Editor:

 The Cape Cod Chronicle has dedicated much space to the discussion of housing issues as of late, one of which is the notion of over-building in our region. The fact remains that the Cape still has a severe shortage of year-round units, making it harder for our families and workforce to live locally while contributing to our economy.

Households making less than $200,000 a year still struggle to find a place to live on the Cape. A greater supply of properly scaled and well-designed housing options would help meet the needs of year-round residents who are paying nearly 70 percent more for rental housing than the national average.

Last week’s housing production report from the Healey-Driscoll Administration set a target of 222,000 new homes statewide over the next decade to ease our housing shortage. While the Cape was identified as having a lower need for housing units overall, the situation has been exacerbated by the conversion of existing units into vacation homes for non-year-round residents.

What we need in communities across the Cape are more housing options, especially the “missing middle” inventory for the people who make our economy hum. New developments help meet this need by adding both affordable and market-rate housing. Persistent job vacancies, declines in school enrollment, and the region’s relatively high median age (57 compared to about 40 for the entire state) make clear the enduring need for housing production.

Community by community, the Cape is beginning to make progress on the housing crisis. But let’s not get complacent and forget about what we need to succeed.

Alisa Magnotta, CEO
Housing Assistance
Orleans

Editor:

I spent 25 years teaching high school history in Massachusetts public schools. Fifteen of those years were spent teaching in Chatham and Harwich. I taught students about the separation of powers and the constitutional authority of each branch of government. I taught that, unlike a monarchy, the authority of the United States federal government is derived from the will of the people, expressed through their elected representatives, and that Congress has the power to make laws and controls the power of the purse. The Congress has these powers now because an earlier generation of Americans overthrew a king whom they had not elected.

The Trump administration and its allies, including the billionaire Elon Musk, have decided that all those civics lessons — and the Constitution — were wrong and that the executive branch and whatever private agents it authorizes, regardless of their conflicts of interest, can overrule the will of Congress and the laws it has passed. I've seen a few people cheering these developments on because they oppose excessive federal spending. But it is an illegal abandonment of authority by Congress to allow it, and the courts are ruling against it.

If the Trump administration persists in interfering with actions authorized by Congressional laws and ignores judicial orders, then it will have proved itself an illegal regime, and Americans will have a duty to resist its actions and remove them from power. We do not honor our history by bending a knee before a king.

Matthew Brown
Harwich

Editor:

I am perplexed about the situation with our senior center. I ask myself why my town, with such an abundance of money and wealth, chooses to ignore myself and fellow elders.

It’s offensive and unfair. You had an offer to create a new venue, land to make a place for seniors to relax, engage and enjoy, but refused it.

Sure, shoot a Hollywood movie. What about us, the seniors?

Suffice it to say, I am disgusted and ashamed we are not being taken care of.

Beverly Anderson
Chatham

Editor:

A Cape Cod morning talk show on Wednesday Feb. 12 took calls about the new Cambridge zoning rules that specified no more future single-family, one-story zoning in Cambridge. Other callers spoke to excessive apartments being built in Hyannis that may not have enough interested qualified renters, but more importantly, those that would qualify would not want to live in a place that looked like a Motel 6. It sounded exactly like the proposed Pine Oaks IV in Harwich. Multi story units (who wants to live in a "unit" with no patio for a bbq, no shed for bicycles) being built to satisfy Massachusetts affordable housing regulations, but with too many of them at the high end of the price scale so those that could afford them would not want to rent them anyway.

But the water and sewage issue is far more important than affordable housing, especially on Cape Cod. The rest of Massachusetts, at least the urban part, probably has sewers. While I do understand about people who were born here that can't afford to live here, that happens in every tourist destination in this country. Somebody could probably do a master's degree thesis on this topic. If we continue to pollute our ponds and even pollute the beaches during a summer rain, we are all ruined. Consider this: I don't think it is about the teachers or firepersons, I think we could find a way to get them affordable housing. To my way of thinking it is about the support system for every other homeowner (including me, who needs all sorts of help). Well, the Tech is training wonderful people to be our support system. We need to prioritize our own people.

Anne Stewart
Pleasant Lake

Editor:

I would like to respond to the select board and taxpayers of Harwich. I believe you need a history lesson. We, the taxpayers of Chatham, only approved the regionalization with Harwich because of the promised financial long-term benefits. We were told that because of our declining enrollment in Chatham Schools, our upfront costs for regionalization would be high but we would see a net benefit in the future. The time has finally come. Chatham is getting what we were promised. However, “Harwich Balks." We bailed you out with the elementary school. Now you want us to cave on the middle school and renegotiate the funding formula. Enough. We are not your piggy bank. I am sorry that Harwich has mismanaged their finances, but please remember you came to us with hat in hand because you needed a new high school.

Peter Taylor
Chatham 

Editor:

In his Feb. 13 letter to the editor (“Info About Pine Oaks Village”), Gregory Winston, board president of the Pine Oaks Village group, states that his group is “disappointed by the wave of misinformation being circulated on social media and elsewhere.”

Misinformation is not needed to prove why the select board and a growing number of informed residents cannot support this proposed massive development. The facts speak for themselves.

To his first point: Yes, there would be 248 units housed in 10 massive apartment complexes, which at full capacity would cluster 886 people together in a town with a year-round population of 13,329. In addition to the footprint of the 10 buildings, the 445 planned parking spaces appear to be equal to, or greater than, the footprint of the buildings themselves. If built as proposed, POV4 would be one of the largest housing developments on Cape Cod. Compounding the density problem is the likelihood for more development on the adjacent non-40B land which the Pine Oaks group hopes to gain control of.

To his second point regarding local preference. Such preference, if approved by the state, would only be required on the first round of rentals. Once the initial tenants of a unit leave, no local preference is required for subsequent tenants.

To his third point about affordability, I would direct people to section 4 of the Operating Pro-forma on the Pine Oaks website to see the actual dollar amount of the rentals and see for themselves what is considered affordable.

In his fourth point, Mr. Winston states that “Environmental studies of the site have already been conducted. Much of the site land will be undisturbed.” The Harwich Conservation Commission refutes that statement. In their response letter to the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program, the HCC states that “the plans that have been provided are not fully engineered. They lack labeling for wetlands and buffer zones. It is hard to review the project from the conservation perspective as it is not clear if what appear to be wetland lines and buffer zones are actually that. Plans are not stamped or signed by a professional engineer.”

In his fifth point, Mr. Winston claims that the Pine Oaks group has “already begun discussions with the CC Regional Transit Authority to create new routes serving our entire community.” This does very little to assuage the concerns regarding the volume of traffic that POV4, with its 445 parking spaces and its own projection of 2,234 trips per weekday, would add to the already heavily used and dangerous Queen Anne Road. Bus service would also do nothing to alleviate the need for substantial infrastructure improvement, costing the taxpayers of Harwich millions of dollars.

In addition, Mr. Winston’s claim that “much of the site land will be undisturbed" is nebulous and is inconsistent with the site map on the Pine Oaks website which shows vast amounts of impervious surfaces. There are no percentages or numbers given to clarify what “much” means. In addition, undisturbed and open space are clumped together, so it is difficult to ascertain how much land would be left undisturbed.

And finally, Mr. Winston asks that the residents of Harwich keep an open mind. Yet, the Pine Oaks group has shown no such open mind when asked to propose a smaller version of their project.

They call us their friends and neighbors while ignoring our concerns regarding the size and density of the proposed development as well as the environmental, safety and fiscal impacts. They continue to forge ahead, hoping to use the force of the state and three levels of taxpayer dollars to build their enormous, all rental, worker warehousing against the town’s wishes.

Sherri Stockdale
Harwich