"I beseech you"
Perhaps there is no greater corner of Community and Homeside than the municipal public meeting, where the intersection of the two meet when the public presents their personal comment on concerns related to the community. Depending on the meeting, the comment may need to relate to the matters on the “docket” (meeting agenda), but sometimes not.
This intersection can be messy and is often frustrating, especially if one has taken time from the “homeside” to participate—even virtually—to find the topic to be addressed has been taken off the meeting’s agenda or is last in a very long line of matters.
Most often one only makes time for these meetings when one is directly related to the matter at hand or one has a passion for the particular topic. Such is the case for me with the planning for housing. Indeed, it is the genesis of this endeavor!
And such it was last Tuesday night. A rough day behind me, I settled in to listen and participate virtually in my city’s planning meeting, but from a scenic location. On the docket were two public hearings and six zoning matters for the commission to regard for their recommendation. All but one of the matters regarded some version of a request for relief from land regulations in order to construct an additional one or two dwellings. Some would be new standing homes, and others would increase the number of dwellings within an existing building.
My comment, though addressing one matter, was to be a global one. Please allow relief so that these new dwellings can be created.
When I first logged in, I saw that the first matter that I wanted to make my comment on, was “continued.” So, the meeting was already onto the second lengthy argument. Especially given the incongruence with my beautiful location, forty minutes in I was frustrated and left the meeting.
Arriving back home a half-hour later, I logged in again, and as fate would have it, the matter being discussed was a home not very far from me on a main street near public transit. The request was to turn an existing three-family home into a four-family by converting the basement into a legal apartment.
As a veteran of these meetings with keen awareness of the commissioners’ tendencies, I heard the concerns I hear so often, particularly the squeamishness toward “density.” Despite all the sensible reasons in favor of this request, the commissioners were predisposed to not recommend it. My remarks were brief and earnest: “Nearly all the matters before the commission tonight seek some form of amendment or relief to add small amounts of homes. I have come before you many times, so you know what I am about to say. We need more homes. Homes of all kinds. I beseech you to find in favor of these changes.”
They did not.
And so it is with many of us that we will remain at our homeside.