Village 14 regular Julia Malakie is on hiatus from posting new threads here as she runs for Alderman/City Council in Ward 3. But she’s still bringing her mix of reporting/photography/graphics/opinion that she’s so good at, to her campaign blog.
On her latest post, she breaks news about a possible development on the corner to Washington and Walnut Streets in Newtonville.
I would very much welcome a larger more productive development here, the buildings other than the Ore block are limited in appeal, especially the 845 property. HOWEVER, the facade of the Ore block lends an excellent element of interest to the block and encourages pedestrian access because of it, as does the somewhat nice brick of the H&R Block building I would be very very concerned with both being lost. I would also hate to see businesses lost with such a transition as well… That all said, we need more housing in Newtonville to sustain the businesses we have here, we cant rely on folks coming in from other villages and towns to help our economy, but we dont have enough density to really support them right now, building up in a reasonable manner is the best option. I would like to see the facade saved like they are doing with the old Filenes in Downtown Crossing, I think that reasonable and very doable even if the plan is to build additional stories above it, especially if set back so as to highlight the existing facade. I wonder if it would be possible to swap Newtonville Camera with the existing CVS if that is indeed the plan to move it…
I only have one question… What’s in it for Newton? The devil is in the details.
Julia Malakie, John_on_Central, Mike Striar, what assumptions are you making here? If this is a piece of commercial property, which I understand it is, zoned BU1 and BU2, and it has been purchased by a developer, especially one with ties to or operating on behalf of CVS, then welcome to the future, because the new owner may have plans and intentions that really don’t fit your vision of how this will work. The Austin St. project is a sideshow by comparison. Suppose the anchor is CVS, who wants a major upsizing to their presence in Newtonville, which if you look at their current premises on Walnut is no surprise. If you think there is going to be anything other than a complete teardown of the ‘Karoun’ parcel you are dreaming and smoking dope. If the transaction (sale) has already happened, you are way behind the curve, worrying about the lovely decorative bricks – and in any case, have you looked at that block? The buildings are pretty run down, let’s face it. @Mike, you must know how to check these things, Banker and Tradesman, whatever, will have the sale information.
Having said all that, will they have to deal with neighbors and abutters, special permit, and all that? Sure probably. But in the end, it sounds like this train has also left the station. Maybe we should find a way to get all these folks to work together, and come up with some rational, pragmatic approach to how the next 10 or 20 years in Newtonville might play out, instead of railing against change and opposing every single attempt to move forward. Stay tuned, I don’t think this show is anywhere near over yet.
H L Dewey, I would be fine with a new development and yes most of these buildings are unfortunately run down. However, current projects around the country have typically done a poor job of replacing century old buildings and maintaining the natural pedestrian friendliness that was created when peds were the only game in town. I would be perfectly fine and supportive, but I also don’t believe it is in the best interest of the city or businesses to just bow down to whatever the developer wants to do.
Count me firmly in the pro-development, but smart, and not done for development’s sake camp. I believe incremental development is better than whole block demo’s and can create a better more productive final product that does not have a sterile feeling to it. In any case this will be before zoning, land use, design review etc.
In any case I look forward to hopefully a discussion and great opportunity to enliven this block! (also if they get rid of the driving school building and actually put massing to the sidewalk that would be a huge improvement)
What a great website Julia!!
I am interested in the fate of the local businesses located there- after what happened to Newton Corner 35 years ago (and all I know about that is the little I’ve read and seen in photos, to be honest), I would hate to see those businesses go- my only personal attachment is to Newtonville Camera, but interested to hear from others who are familiar with those businesses on the block.
I too like the facade on the corner, but can’t imagine them leaving that and building around it.
Ms. Malakie has a very attractive website, but I do not see any mention of finances on it. How do our slow or no growth candidates (LeBlanc, Auchincloss, Barton, Malakie) propose to pay for Newton’s unfunded liabilities and underfunded infrastructure (for example, road conditions have deteriorated over the past 6 years)? My understanding is 80-90% of Newton’s funding comes from residential taxes.
I’d also be interested in learning their ideas on traffic. Businesses can create more traffic than residential units. A 2,700 sq ft. shopping center or bank w/ drive-in generates the same number of car trips as a 120 condo/apt units (from the Institute of Transportation Engineers).
Excellent points about both revenue and traffic, Lucia.
Agreed, Lucia. Which is why this city needs more commercial development near public transit, like Mass Challenge and now Washington Street. I met with the developer of this project on Wednesday. He has two promising commercial anchors, great ideas to enliven the sidewalks, and is committed to working with the community. More details are needed, of course, especially on projected impact on the schools, but it is a promising start.
There is no capacity at Cabot School for any more students if Austin Street goes through. That is a fact in reading the capacity planning for the new Cabot school. We need to make choices– in this case, providing the basic amount of space for our children to learn or new residential development. You unfortunately can’t have both.
This proposal doesn’t sound like it offers much growth of commercial space. It seems to have much more emphasis on housing. There is currently only one vacant retail space among these buildings. We could potentially lose two very prominent independent businesses; Newtonville Camera and Karoun, and a cultural enterprise; Boston Ballet School. Is an expanded CVS more desirable than some of these existing, more unique businesses? Replacing historical buildings with large scale, potentially modular construction may not be appealing to residents. This type of proposal would require re-zoning in addition to a special permit, so it may not be approved. With the current proposal on Austin St nearby many residents have development fatigue
It sure sounds like a lot of folks are rushing to judgement here – Mr. Auchincloss says “I met with the developer of this project on Wednesday. He has two promising commercial anchors, great ideas to enliven the sidewalks . . . ” and then @Jeff says “This proposal doesn’t sound like it offers much growth of commercial space. It seems to have much more emphasis on housing” and so forth, as though there were an actual plan or proposal on the table, comparable to the proposal for Auston St. I suspect this is total speculation at this point, with a bunch of people either trying to give the impression that they have some sort of inside information, or jumping the gun and criticising details of a ‘design’ where one does not exist. I would also suggest maintaining a healthy scepticism toward any statements from political candidates involved in an election that is just over a month away, since they have their own selfish agenda. And please, I’m not referring to any specific candidate, I mean any candidate. What would be nice, of course, is to have some local journalistic resource to do some balanced reporting for us, but I don’t know if that exists anymore. Greg, Gail, and others don’t work that beat now – is the Tab covering it?
Could we talk about accountability, transparency and openness? Something has been bothering me about this thread, and I think it has to do with some of the posters and current political candidates making statements and positioning themselves as being champions of ‘transparency’ while failing to disclose relevant information themselves. The top of the thread starts with a flattering reference to Julia Malakie, who is now a candidate for Alderman at Large:
OK, great, she’s a candidate but we refer to her still bringing her stellar skills to the subject matter as she ‘breaks a story’ which implies that you should take this as journalistic output up to her usual standard. Fine, let’s go over to her blog, which is by the way her campaign blog, where the ‘story’ is broken:
Now, help me out here. Where and how exactly did she get this information? Was this in a press release, did she do an interview, did she get a call, did she go to a meeting? She is already talking about how many units, how many stories the building will be, retail on the first floor, and so forth. Where is this coming from? Does the general public know all this? How does she know it? Was there a press conference? She devotes an entire blog article to questioning and criticising a ‘project’ that I can’t find in the public press. Then we have Mr. Auchincloss, who makes the following statement further down in the thread:
I have similar questions. What meeting with what developer? Could we know from him how this meeting happened, what was the context, who was there, why was Mr. Auchincloss meeting with these people? Who else got invited to such a meeting, was it as a group, so maybe all the current candidates were invited? What the hell is going on?
@HL: I praised Malakie for her good blog post because, well, it was a good blog post.
HL,
Sadly you like so many of Newtons citizenry are behind on the story. This is exactly why we need new leadership that will be more transparent and inform constituents about developments before the working drawings are complete.
@HL: Just in terms of process, often a developer or a developer’s attorney will reach out to immediate abutters, area businesses and the local Aldermen to either inform them of their plans or to gauge sentiment about their proposal. They also tend to meet with City Staff and the Development Review Team if a site plan review or special permit is required Those meetings are not necessarily public – although the Planning Department has been putting together a weekly Development Review Team Transmittal Sheet which can be found online as part of the Friday packet. Here is a recent example: ftp://209.6.5.208/07-24-15%20Friday%20Packet/07-27-15%20Weekly%20DRT%20Transmittal%20Sheet.pdf.
@Lucia: How do our slow or no growth candidates (LeBlanc, Auchincloss, Barton, Malakie) propose to pay for Newton’s unfunded liabilities and underfunded infrastructure (for example, road conditions have deteriorated over the past 6 years)? My understanding is 80-90% of Newton’s funding comes from residential taxes.
I do not know the candidates’ position on payment of our unfunded liabilities and underfunded infrastructure – but growth – especially housing growth has costs as well which further exacerbate our infrastructure – water/sewer, roads, schools. There needs to be balanced growth at a rate and pace that does not overwhelm our existing infrastructure so that we can make the repairs and improvements necessary to handle what we already have. We have successfully used debt exclusions as a means to improve our schools and we should probably do the same with our water/sewer infrastructure, our roads, and for funding our OPEB – as our neighbors – Wellesley did a few years back.
That’s just my two cents.
@Amy – How would that differ from what Newton is currently doing? Or put another way, why hasn’t Newton been doing what Wellesley has done? Is there a downside to debt exclusions?
@Gregg
Would you care to explain why you (or another moderator) deleted my post? It didn’t violate any of the blogs commenting rules.
I was curious about that too. Is “outing” someone’s identity against the rules?
Yes. Outing an anonymous commentator is not within the spirit of the rules. Simon I sent you an email about it.
As an aside, I’m not certain Simon was correct either. But that’s besides the point.
Lucia – Consider this: Wellesley has passed 25 overrides since the passage of Prop. 2 1/2. Newton has had 2. Anyone who’s worked on an override campaign in this city will tell you that you hand over your life for months in order to get to a yes vote.
Just out of curiosity, is it within the rules of V14 for a sitting elected official to post under a pseudonym?
@Greg,
I got your email, and will respect your decision.
I’m not so sure I was “outing” anybody though. I thought it fair game considering transparency was at question.
Emily – Give me a break. Of course it is and they do, and not just one.
It is against the TOS of the TAB Blog:
“If you are an elected official, you must submit content identifying yourself as such when posting about a political issue.”
@Lucia – You might recall that despite my advocay to use debt exclusions to pay for the new Newton North – there was extreme reluctance to go to the voters and make the ask. In 2008, Alderman Brandel and I put a debt exclusion and override package forward but that was summarily rejected by the Board, The override package that was passed by the Board which did not include a debt exclusion and was rejected by the voters. It was only recently that Mayor Warren, the school committee and the Board – perhaps with the realization that we desperately needed to move forward with the elementary school repairs and did not have the necessary funds, went to the voters and made the ask. It took a tremendous amount of time and energy and campaigning and town hall meetings to convince voters that the override and debt exclusions that were proposed, were well worth the added taxes. We probably should have included Zervas but that’s a whole other story.
The concept of going to the voters for a debt exclusion for OPEB was brought up during this budget session when we were discussing Alderman Norton’s resolution to fully fund OPEB. That resolution did not pass but I made the suggestion that we should consider doing what Wellesley did – and that was to go to the voters with a debt exclusion override to address OPEB.
We have many more schools and city buildings that need to be upgraded – streets, sidewalks and roads that need to be repaired, water and sewer pipes that need to be replaced ,cleaned, repaired, etc. There are a lot of things to bring forward to the voters but there is only a certain amount our residents are willing and able to pay…..
Which goes to a broader issue – Newton continues to become more and more unaffordable. Teardowns of smaller homes are being replaced with much larger and more expensive homes at a very fast pace and with no controls. The push is to create more density in order to combat the increase in expensive housing and maintain diversity in this community. But with density, comes more pressure on our infrastructure which already is in great need of repair and upgrade. In order to fund these needed upgrades and repairs – we need to increase our tax base and/or go to the voters. We have very little area for commercial development and businesses are heading to Needham and Waltham (something I hope we are able o stop). If we increase the cost to live in Newton – fees and taxes, it makes it impossible for long-time residents who have invested so much into this community to remain and we make it impossible for new residents who will move into these new ¨affordable¨ units to succeed. In addition, if we are not careful in our approach to development, we will become more like the more ¨urban¨ cities we chose not to live in because we wanted something less urban than Brookline and less suburban than Weston. But I digress….
It’s not a huge issue to me, Greg, but I think you’re setting the wrong precedent. Would you agree that it’s in the public’s interest to “out” elected officials or their spouses who comment under fake names? It bothers me that a mayor, councilor, or school committee member can come on this blog and comment under a fake name. Deception should not be part of the Village 14 experience.
This blog allows anonymous comments. In that spirit I don’t believe we should allow someone to out an anonymous participant.
As an aside, I proposed to my fellow Village 14ers that we not allow anonymous comments as an experiment during this election cycle. But I was out voted.
@Amy
So succinctly put. We are very fortunate to have you represent us.
Who wants to be an Empress when you can be a councillor in a leafy suburb?
@Greg,
In recent topics people have almost been ostracized for not providing identity.
“No Credibility” as some people like to say.
Yet if you’re politically connected that’s ok?
And what makes it more interesting is how a so called anonymous blogger gets inside protection?
People can choose to assign less credibility to anonymous participants. They can challenge them to come clean. They can ignore them. But they can’t out them. And it has nothing to do with connections.
But Simon if you feel strongly about this you could set a good example by using your full real name.
I don’t quite follow it.
Questioning if an anonymous bloggers partner met someone is hardly outing them.
I would say it falls under challenging them to come clean.
@Simon: I want the title and the crown!! : )
@Greg: I have no idea who the anonymous elected official or relative of an elected official is but I am very proud that Ald. Ted Hess Mahan, School Committee member Steve Siegel, School Committee member Margaret Albright, Alderwoman Emily Norton, Alderman Brian Yates, Alderman Scott Lennon, Alderman Alison Leary, Alderman Ruthanne Fuller and myself– ( forgive me colleagues in government, if I have inadvertently left you off this list), freely use our identities and subject ourselves to sometimes intense public scrutiny. Frankly, I think if you choose to participate in public discourse – like this blog and you are an elected representative or related to an elected representative, you have an obligation to disclose your identities or cease participation.
@Alderman Sangiolo. I agree! And there have been other electeds as well. I do not know of any sitting elected official who is commenting here anonymously. There’s been much speculation lately to the contrary but it’s purely that.
Also, as I said, criticizing an annonymous participant or political group is fair game here. Outing annonymous participants on Village 14 isn’t. (Feel free to so elsewhere)
And please don’t confuse my position here as an endorsement. If it was up to me, we’d not be allowing anonymous comments here now. But contrary to common perception this I don’t own this rodeo, I just ride here.
@Simon: I agree. It seems hypocritical that folks who run this blog criticize organizations like Newton Villages Alliance for not disclosing their membership, yet they allow elected officials and/or their relatives to post – what might be – vitriolic statements or criticisms launched at the regular citizenry and even at fellow electeds like me – anonymously!
Greg said: As an aside, I proposed to my fellow Village 14ers that we not allow anonymous comments as an experiment during this election cycle. But I was out voted.
Care to disclose who those ¨fellow Village 14ers¨ outvoted you?
@Greg,
Now thats an interesting challenge.
If the other blogger in question does
I will!
@Greg: How about ¨outing¨ your fellow Village14s who out-voted you?
Amy, I was one of them, and I’ve explained my reasoning on other threads. I don’t recall a formal vote. I think the decision was made by consensus. And while I typically do not post comments with my last name, it should be pointed out that all of the “voting” Village14s Greg cites are identified in the interest of providing some transparency. (Ugh, who added the e-mails? Probably doubled the amount of spam I’m getting)
For your consideration, a slightly different perspective:
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Outing
In particular the reference from the EFF:
https://www.eff.org/bloggers
Or just look at a relatively minor site such as http://www.reddit.com and examine their policy on posting personal information.
So much to catch up on! First, I will out myself as being one in favor of allowing anonymous comments. I think many people have a legitimate concern that they don’t want their name to show up in a Google search, and I don’t want to prevent them from commenting. However, I’d forgotten about the Tab Blog’s policy on elected officials, and I think that would be a good policy for V14 to follow as well, as their names are going to show up in Google searches anyway. (Not sure I get a vote while on hiatus!)
H L Dewey, you seem to be making my point that there was a lack of public information about this development proposal, at the same time you seem to be criticizing me for trying to correct that. Of course there was no press release, and as far as I know there was no master meeting for electeds or candidates. I got my information about the project from making phone calls, including to Steve Buchbinder, who was was helpful. Scattered people seemed to have heard of the project before me, but not the people who would be most directly affected — the businesses who are current tenants. I wouldn’t want to be a business owner making interior improvements and then find out a couple of months later my lease wasn’t going to be renewed when it expired, and someone could have told me but didn’t.
It just seems backwards for developers to come up with these projects holed up with Planning and the alders, and then bring in the public when everything is substantially decided. Is there a groundswell of sentiment that we need to modernize the Orr block even if it means displacing long-term successful businesses? I don’t think so. And like Austin Street, we’re once again looking at one project in isolation without knowing the big-picture plan. If one five-story building on this corner is accepted, can we expect more such proposals down Washington Street? In West Newton Square? Village centers on the T like Waban, Newton Highlands, Newton Centre?
Lucia, you seem to be suggesting that because a high percentage of revenue come from residential taxes, residential development will help solve the problem of unfunded liabilities. I would say the opposite is true. Commercial property brings in more in tax revenue than it costs in services; residential on average costs more than it brings in. Developers like to claim, and planners envision, that their projects will attract “millenials” who will take the commuter rail to Boston, not use their cars much, and not send kids to our overcrowded schools. But past experience in Newton, with actual numbers of added students exceeding projections, and in Brookline (see pp 13-14 of their report http://www.brooklinema.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2604 on school population) suggests people will squeeze into smaller units to access desirable public school systems. Brookline passed their school override. More overrides passing in Newton will tend to drive out the low and moderate income, and those without children in the school system. And if needed overrides don’t pass, it will hurt current students.
@Adam– I really don’t get the logic or rationale behind providing a local forum that allows elected officials to hoodwink the public. I would think you’d do everything in your power to stop that from happening, rather than continue to provide a safe harbor for fake names and hidden agendas. Some people are using you and this blog to mislead Newton residents, and your not only allowing it, you’re effectively encouraging it. I’m not saying you don’t have the right to allow identity liars. But I am saying that the debate on V14 often suffers for it.
Mike, sock-puppeting is forbidden in the guidelines and I suppose it’s implied that hoodwinking is also (we could be explicit, but I don’t expect the moderators to be able to verify things to that extent). If someone did something deceptive and we knew about it, I expect we’d block it, but this is just our little corner of the Internet. There are plenty of places to deceive, if someone really wishes to do so. We’re not running an authenticated service. We’re all on the honors system and people have to read everything in that context.
@Julie – I didn’t mean to imply this: “residential development will help solve the problem of unfunded liabilities.” I was only asking for no/slow growth candidates to describe their financial proposals for repairing Newton’s infrastructure and unfunded liabilities.
The arguments I’ve heard against more commercial development in Newton are that there is no place to build and that commercial development creates more traffic than residential.
Which developments in Newton have added more than the anticipated # of students to our schools? As I recall, the last big development, Avalon, was built because neighbors opposed putting a Shop and Stop in there because of traffic concerns. I believe NPS says Avalon did not add more than the expected # of students.
@Amy – I supported the idea for a debt exclusion for the new NNHS and appreciated you and Ken Parker raising the issue. But, isn’t a debt exclusion just a short-term (10-20-30 year) override? How do debt exclusion benefits low-income Newton residents any more than an override?
@V14 – Yes to anonymous blogging, even by elected officials.
@Lucia: A debt exclusion override is an override in taxes for a specific project. That is how the debt exclusion override was proposed for Angier and Cabot Elementary School.
@Adam: Thanks for your comment. I am still of the belief that elected officials and their spouses/representatives should be held to a higher standard. I made the inquiry about those on the Village14 blog board’s positions because at least one member (I think) is running for the Charter Commission and frankly – in my own opinion – if you think there should be a review of the Charter and are running for the Charter Commission – then I would hope that you are in favor of full transparency – in anything you are involved in – particularly – if that is something you would demand of public officials.
Amy, I tend to agree with what you say about elected officials, but it’s not always obvious where or how to draw the line, especially in cyberspace. So much of what occurs here is on the honors system. But this is the Internet (more anarchy than democracy) and not a public meeting or a political body where transparency is expected. That’s what makes V14 different and I think it’s generally worked out more often than not. I certainly do not expect transparency from everyone for all activities in their life.
If you or anyone else sees comments you feel are offensive or inappropriate, flag them with the ‘report’ button (anonymously) or contact a V14 moderator. We want to make this a place where everyone feels comfortable.
I don’t know if it is the hour or the fact that we keep repeating the same conversation, but let me be blunt.
Amy, your rather snarky remark ” @Greg: How about ¨outing¨ your fellow Village14s who out-voted you?” ignores the fact that this blog has had this conversation a least 3 or 4 times, and my recollection is that you’ve been a part of at least a few of those conversations. You know how many of us want or need anonymous comments, at least you do if you’ve been at all paying attention. We can always take a poll again, and find that your position is in the distinct minority.
Regarding my situation, I don’t do any business with the city, and there is no direct reason for me to be anonymous. But being so allows me to express myself without worry of repraisal or personal injury. I am not retired, and I am young enough that is possible that I will need to do business with the city and the mayor at some point. I wouldn’t post here if I thought I might negatively effect my family or my business, and I think there are lots of folks who feel the same. I also think that we add a heck of a lot to the discussion Amy. If you and Ted and Mike and Greg would prefer to stand in a circle of public officials (or retired/immune folks) and express the same opinions among 10 to 15 of your known selves, you go right ahead. That is called Facebook, or a conference call. But you’ll gain a lot more if you swallow hard and take the good and the bad of a blog.
Yes, occasionally the anonymity is annoying. Yes, Mike and others, it would be disappointing if a public official formed a sock puppet and took advantage of the anonymity to buttress his/her opinions. Does that happen? Perhaps. Just like some of the opponents of Austin Street have formed dummy accounts, or not revealed their personal reasons for opposing the project, etc.
But I don’t read the blog as a newspaper, and I take every comment with a grain of salt. I happen to respect the comments of the known commentators more, since I know Ted/Amy/Greg/Jane/Dan/Mike and others have been willing to reveal themselves. Those of us who are anonymous have to build a blog reputation to be taken seriously, and I’ll be quick to doubt a sock puppet new poster just like anyone with half a brain would do.
And how would you police the blog if anonymity is removed? I can easily set up an email address in a false name. How will you track down a “Bob Smith” or a “Robert Jones”? Lots of those in MA, right. Only residents of Newton? Only voting residents? Do a cross comparison to the voting roles? Only real estate owning folks can dare post? Or just friends of aldercritters or former tab employees.
My next post will get back to the topic at hand. But jeez, I’m tired of this. Take a deep breath and take the blog for what it is. A cool place to get some Newton info, have some greater sense of Newton community, but at most it is an online community. Don’t expect country club vetting or FEC involvement. Trying to make it more that what it is will effectively end it.
Regarding the Ore Block, while I really like most of the current tenants in the block, I’m under no illusions that preventing this project from moving forward will guarantee the status quo. If these are renters and there is greater value in rehabbing the building, eventually the commercial space will be rehabbed and the current tenants will either need to adapt or find new space. Stopping the new building won’t prevent that.
So as painful as it might be, I can’t focus on the current tenants. Nor do I think the building is incredibly historic or vital to the architectual fabric of Newtonville. It is an old building and fits into the village very well as is.
But I’m willing to learn more about the project, especially any developer concessions, etc.
Amy may have forgotten that, initially, the Mayor had proposed a straight Prop 2-1/2 override, which is permanent. The only reason he proposed debt exclusions for Cabot and Angier–and not Zervas–was that the receipt of state School Building Assistance funds was contingent upon getting a debt exclusion.
This thread hasn’t exactly been hijacked, but the focus does seem to be more on transparency than the project itself, and I have been looking for the right occasion to provide a link to this story about a recent state supreme court decision striking down a law against lying in political races. It is based on the free speech guarantees in our state and federal constitution, and states the obvious which is that the remedy for the speech you don’t like is more speech, not less. All the more reason why spending limits in the Charter Commission race would be a bad idea.
Fignewtoville, I, for one, have made my peace with anonymity on the blogs, and you are one of the main reasons. I don’t know (for sure) who you are, but your written words stand on their own merit. So I wanted to respond to a point you made about adapting older buildings rather than replacing them. Both private and public buildings built a century ago are much harder to adapt than may appear at first blush. The building methods and materials often make it difficult if not impossible to open up space that can be adapted to modern demands, particularly when the technology so rapidly evolves.
As just one example, even office building constructed in the 1990s have to be retrofitted for fiber optics because, at the time they were built, they were fitted with phone lines and cable. That was and is part of the debate about what to do with historic buildings like the Angier and Cabot schools. And the construction methods and designs used for buildings like the Orr Building do not allow an entire floor to be opened up, or to add additional floors on top. That kind of flexibility in open floor plans is what most commercial tenants demand these days (in addition to parking, which is inadequate on these sites).
There have been some projects, for example the Exchange Building in downtown Boston, where historic facades have been saved and office buildings built behind them. Needless to say, this a very costly way to go, which is one of the reasons these types of historic preservation projects are few and far between.
@Amy – sorry I didn’t see your note last night, but wanted to respond. The Village 14 board had yet another discussion on this topic just yesterday. I’ll pass along my own thoughts, without adding those of the others.
I personally feel that the only way for me to participate in the fashion I want to is to provide my full identity. However, I agree with Adam’s points here as presented above to participate in the fashion with which they are comfortable. Moreover, Village 14 has established itself over several years now as a forum where commenters have the opportunity to post anonymously if they choose, and the content of the debate is (I think) more direct and varied as a result.
The one exception is elected officials. I asked if we could please confirm that elected officials are barred from posting anonymously and then to ensure that this distinction is made clear and enforced assiduously.
Village 14 is not in itself government or a government communications channel and therefore does not have to comply with the standards of government. However, those involved in city government themselves should hold themselves to the standards of the role they serve in the broader community and the ensuing need for transparency in their own communications.
Just about everything Fig said. Bloggers have many legitimate reasons to remain anonymous: safety, business reasons, doing business with the city. But let’s face it, V14 loses as many readers as it gains because of the policy (if not more). A lot of former readers/posters didn’t vote on the issue because they’re no long here, and that’s a shame. Each of us has place where the anonymity crosses a line. For me it’s when an anonymous blogger attacks another’s personal integrity. It shouldn’t happen under nay circumstances, but most often these attacks come from anonymous bloggers.
I agree with Chris in theory, but there’s no way to enforce a policy that says elected officials have to self identify in a day and age when we have access to multiple computers and can have multiple email addresses.
@Fignewtonville: I have no issue with residents posting anonymously. I do have an issue with elected officials posting anonymously – particularly whennpublic officials or their spouses criticize or attack another person.
@Ted: Thanks for the reminder about the MSBA requiring debt exclusions!
Chris, can Village 14 confirm whether any past or present elected officials (or candidates for public office, for that matter) have posted or are posting anonymously? I am aware of at least one former elected official who stopped using his real name and chose an alter ego–a sock puppet, in other words. He is back to using his real name, but I will spare him further embarrassment by not outing him here. These pseudonymous clandestine bloggers have a First Amendment right to do so, but I should think that the continued integrity of the blog would depend upon either outing them or blocking them from posting. Spouses and significant others, not so much, but definitely the elected officials and candidates themselves, as well as their campaign staff.
@Ted: Oh and +1 to what Chris said regarding First Amendments rights. I know you know that First Amendment protections don’t apply on a private blog so I’m guessing we’ve both misunderstood the point you were trying to make.
There’s simply no way of knowing if an elected official is posting anonymously.
@Ted – Anyone has a First Amendment right to say what they would like in public. However, this blog is – I believe – not completely a public forum as it is privately owned and operated (by Greg) and therefore can be subject to some limits on those First Amendment rights as put forth by the operators.
That having been said, Greg and the board do their level best to ensure as free a dialog is possible given certain basic rules of conduct.
To your other question,… my first answer is to say that I can neither confirm nor deny that public officials have done so. (In other words, you may very well think that. I couldn’t possibly comment)
However, my more serious answer is I just don’t know. That really is more a question for Greg.
Well. This has been, interesting. Let me try to answer a few things here.
1. Village 14 does not presently have a policy preventing electeds from posting anonymously. There is an offline conversation happening now among the V14 bloggers to consider changing that. Certainly folks can provide input here. While I am personally in favor making that change (I don’t make any of these rules alone), I’d be reluctant to also include spouses but feel free to weigh in on that too.
2. If we did have such a policy, it’s true that some electeds may still post autonomously anyway. However, if discovered, I’d have no reservations about a (a) blocking them from continuing and (b) perhaps outing them for being in violation of our rules.
3. Yes, Jane it is possible to figure out if an elected is posting anonymously, or at least it’s often possible. Someone who did so would need to be careful and knowledgeable to avoid being discovered.
4. It is against existing rules for anyone to post comments using two different names (i.e. sock puppeting). It is ok for someone to switch once, say, from their pseudonym to real name or vice versa. but they can’t go back and forth.
5. I’ve said earlier on this tread that I didn’t think any current electeds are currently commenting anonymously. I no longer believe that to be true. However, it’s not currently against the rules so I won’t out them or ask them to stop and we will remove any comments here by anyone else who tries to out someone.
6. I don’t actually “own” this blog, although I do own the URL. I don’t think of the hosts here as comprising a “board.” It’s a lot less structured than that. I think of us more as a collection of citizens who care about Newton and maintaining of forum for community participation.
Amy, respectfully I do not think you addressed the point Lucia was making about debt exclusions not benefiting low-income Newton resident any more than a general override.
While DE’s are for specific projects, unless the specific project directly helps the low-income resident, the added annual taxes are not offset with an associated personal/family benefit. And with DE time frames being measured in decades, low-income residents need financial assistance now while they are trying to improve their financial situation to the point where in the future they can afford the added tax payments for the greater good of the community.
The major financial benefit of a DE compared to an override from the perspective of a taxpayer is that the money is constrained to the specific project for the life of the DE. With an override, the money approved is only specifically committed for the first year, after which it can be reassigned unilaterally by city government without input from the voters.
I will add that people (regardless of their income level) who are currently of the age where membership in AARP is a current consideration, the financial impact of a debt exclusion is the same as a general override, i.e., for the remainder of their lives. DE’s are far more preferred by our knowledgeable senior citizens because of the project constraint aspect, not the limited time frame. JMO.
Assuming Julia’s info is correct, I think it is a good place for a 5 story mixed use building. What Fignewtonville said about the tenants is unfortunately the truth and we have already lost several locally owned businesses in Newtonville because the current building owners have not renewed leases or have raised the rent or both. So doing nothing to maintain the status quo isn’t working anyway.
It is also possible to build an attractive, LEED certified building without using prebuilt containers and I would hope that is what is in the talking stage.
At #Fab11 #FabFest this week, there were many discussions about creating sustainble cities, in cities that are already built out. There was a Power Point about how Barcelona is doing it. Mayor Walsh joined the pledge for Boston, along with Cambridge, Somerville and others around the world. It was wicked fab.
It strikes me that a middle ground on the anonymity of elected officials might be not to completely ban that but to make it clear that if discovered it is V14s policy to identify that. ” I won’t stop you, but I’ll let folks know.”
Amy, I’d like to find out the cost savings Newton could realize if we let the repair and replacement of National Grid’s leaking natural gas pipelines play into our repair plans for water/sewer/road/undergrounding electrical infrastructure. The costs of police detail and digging would already be covered by National Grid, since it has the responsibility over its leaking pipelines.
I think everyone who possibly can should use their real names. I can attest it will lead you to be more respectful and restrained when it’s your real name out there.
Having said that I understand that for some if they had to use their real names they would not feel they could participate at all.
Having said THAT I cannot see any excuse for elected officials to be blogging under pseudonyms and would strongly recommend V14 prohibit it.
Emily/Amy:
I really think you guys look at this differently than the typical blogger. The Aldercritters are on this blog for dual purposes in my view. The more you comment intelligently, the more you engage with the Newton public. Being anonymous in your position is not to your advantage.
I also would note that once you have made the jump to be a public poster, I can completely understand why you’d want everyone to be public, first it is self affirming (I made the RIGHT choice) and second it must be frustrating when folks abuse the anonymous nature of the medium (you are somewhat restrained in your view and the anonymous blogger gets personal, etc.).
And it must be especially frustrating for elected officials who are by their nature public human beings to be mocked/criticized/doubted by folks hidden by a shield of anonymity. How does one fight back against an opposing view when you don’t know the person’s true intentions.
Let me answer that one for you. The stronger your argument, the better the discussions, and the less it matters that someone is anonymous. We aren’t dealing with sound bites here, many of the postings have well reasoned arguments. And your arguments are stronger with a public persona. I believe I have a “blog persona”, and probably deserve a bit of that benefit of the doubt as well. But I post here mostly I hope when I want to make a point to the wider community, and the strength of my argument, rather than my name, hopefully leads the way.
So with that a few follow-up points:
1) Ted, my argument on the older buildings was meant in the context of what Marti said, namely that not allowing the project in a means to keep the existing tenants is like trying to hold back the ocean against the sand. Eventually the landlords will upgrade the space, raise rents and the tenants will be squeezed. Do we really think that if the owner is forced to keep the current building as is the rents won’t eventually be raised. I’m guessing the development is being proposed due to the low interest rates, the interests of major tenants like CVS and the terrific market for condos/apartments. And probably because some/all of the current tenants are about to cycle on their leases…. This building at a crossroad is a building at a crossroad, so to speak. Change is gonna come….
That said, I agree with you regarding the extra costs and issues in doing a full rehab of a historic building. I could note the incentives, but there very well might be a higher and best use for this site, and I’m not even sure the Orr Building is truly historic (it may just be old, and there is a difference).
2) Isn’t this also where 40B comes in?
3) I can see the objection about parking. But isn’t this an ok space for a bigger building? On the corner of two major streets? Washington’s traffic isn’t so bad, and there is direct access to the commuter rail, and the express bus. And there is no drama about parking lots….
4) I can also see the advantage of having CVS on the other side of the Pike. That would greatly reduce the parking issues on the south side, and it would likely also increase the activity on the north side of the Pike. And the North side during the day can handle it I think. You may need to switch some of the commuter rail parking spaces to short term (which is doable since the Commuter rail spaces a bit further way never get used) but there are worse issues to have. And having a Minute Clinic and a bigger CVS is a good thing in my view.
5) On the school front, the North side is zoned for H.Mann I think, isn’t it? Cabot ends South of the Pike I think. Regardless both Austin Street and this project are on the Elementary schools border.
6) 100 units if true is a lot of units. That feels like a “float” number to me. But it really depends on the unit mix.
There’s a younger generation which would find this whole discussion very odd. They’ve been engaging in discussions with avatars and pseudonyms in communities based on meritocracy. It’s certainly got its pros and cons, but we have to realize this is a different medium than we’re used to.
@Adam– Nonsense! You host a venue where elected officials are free to deceive the public. This isn’t a video game being played by kids. It’s a community forum. When you allow an elected official to comment under an assumed name, you become part of the deception.
@Greg and @Chris, you have divined that the First Amendment protects against government censorship and not private censure.
@Fignewtonville, you are correct. The owners were ready to sell and the buyer wants to make a profit off of this purchase (‘Merica). Some of the buildings on this block, particular the one with all of the aluminum siding, are outdated and not very attractive. Newton’s demolition ordinance creates a presumption that anything over 50 years old is worthy of some protection. And, I must confess, the Orr Building, which is on the corner, has some charm to it. But I would be remiss if I did not also point out that it does not meet the needs of modern tenants.
We will have to see what this new owner eventually decides to propose. I would not be surprised, however, if he decides to ask to rezone MU4, which is the zoning that the BOA created for Austin Street. And that is more or less what the BOA intended.
This discussion got mired in the “anonymous vs. real name” quagmire pretty quickly, when the real issue is sue is intent. This blog allows anonymous commenting via the use of a consistent pseudonym. What it does not allow, through its prohibition of “sock puppetry”, is an anonymous user to pretend to be someone they’re not *with intent to deceive*. For example, if an elected official used a pseudonym to post comments on this blog about social or cultural events – just like any other Newton resident – I don’t think many people would care. However, if an elected official (or a paid member of their staff, or a close family member) posted comments on a current political issue or campaign, especially negative comments toward opponents, while pretending to be “just a regular Newton voter”, people would care. A lot. In those situations, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with another commentor calling them out. And if I were an elected official, I’d think long and hard about how incredibly bad a look it would be to be found out.
I believe Trish just nailed it.
She usually does.
@Patrick: No – I did not address Lucia’s question. Sorry – I got side tracked on the anonymous posting by elected officials issue. I don’t disagree with your assessment on the impact of general overrides vs. debt exclusions on low-income residents or residents on fixed incomes.
@ Nathan – Happy to discuss offline about the repair and replacement of National Grid’s leaking natural gas pipelines and how that could play into our current plans.
Happy August!
I agree with Trish. But I’m guessing this discussion will convince public officials to stop sock puppetry….
Maybe we can add this in the charter….”no sock puppetry for elected officials on public blogs”
To heck with that, I’m only voting for charter commissioners who support giving Village 14 its own city council seat, which, of course, we will select via blog poll.
Oh, I’m sure village 14 will be well represented on the commission, so you just might be able to pull that one off.
Only a small number of elected officials contribute to this blog. Why is that? Do they feel the blog discussions of no interest to them?
In ward 2 only Emily sends out monthly newsletters to inform the public of political issues important to residents and follows up with monthly meetings at the senior center.
Why do so many aldermen/women/councillors appear to be isolated from the general public?
Colleen, as a private citizen long before I started serving on School Committee I would reach out to our Aldermen and SC representatives by email or phone. Only a few didn’t get back to me immediately. I don’t think it’s about isolation — most respond right away to direct outreach but simply don’t choose to blog.
I know they don’t blog and many never send out informative newsletters via internet. Why is that? During these next few months it is important to know where each one stands on the controversial issues of today. Not only Austin St. but other significant developments proposed for the city. Plus early school start times and the very contentious redistricting plans which are antagonizing many families.
Road conditions are deplorable and getting worse. My big complaint is about the imbalance of city funding between the schools and the city. Water rates are poorly managed. I would very much like to hear from more aldermen/councillors on these issues.
@Colleen: I imagine that few Alderpeople blog online because they have concerns about the OML restrictions that limit conversations/meetings of elected officials that are not properly publicly noticed and announced. Even though I am subject to those same laws as Waban Area Council President, I try to keep my blogging to more general discussions that will most likely not be central to our Area Council’s interest. I also view it as my personal (not official in any way) thoughts. However, if there were five bloggers here from the Council talking about an issue (e.g.: whether we should support the community for or against the development of St. Philip Neri), I would have to remove myself from that discussion which would rightfully belong at our open monthly meeting. Aldermen Ted Hess-Mahan and Amy Sangiolo bring a valuable surfeit of information on process more than on their own views…but, if you have ever watched them in action (e.g.: voting) you know what their biases are and can adjust your opinions of their comments accordingly. I’m glad they offer info on subjects that would otherwise be murky to us! Btw, Amy has a blog that she sends out to alert residents to the next week’s City meetings of importance. I’m sure she would be delighted to add your name to that list! (I’m on it!)
Whoops…I forgot Ald. Emily Norton who not only blogs well here, but tweets 24/7! I can attest to that!
@Steve – you’re lucky to have that experience. I’ve had very poor luck getting responses from my alderpeople – a former one was widely known in our Ward for never answering email or phone calls.
@Colleen: are you not on my newsletter list? I send them out weekly and provide a synopsis of board actions, reports and information about other boards and commissions and boards. Sign up by going to my website at amysangiolo.com and subscribe!! : )