From Wicked Local’s Jonathan Dame
The Appeals Court has affirmed the decision of a lower court judge to toss out the lawsuit of a group of Newton taxpayers who sought to block the Austin Street project in Newtonville.
….but there’s also this…
The Appeals Court’s Dec. 19 decision is a win for the city and the developer, Austin Street Partners, but a separate lawsuit remains pending in Middlesex Superior Court.
The Austin Street proposal got off to a very poor start, due in large part to a lack negotiating skills on the part of the city. But the late addition of 6 more affordable units turned this project into a good deal for Newton. So if these plaintiffs want to bang their heads against the wall and spend a lot of money in the process of losing, go right ahead. Austin Street is going to be built, and the final deal serves as a good example of how to extract concessions from large developers.
Mike:
I think you are missing the underlying strategy here. This is your basic delay strategy. It’s worked before. File lawsuits questioning the zoning/permitting. Said lawsuits prevent the developer from getting construction financing. Said lawsuits take considerable time to wind their way through the legal system, thus increasing overall costs to the developer. Eventually, interest rates go up, project doesn’t pencil out, and project is abandoned. For a great example, see Columbus Center project over the Pike in Boston’s South End. The opponents kept saying in that project they were delaying it for the good of the community to get a better deal. 10 years later, the Pike is still uncovered and the the views of the folks funding the opposition remain unblocked…
I read through the complaint. I don’t agree with the merits of their argument. I also don’t think they have standing. But the wheels of justice grind slowly forward. And in many cases those wheels just grind the project to dust along the way.
Not much to do except respect the process. Any cure would be far worse than the disease, and access to the courts is fundamental.
No question, Fig. You’re absolutely right. Delay is the plaintiffs objective. But so far all they’ve done is spend a lot of money to lose.
They’ve cost the developer major money I’d imagine. Interest rates have gone up considerably since the election. 50 to 100 basis points on a large project can be make or break. Plus if the rental market begins to soften, the value might suffer, causing loan to value issues, appraisal issues, debt service coverage issues. I know you know all this, just stating for the wider audience.
Like I said, time is money. If they lose the battle on the merits they may still win the war on the delay.
For all he reasons stated above and also because it’s costing the city of Newton money, this lawsuit needs to be quickly dismissed. I’m still hoping Austin Street will survive this assault but even if it doesn’t, something else will.
Marti, they said the same thing about Columbus Center. It took 8 years to get to this place with Austin Street. What developer would touch it at this point if it doesn’t move forward. Just deals just aren’t worth the pain.
Fig, I think the number of plaintiffs may be relevant. I’m not sure how many there were on the Columbus Center case. But there are only a few plaintiffs in the Austin Street case, and this must be straining their bank accounts. Strategically, I would think the city would want to do everything it can to make those costs untenable.
Mike:
I just assumed Guive M. took it on a contingency basis. Isn’t that what he did with the CPA lawsuit? And filings aren’t all that expensive, it is discovery and ongoing hearings, etc. Believe it or not, this is just in the beginning stages.
This lawsuit is outrageous. We could be on the verge of new shops opening and much needed infrastructure improvements by now if we could move on from this nonsense.
The greater picture is what developer in their right mind would propose affordable housing in the city if everytime someone comes in with a project it has to go through the courts?
Fig, you make great points. The plaintiffs may not have won in the courts, but they accomplished their goals.
Lastly, I believe Guive took the 10 person lawsuit as pro-bono, not on contingency. Contingency would need to have a monetary judgement and I don’t believe that was the point of the lawsuit.
Someone asked me the other day what major completed projects in Newton have added density to Newton and I couldn’t name one. If all new housing options that aren’t single family homes are voted down, aren’t we basically saying that once you need to downsize, you need to leave Newton? Just sayin’ as one who can see into the next phase of my life through a very clear lens.