UPDATED: This appears to be a function of state law (61B), not of city law or practices. More later.
View Larger Map
The question I would be asking if I lived in Lower Falls: why is the City of Newton asking my neighbors and me to make accommodations and accept transit-oriented development in my neighborhood when, one stop down the D line, the potential site of a much better mixed-used development is a city-subsidized, private country club?
Make no mistake, the Riverside site should be developed, and more intensely than the neighbors would like. But, fairness dictates that the city not promote development on one site and subsidize non-development on another, better site.
Note: a nifty Google map is not appearing. I’m trying to figure out why.