I don’t believe the elected guardians of our town’s well-being have done their due diligence to protect our public assets. In particular I am writing about the project to enlarge and remodel our Jones Library, a landmark in the center of town. 

The development that’s happening all over town, the continual push for ever more permissive zoning changes, the flurry of construction activity is encouraged by our planning department as part of our “Master Plan,” a blueprint for development that began as a participatory community activity but was greatly modified before it was written into our Zoning Bylaw.

It was never brought to Town Meeting but ratified by the Planning Board. The key word is “infill” – the imperative to use every shred and shard of valuable real estate in the town center for building. 

But there are other principles written into that plan for historic preservation and preservation of greenways.  From the plan’s Land Use chapter: “Amherst should preserve the historic character of its neighborhoods; ensure that new development complements historic buildings, and create an accessible, pedestrian-friendly environment. Emphasize preservation (historic areas of the downtown.”) 

It also calls to emphasize “adaptive reuse,” particularly historic areas downtown. Public green spaces are significant assets to urban areas, particularly when they are well-loved and frequently used by community members.

Trustees and Select Board members have failed to protect one of our finest public assets. They have not considered any plans for “adaptive reuse” of the historic existing building. 

There is a petition article coming before Town Meeting to preserve the gardens. The Select Board will ask Town Meeting to dismiss it. Select Board member Connie Kruger said she did not want to “constrain the design process at this stage.”

Select Board member Andrew Steinberg said, “the health and vitality of Amherst Center might be lost if the building project does not move forward.”

Austin Sarat, in a statement from Jones Library trustees on March 28, said to preserve the entirety of the garden “would unduly constrain the effort to provide the best possible Library to the people of Amherst.”

The Trustees and the Select Board have not studied alternate plans nor, it seems, have they read the historic and greenway preservation imperatives of the Land Use section of the Master Plan while they extol infill.

And how do Select Board members Kruger and Steinberg and Jones trustee president Sarat know what will provide the “best possible library” or how the building project might affect the “health and vitality of Amherst Center?”

Let’s ask the leaders of our community to take a more balanced view of the facts that make up their decisions to destroy an irreplaceable asset in order to save it.

Molly Turner

Amherst