Calling out the NIMBY's

Common goals for the common good in Boston
By Meg Mainzer-Cohen
October 25, 2008

AT A TIME when the economy has ground to a halt, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino is right to encourage the Boston Redevelopment Authority to expedite projects that are in the pipeline. The city may also want to reflect on the contentious public process that businesses must go through in order to build in Boston.

When it comes to development, the business community is often the underdog to anti-development zealots. The benefits of creating jobs, tax revenue, and new development get hidden in the shadow of invalid claims about environmental impacts and zoning.

Consider the Back Bay. Much of the Back Bay and South End is historically protected or is now parkland. Minimal new development will ever happen. Between them is an area called the "high spine," identified in the 1960s as a place for density connecting Back Bay with downtown. This makes perfect sense in the Back Bay where people want to live, work, stay at a hotel, shop, eat in a restaurant, or attend a convention at the Hynes. These activities are a catalyst for economic growth that supports the city and state. During boom times and bust, the economy of the Back Bay remains strong, which should be leveraged as a highly viable way to add to the tax coffers and create jobs.

With concern about the environment, the Back Bay is an ideal area to build density near public transportation. Menino created "green building" amendments to the Boston zoning code that encourages smart growth and environmentally friendly development. Back Bay benefits from having the commuter rail, MBTA Green and Orange lines, and soon the Silver Line. With a mix of housing, and office and retail space, people who live here don't need cars.

Zoning in Back Bay was written 20 years ago, before the concepts of smart growth, and should be rewritten to allow building for the future, incorporating smart growth in areas that are not historically protected.

Yet there has been opposition. The Neighborhood Association of Back Bay has opposed every building proposal as well as efforts to improve transportation for citizens. It opposed the MBTA adding articulated buses, and sued to stop handicapped-accessible stations. It said "no" to Columbus Center, 888 Boylston Street, the Exeter Residences, the Mandarin Oriental, 350 Boylston Street, and the Back Bay Restaurant Group's plan for TGIF's. The group wanted traffic signals on Storrow Drive, restricting traffic by 40 percent.

At a recent public meeting held as part of the Article 80 review process to inform the community about updated plans for 888 Boylston Street and the Exeter Street residences, presenters were cut off by the NIMBY crowd who wanted to comment on why the projects shouldn't happen.

Activists used buzzwords like "zoning," "shadow," and "wind." The public didn't learn that the "wind" improved in more areas than it worsened, "shadows" were not considered impactful because they were minimal during December, and "zoning" was created to allow changes in a planned development area, where the development is located. Instead, the meeting debased into a NIMBY-fest as one activist questioned the legal authority of the Boston Redevelopment Authority and advocated its dismantling.

The city must advocate for common goals for the common good, considering how to build Boston for the future. We must add housing and office space in areas that can support it, translating into the creation of jobs, housing, and increased taxes. We must advocate for transportation projects that ensure people can get where they need to go.

When it comes to creating jobs and homes, and increasing tax revenue, NIMBYers just say no. We must raise our voices in support of common goals for the common good.

Meg Mainzer-Cohen is president of the Back Bay Association.

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.