2023-03-08-LHRC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

explains further that ultimately, the goal of the state is to produce more housing units and there was concern that applying pressure to build more affordable housing would have a negative impact on housing production. For several decades, housing supply has consistently been less than the demand for housing. The hope is that zoning for multifamily housing will help increase housing supply and thereby stabilizing the cost of housing. 2% of Lexington's land area is required to be zoned for multi-family unit housing under the new state law. o A member inquired about increasing pressure on schools as a downstream effect of the zoning rules. In particular, the concern is that special education students are the most disproportionately impacted when schools become overcrowded and students with marginalized identities are also disproportionately affected. Additionally, while the question targets a concern about concurrent planning for schools, the member did emphasize a desire to encourage more diverse housing stock and younger demographic to be able to access housing in Lexington. Ms. McCabe shares that the planning board is aware of the possibility of increased housing leading to overcrowding in the schools. However, through zoning, it is hard to predict exactly how much housing will be produced and they are not allowed to exclude certain groups in the planning process. The school district is aware of the proposed zoning and there is an enrollment group in town that looks at student enrollment trends and they too are supportive of the new proposals. Additionally, multi-unit housing typically has fewer school aged children in their developments. o A question about whether the planning board could push for more affordable housing because they have heard others asking if Lexington could do more for increasing affordable housing units in town. McCabe responds that with this zoning proposal, the planning board is doing the maximum and points out that while the state requires only up to 10% inclusionary zoning, the Lexington Planning Board were able to push for 15% inclusionary zoning by consulting a fiscal economic study to verify that it is financially feasible in Lexington to increase the affordable housing cap to 15%. Ms. McCabe also cautioned that the Planning Board is not allowed to propose zoning that is so restrictive that it effectively prevents new housing. She also commented that having Article 33, 34 and the new Affordable Housing Trust in combination will create a strong policy for inclusionary housing. o SJ addressed their belief that there were misconceptions about the correlation of housing and rate of student enrollment and that past data looking at number of students per dwelling was well below one and encouraged the committee to help dispel any notion that each new dwelling will bring along multiple students to the school district. They also pointed out the need to ask for clarity when to wn residents make broad statements that Articles 33 and 34 will destroy the 'character of the town.' o Ms. McCabe commented on the nature of concern around single housing development in comparison to multi-family unit housing. Whereas single housing development raises concern over traffic and general construction, only when multi-family housing is proposed, does the Planning Board hear concerns of overcrowding of schools get mentioned. She points out that this is a rather curious anomaly associated with denser housing proposals. A member of the committee echoed this sentiment, the construction of the Avalon apartments had not increased student enrollment as suggested by those concerned with development of multi-unit housing. MR pointed out that the special education community do worry about downstream impacts of increased housing (whether it is single detached or multi-family units) on their students who are disproportionately impacted when enrollment exceeds capacity.