40B a positive law
To the Editor:

The Chapter 40 B law has and will continue to be one of the only defense mechanisms that developers have for the current lack of good zoning by laws in the state of Massachusetts. Suburban and Urban Municipalities in Massachusetts have over the last 40 years continued to add layers of convoluted zoning and subdivisions control by laws in the attempt to maintain the "Beauty and Integrity of the Community." Add to that the restrictive local bylaws for wetlands protection which extend well beyond the 100 to 200 foot buffer to a wetlands area it becomes more and more costly to build affordable house or achieve densities that allow housing to be available under $ 200,000.00.

Having been in the construction and development business in the Massachusetts for over 24 years I have seen the approval climate change from that of working with communities to meet common goals to the polarized position of non growth that exists today. Most municipalities in Massachusetts if you review permit activity grow between 1 to 2 percent annually. Yet I will listen to baseless arguments of the rampant housing sprawl, too many children, the added cost of the new housing elements in town, too much traffic, clear cutting land and water shed destruction each statement requiring countless hours of wasted engineering review and added cost to projects which in the end cost every resident in Massachusetts additional money to live here.

Having been involved in the 40B process the argument that it a slam dunk for developers is a myth. I agree that relief is given from the local zoning by laws of a community but in the end the developer needs to go back to the local zoning board it is looking to circumvent and work to get its approval and then go back to MassHousing for final approvals a process that can last for years costing hundreds of thousand to millions of dollars.

The reality is that the state of Massachusetts needs to remove the most restrictive reason for not meeting its housing goals. That is "Home Rule," local boards will always be restrictive in nature, conservative or non inclusive and resistant to change. County authority oversight with design professionals with direct reporting responsibility to state government is the only way to ever get the state out of the 49 percentile when it comes to meeting its housing responsibilities for all members of it population.

Until then unless there is another method to force municipalities in to making affordable housing decisions 40B is the only method to stop non growth or the not in my neighborhood atmosphere that exists in the state today, eliminate it and it may be your children who won't be able to live here, if you do not believe me look at the population growth numbers and the exodus of the 27 to 35 year age bracket from the state and then lets discuss the success of meeting our responsibilities for future generations and eliminating 40B.

Geoffrey Evancic

Ashburnham