Neighborhood Zoning Saga Continues
- mcc021557
- May 26
- 4 min read
Log onto the next Community Development Board Meeting on Wednesday June 4th at 6:30PM and email them: ocd@medford-ma.gov, the mayor, and the city council to tell them that you are against NIMBY protectionist zoning that prioritizes “neighborhood character” in some neighborhoods at the expense of adding untenable amounts of density to the environmental justice neighborhoods. This zoning is rapid gentrification and will harm the communities that many are pretending it will protect. Drown out the activists that Matt Leming is rallying - with the truth!
Matt Leming is correct that “Affordable housing activism is a tricky, wonky area” but it is made trickier by elected officials positioning themselves as experts in the subject area and spreading propaganda to weaponize uninformed housing advocates who will believe them and spread the misinformation further. Attention activists: There is ZERO affordability built into the Neighborhood Residential Zoning despite Matt Leming’s claims to the contrary. The zoning is not the same for all neighborhoods. The neighborhoods with the most density are being zoned to hold much more density. The neighborhoods with large lots of mostly single-family homes in parts of West Medford, the Lawrence Estates and Fulton Heights are being zoned to only allow a single-family home and the state required ADU.
If density is a community good and the desire of all of Medford (as Matt Leming and Kit Collins have repeatedly mischaracterized based on the Medford Comprehensive Plan), then why would certain neighborhoods be exempt from further density? Further why would the areas excluded from the density push be the areas with the least density and the most space?
We are around EIGHT meetings into the Neighborhood Zoning proposal…so why are Matt Leming and the Medford, MA USA Facebook page suddenly announcing this zoning as if it is brand new? Probably because some housing advocates have been alerted that the proposal voted through to the Community Development Board can only be described as NIMBY protectionism. There is now some urgency to pass it as is in order to deliver on the “promise of density,” but also maintain the “neighborhood character” of the wealthier neighborhoods with the largest lots. Matt Leming will allow no compromise. He will with one motion flip any zoning suggestion from the Community Development Board to the side and his OR brethren will vote to support him as one.
Matt Leming thinks the Neighborhood Zoning is perfect as he voted it through to the CDB. He actively made sure the zoning was less dense in the chosen neighborhoods and more dense where density, lack of parking and heat islands are already an issue. Many in the public pointed this out over and over. Some who were happy for the Salem St Corridor zoning to be overly dense suddenly flipped to not wanting density when it came to their own neighborhood. Unlike the reasonable requests for studies from the Glenwood residents, these residents went street by street and had the City Council Planning and Permitting Committee downzone their neighborhood - one street at a time. There was ZERO pushback from Matt Leming to keep the density he said is required to “solve the housing crisis,” he allowed thousands of parcels to be downzoned in the interest of maintaining “neighborhood character” in the neighborhoods deemed worthy by him and his committee members.
Don’t be fooled. Matt doesn’t believe that density is good, or he would be urging the housing advocates to push for more housing in the less dense areas. When trying to engage with Matt on the subject, he lamented that the “walls of text” were too much for him to read. Not sorry, Matt, sharing information takes many more words than just spreading misinformation and propaganda. Don’t believe me, check the zoning map…
This is the map that Matt and his fellow committee members voted through for suggestions/approval. Despite a lack of rapid transit in the Glenwood area, they are set to be zoned at the highest Neighborhood Residential Zoning. The same level of density or greater than what was proposed near the West Medford Commuter Rail and the same (in one section one level lower) as the area surrounding the Green line stops.
The reason the zoning is so high in Glenwood is to enable the resident flipper and others like him to buy up the housing as the environmental justice neighbors are priced out and replace them with far greater numbers of luxury units. As the lots are so small (3k or 4k – if the CDB suggestions are accepted), that there will be no parcels large enough to hold 10 units which is the minimum to require an affordable unit.
Finally, Matt and his comrades would have you believe that building one-bedroom apartments will make apartments more affordable so that people can afford to not have roommates. This is decisively UNTRUE. These will be new construction and will be the most expensive housing in the neighborhood from day one.
Statistically in Medford, a one-bedroom apartment is about $400 less than a two-bedroom apartment. Meaning that move alone will make housing less affordable and less able to have costs shared by bringing in a roommate.
Don’t believe the propaganda. These facts are easy to find.
Log onto the next Community Development Board Meeting on Wednesday June 4th at 6:30PM and email them (ocd@medford-ma.gov) and the mayor and the city council to tell them that you are against NIMBY protectionist zoning that prioritizes “neighborhood character” in some neighborhoods at the expense of adding untenable amounts of density to the environmental justice neighborhoods.
This zoning is rapid gentrification and will harm the communities that many are pretending it will protect. The zoning is available to read:
We can answer any questions that you might have. Be informed. Speak out!
Remember what Matt Leming thinks of you come election time. Read his blogs to see the open distain he has for people more educated than him, more informed than him and anyone who disagrees with him. This blog is informed by the blog for Matt Leming.
Comments