We were disappointed to read the article on affordable housing in the Press last week. The article presented substantially more opinion than fact. To foster a productive discussion and ultimately a solution, it’s important to keep track of this project’s evolution, as an overwhelming majority of us would like to help satisfy the town’s need for affordable housing while balancing the rural character of our town.
The table that accompanies this letter compares the details of the original proposal (Harvard Press 1/10/14) to the MetroWest proposal. The original plan had wide support as an affordable housing project.
Clearly, the original plan, both the size and character of this project, was dramatically altered in the MetroWest proposal. A quote from last week’s Press, “The notion that the recent project was twice as big as initially advertised was a persistent, if inaccurate, theme at the meetings.” To any reasonable view, when the number of planned bedrooms in a project jumps from 35 to more than 80, the project is indeed double initially advertised. Beyond the dramatic change in plan size, the MetroWest proposal was based on entirely different housing composition —100 percent rental and 100 percent affordable. The inclusion of any market rate single-family homes was dropped completely. The MetroWest plan was based on proposed structures that didn’t include garages but instead featured five parking lots, complete with 24/7 lighting. Clearly, any of us living in Harvard can recognize this type of development is not in keeping with the character of Harvard. It was striking to us that these two fundamental changes went undiscussed in last week’s article.
The Harvard Selectmen chairman is quoted in the Press, “People were never lied to. There was never a bait and switch. These were just the numbers people remembered before the RFP even went out.” What is obvious for anyone involved in this project is the nature and spirit of the original 40B proposal, which had Harvard community support, was fundamentally changed. And this fact, in conjunction with the MAHT’s negative posture towards communication and transparency, explains the significant and increasing public involvement and concern around this project. Can’t we have an honest discussion?
Susan Mitchell, Pinnacle Road
on behalf of 40 area residents
