people’ whom all of us fear become our neighbors, and the same community that fought to keep the affordable housing *out* now fights to keep it *in*. It’s an investment in a healthy townand I wish Milton would invest more.
I am puzzled here. I am reading the town has argued against some projects such as town farm, 40b etc. We have a 40b proposed at the old hendries site but I have yet to hear any supporters of affordable housing stand up for that project. Sort of surprising actually given some of the commenters strong advocacy for more affordable housing. This is actually a 40b in a smart location due to proximity to public transportation and shopping whereas the Town Farm is a historic site and not accessible by public transportation and essentially convenient to nothing. The Hendries project is in my neighborhood and I would have rathered the original proposal of 36 owner occupied units but can not argue against the 40b as it is by definition a smart location for it. Some of the people that have commented here have been very vocal at every town farm discussion but are silent on the Hendries site. Makes you wonder.
Stop wondering, Joe. I support the 40B proposal at the Hendries site. I supported the original proposal as well and continue to think that a mixed use – ground floor retail with residential (market rate and affordable) above makes the most sense. It is a lost opportunity that the developer’s 40B proposal does not include commercial/retail space, in my opinion. That being said, developers need to follow the rules of the town and unfortunately some of the actions by the Connelly’s have made it hard for them to build a lot of support for their proposal. The planning board deserves some of the blame as well but I don’t believe the Connelly’s are being unfairly persecuted by the town as some here have written in the past.