In this comment on another thread Bob Kavanagh writes:
Chuck, you write “… that Nonantum is gaining traction with a lot of great stores, cafes and restaurants. I was in Olivia’s Bistro for the launch and the rebuild is beautiful. It adds a very nice cocktail bar to the neighborhood. ”
Something tells me this was not high on the list of needs of the long-time residents of this neighborhood. Just saying. But then, some folks seem to know what my neighborhood also needs so that it can start ‘gaining traction’ as you say.
Is a community only supposed to welcome and encourage businesses that serve the “needs of long-time residents” of that neighborhood? Please share your thoughts.
An odd comment on multiple levels.
What people need and what will succeed are different things. Retail businesses are seriously struggling and we are lucky to have things like Schwarz and Paper Mouse thrive here in Newton.
Also, who decides what a neighborhood needs? It’s subjective. What I need, a 30-something year old parent, probably isn’t the same thing that say, a retiree needs. But who am I to shoot down something that is useful to someone else?
Actually, Nonantum Center does NOT have any great cafes. There’s just the Dunkins. It’s quite the scene in there – a lot of old timer Mushes hold court in there all day long.
I’d really like to see another option or two for cafe’s there – something like L’Aroma or the various great coffeehouses in Camberville. Maybe the excellent nearby Koko Bakery should open a branch in the village center? Or maybe Cafe Nerro, sensing a synergy with the Italian history of The Lake, would set up shop there?
^ I should note, I tend to think of a coffeehouse when I say “cafe.” We do in fact have a number of euro-style cafe restaurants.
We had family visiting us last week, and one afternoon we had a happy little village experience in Nonantum…FWIW the mix of shops and food was greatly appreciated by us out-of-towner Needhamites!
1) Delicious haddock fish and chips and some nice kids meals w/Shirley Temples at the West Street Tavern
2) Purchase of a cool English-made hairbrush for my sister-in-law at Colonial Drug (a shop which we were very happy to rediscover after having lost track of it when it moved out of Harvard Square)
3) Antiquing at the Antique Shop
4) Elephant ears at Antoine’s Bakery
5) A weeder at Swartz’s
6) Brown-sugar coconut macaroons at Prelude Bakery
7) A few extra trots up and down Watertown St. in a futile effort to burn off the calories
The OP is asking a loaded question. The real issue is a bit more complex than that.
A business can be characterized by the geographic area from which it draws most of its customers.
– Some businesses are very local and draw largely on neighbors and pedestrians. Think coffeeshop. That’s why there can be so many Dunkins and Starbucks. Some do draw a lot of customers by car too, and there are drive-through Starbucks in the ‘burbs where nobody can walk anyplace, but in Newton, at least on the north side, there’s usually foot traffic.
– Some businesses draw from the surrounding community, as in a 10 minute drive. Think supermarkets or a Staples. They need good parking, and nobody but Chuck Tanowitz (who I acknowledge is a better person than me, a true legend, whose near-Trumpian greatness needs to be spoken of often, while I’m just a car-shopping luser, a mere 99%er in that regard) uses a bike to buy groceries.
– Some businesses are destinations, and draw from farther away. Think of specialty stores like You-Do-It in Needham, or I suppose Newtonville Camera now of Waltham. These don’t need to be in villages. They do depend on car traffic unless perhaps they’re in a place like Downtown Crossing.
A village center thrives on the first category, but generally also has some of the latter two. And the latter two depend on cars, outside of dense core city areas like Boston Proper, Center City Philadelphia, and Manhattan. The latter have much better public transit and no room for cars; that’s well understood. Newton however is several of Boston’s outlying neighborhoods. And its public transit, while better than say Sudbury’s or Bedford’s, is pretty mediocre, and oriented primarily towards getting 9-5 commuters downtown.
Claiming that a lot of neighborhood apartments will save a village business is ridiculous, though the first category will benefit. The others will die off if traffic and parking is bad. That decision, to oriented Newton around cars, in fact to orient almost the whole USA around cars, was made over 60 years ago, and it’s too late to undo the damage.
Businesses catering to non-residents who drive should internalize the costs they impose on residents in traffic and parking burden. Shops that support the ability to walk or bike to them should be welcomed. City policy can help by creating parking maximums for businesses.
I kind of get where you’re coming from Fred. But by Bob Kavanagh’s standard, if YouDoIt! wanted to open in Nonantum, Bob wouldnt like it because it’s “not high on the list of needs” of long-time residents.
Same thing if Newtonville Camera would have found space there instead of Waltham. How many long-time residents have a new camera high on their needs list? Probably fewer than will enjoy the “not high on the list of needs” wine list at Olivia’s.
But I’d love to hear folks thoughts about the larger point of Bob’s comment and my question: Are our neighborhoods reserved only for the people who live there now, particularly long-timers? Should they perhaps get two votes for every one for a new timer? And what’s a long-time anyway?
I’m not sure why anyone would want to discourage people from doing business in Newton, whether they are residents or not. (Long-term or otherwise) There are some things that are useful for residents, like CVS and dental offices, but I think it’s cool when people from surrounding towns or newbies to the neighborhood discover things like L’aroma, Shaking Crab, Hip stitch, etc. We should be proud of our establishments and they should be for everyone who wants to enjoy them.
@Greg
You’re twisting Bob’s words, taking them out of context, putting up strawman using extremes– its completely divisive.
Bob didn’t say that businesses should ONLY serve long-term residents. You did.
How about trying to find common cause and not stir up arguments? How about asking Bob to explain what he means further, rather than distort his words as the starter for a new thread?
I just don’t like your tactics Greg. Not in good faith. Not good for finding the best path forward for Newton.
As Paul noted, I don’t think Bob meant what you think he did, Greg.
However, Nathan’s comment is truly and deeply hostile to non-neighborhood business, and goes well beyond anything Bob may have suggested.
What Paul said.
I dub thee “Snarkman”!
Anything to pave the way for high density development, eh Greg?
What continues to elude me is why, given your position, you fail to advocate for more commercial tax revenue, which the city desperately needs. Again, the elephant in the living room: over a billion in the red. Mysterious.
@Pat Irwin writes:
Pat: I totally share the desire to grow Newton’s commercial tax base through business attraction and retention. But new businesses will not elect to locate here if we do not address a chronic housing shortage, while, established businesses here consistently tell me our housing shortage is a prime impediment their ability to hire.
Not only that: residents = customers for our restaurants, shops, dentists, shoe makers, painters, yoga studios and many other business. More residents within walking distance of our businesses also preserves and grows our commercial tax base,
@Greg: Why do you keep dividing people into camps? Why can’t there be both? Respect and understanding and support for the needs of the existing residents as well as room for growth and expansion of new services for newcomers? I’m currently reading one of three books on gentrification _ “How to Kill a City: – Gentrification, Inequality and the Fight for the Neighborhood” by Peter Moskowitz. Fascinating. Moskowitz states: “Gentrification, at its deepest level, is really about reorienting the purpose of cities away from being spaces that provide for the poor and middle classes and toward being spaces that generate capital for the rich…In every gentrifying city — that is, in every city where there is a combination of new coffee shops and condos, hipsters and families struggling to hang on– you can usually trace the start of that change not to a few pioneering citysteaders but to a combination of federal, local and state policies that favor the creation of wealth over the creation of community.”
He cites MIT urban studies professor Phillip Clay and his four phases of gentrification: “…the first phase begins when individuals, unsupported by any government or large institution, decide to begin moving into a previously poor neighborhood and renovating houses….The second phase, according to Clay, is when those attracted to the neighborhood because of the change that’s already begun start buying up real estate. Some in the second wave are hoping to take part in the neighborhood’s new cultural cahcet. others are small-scale speculators, hoping they can get a house on the chape and sell it sometime later….” The third phase “is essentially what New Orleans is experiencing right now, as middle-class gentrifiers start taking on prominent roles in gentrifying neighborhoods — sitting on committees and community boards, promoting neighborhoods to outsiders as a place where the middle class can move and maintain a high quality of life. …”you can expect banks to begin lending more frequently in previously disinvested neighborhoods. Developers (as opposed to individuals) become the pre-eminent renovators and builders…Stage four is when a neighborhood is already gentrified and begins to become even more wealthy…Properties that were held vacant by developers are turned into high-cost condos. Displacement is rampant, And gentrification begins spilling over into other, less gentrified neighborhoods…But several researchers have suggested that today we need to add a fifth phase to that list….” Gentrification in these globablized cities (New York and San Francisco) is no longer about individuals, and it’s not even about local developers chasing cash in cool neighborhoods. In the words of geographer Neil Smith, it’s about the “reach of global capital down to the local neighborhood scale.””
Wow. And if that isn’t enough: “Why do neighborhoods and entire cities all of a sudden become hot for reinvestment? There’s a critical preparatory phase missing from the analysis, a phase zero. Cities’ real estate and zoning policies are determined by local, state, and federal governments. And so for phases one through five to happen, governments have to be willing to allow for it.”
Amy writes:
People are divided. But I can’t take credit for dividing them, I’m just acknowledging it exists.
All anyone had to do was attend Tuesday’s packed Zoning and Planing public hearing to know that — with only rare exceptions — there is no middle ground. And your former colleagues would tell you their email was the same: with the vast majority of the hundreds of emails being primarily a cut and paste of a form letter from one of two camps.
And you can’t blame people for sticking so closely to the script because, let’s be honest, most folks who stood up in support or opposed to MU4 likely have no idea what MU4 really is or does! I’m not blaming people, it’s complex, and we have no media explaining what’s really at stake so folks just run to those camps.
@Mike: You can’t really think only people who live on the Northside can be trusted in this conversation, do you? So business owners who have store there; employees who work there; folks who raise money for the Boys & Girls Club or Second Step; whose house of worship is located there; who go to the farmers market; who adore the West Newton Cinema or the Barn or, um, Olivia’s, but don’t “live” there can’t be “trusted” in a conversation about what happens there?
You can’t mean that.
FWIW, those “mushes” that hang out at Dunkin’s are part of the fabric of Nonantum. And today, there is one less mush there holding court. Retired Newton Firefighter Jay “Hawk” Leone passed away last weekend and is being waked at Magni’s as I write this. His humor, wit and yellow dune buggy will be greatly missed.
And for the positives of gentrification:
Reduced crime
Increased density which allow more residents to move in
Increased tax base to provide more services
Increased wealth oportunities for businesses and existing home owners
Some people lose and some people win, just like real life. Who are we to decide who is more deserving. You make it sound like people who move in are somehow evil…
I like those mushes, they are nice to my kids when I wonder into that particular DD. The Lake is clearly changing though, although I think it is less gentrification and more the simple passage of time. The North End of Boston isn’t what it was 20 years ago, the Big Dig ended its protection from change in a major way. More tourist area than anything else now, IMHO.
Anyway, let’s all take a step back, shall we?
I think Greg was trying to raise the discussion point, and while Bob’s initial post wasn’t as broad as Greg made it out to be, it clearly did lay down the marker of “long term resident”. I hear that term a lot, and I sometimes use the term Villager to describe folks that care about the fabric of the particular village of Newton they live in, vs. the desire to mainain a full on errand focused village center. Frankly, both are insufficent.
I’ve been in Newton for a long time now. My village needs are different than folks without kids, both younger and older. I was thrilled when a Burrito place opened in Newtonville for instance, less for me than for my kids. I’m pretty sure my older neighbors pushing 70 looked at it and shrugged. I’m not a big user of a bar, but I bet my neighbors without kids were happy to have a village watering hole in Brewer’s Coalition that stayed open late (and lots of folks with kids too who need a drink…).
And then there are the folks from West Newton or Newton Corner who stop by CVS on the way home, and just want a place to park. Or the yoga folks coming from all over. Or the folks coming from multiple towns for Cook or Rox Diner. Think they care as much about the village crosswalks, plantings and lights? Nope. But they do want clear and easy parking, and my village businesses I love so much need their business. No matter how many apartments are in walking distance, I think that need is lessened, but not eliminated.
So where does that leave us? I don’t think any one of us get to speak for all of us. Including Bob. Including Greg. Long term residents have a voice and a vote. Renters have a voice and vote. Property owners have a voice and a vote. And all of us should listen and try and come up with a middle ground that satisfies as many of those voices as possible. And if those voices aren’t ok with it, well, that’s where the vote comes in.
And to address Amy’s comments, I do think zoning and permitting have a huge role to play. But it is important to remember that local zoning is not the end of the discussion. And that 40B allows for exceptions to local zoning and permitting.
Per your last point, it is very difficult to avoid gentrification when property values in the entire region are rising at 10% a year. Many homes in my area have gone up 50% since 2005. On top of 100% from 1995 to 2005. You can limit teardowns (and get more rehabs). You can limit 5 story apartment buildings (and get more 3 story buildings). But that does little to nothing to make Newton more affordable. That little one story ranch that isn’t torn down in my neighborhood will quickly become a ranch house with either an addition or an extra floor. (or are you going to restrict rehabs as well?) That one story commercial space with the large lot isn’t going to not be redeveloped once sold. Local government can’t hold back the waters when there is a wave of property value increases across the entire region. Our city’s underlying benefits are far too attractive. Not just the schools, although that helps, even if it is more reputation nowadays that differential quality (someone should do a post on special education limits in Newton schools and I’ll be happy to vent). IT IS THE LOCATION WITHIN A SHORT DRIVE, TRAIN OR BUS TO BOSTON.
And the state and the federal government are far more concerned about overall affordability and the region as a whole to pay much heed to a local government from a wealthy suburb throwing up its collective hands and saying: WAIT. An entire Bond Bill just passed and was signed into law to increase funds for affordability across the Commonwealth. We are arguing about 4 or 5 story construction along a major street. And the State is afraid of going the way of San Francisco/Silicon Valley.
The wider real estate market doesn’t change its value due to the policies of one city. Prices go up in this market. It is like trying to squeeze a balloon, the more you restrict one action, the more you increase the bubble in a different way, with a different product.
Let me try a different metaphor. I guess what I’m saying is that local long term resident and newcomer alike, Villager and Visiter, we are all in the same boat. And that boat is on the same ocean of the other towns in MA. We rise and fall together. And none of us can hold back the tide.
That doesn’t mean we have to become something we are not. We don’t have to be Brookline. We don’t have to be Weston. We just can’t stay exactly as we are. The boat can be sailed. I’m just suggesting that we work with the current and the tide, rather than against it. Austin street was far better for the process. Orr Block was somewhat better. I’m hopeful with some pressure and some planning, the future projects along Washington Street will be even better as a collective whole, with the whole being more than the sum of its development parts.
I don’t know if the old Newton was better than the current Newton or if the current Newton is better than the future Newton. But I’m confident no matter what attempt is made to limit the future change, Washington Street won’t look the same in 10 years. I’d rather attempt to steer the ship in the direction of increasing long term affordable housing, open space, bike lanes, new commercial shops, senior housing, parking in the back, better lighting and sidewalks, barriers to the Pike, nicer landscaping, pocket parks and community areas, and other things I care about. To do that some of those projects might be bigger than my taste (Orr Block). But I’d push for as much as possible in improvements, plan as much as possible, and try and have a rational process not dicated by a desire to stall out change. That doesn’t mean just giving in the developers, and it does require real leadership from the council and the mayor. And it certainly won’t satisfy everyone. But nothing will.
I look forward to living in this city for as long as I can, and I look forward to advocating for the sensible changes and improvements to come. I think a lot of good has occured in Newtonville (or will occur after the Walnut improvements take place and the construction is done).
Cheers to all.
@Greg* Your question …
But I’d love to hear folks thoughts about the larger point of Bob’s comment and my question: Are our neighborhoods reserved only for the people who live there now, particularly long-timers? Should they perhaps get two votes for every one for a new timer? And what’s a long-time anyway?
Says that you’re not really interested in what folks think. (or am I stating the obvious) Not really a question set up for useful discussion. You’re better than this. I’m here to sort through the onion skin of what is Newton politics to learn about an issue that will affect my day to day life.
Same with smug @Chuck* this morning saying that those who have a different perspective are “off”.
There are a lot of folks here on V14 with an asterisk beside their names – People for who development or affordable housing or climate change or bikeable cities are either in their job descriptions or their pet issue and their frustration and impatience is palpable. Many have been fighting for a long time.
The only people I really trust in this conversation are folks who actually live northside and those who don’t have a vested interest or a cause. The majority of people who this affects the most – Are just good people living their lives, working hard and spending time with family and friends – AS THEY SHOULD BE.
Your truth isn’t any truer than theirs.
Mike, define “Northside”?
I’m on Washington Street every day. Every day. I walk it often. I drive it often. The guys at Marty’s know me by face. I’m at Cabot’s too often for my wasteline. Village Cafe is a frequent haunt. I get my desserts for guests for Antoine’s, I shop at the hardware store, get my shoes at the Barn, my fancy chinese at Rice Valley, I’m at the YMCA every weekend, my bus trips take me down the street each morning, my freezer is filled with Trader Joes, I’m a local at the Local, I ate at Sweet Tomotoes last week, I’ve been to so many birthday parties at the movie theatre that I can identify the different theatres by the seats. I walk from Newton Corner to West Newton often enough to know the state of the landscaping on a weekly basis, and to be happy when the planters with flowers do well along the way.
Am I Northside? I’m going to assume I am. I have a voice and vote. I certainly also have a lot of causes. But I’ve got no financial interest in any of these projects. Do you trust me? Going to put an Asterisk by my name too? Seems to me you responded to a post you didn’t like by neatly dividing the world.
One way to shut down debate is to eliminate from the conversation anyone who really cares about the opposite position from yours. No one is saying folks from the Northside (however you define it) don’t have a voice. But your last line contradicts the rest of your post.
Just my truth* I guess.
Fig I don’t have a position. My only motivation at this point is to learn as much as I can about something that’s going to happen less than a quarter-mile from my home.
Lots to respond to here.
I’ll start by acknowledging that the way I introduced this topic (something I’ve been thinking about for a while) was not my best. But Bob’s comment really does seem to reflect a perspective I hear a lot these days and I think it’s worth talking about.
Bob seemed to be telling Chuck (who btw lives in West Newton and not that far from Nonanum) that his enthaisiam for Olivia’s was somehow misplaced because Chuck was an outsider by virtue of neither a long timer nor Nonantum resident. (Nevermind that Olivia’s was started by long time Nonantum restaurant owner Karl Roche, who also owns West Side Tavern, so why Bob is bothered by Olivia’s in first place is odd.)
To that I ask: Are long timers somehow more entitled to views about what happens in a neighborhood than folks who’ve moved here five years ago or even five days ago?
Sure my question feels divisive (and Amy’s post about gentrification raises good, important question, more on that later). But people are saying it and it does divide people. Bob suggested as much in his comment. Others said as much at Tuesday’s packed Zoning & Planning meeting. So why not ask it?
Do long timers deserve more say? It’s a yes or no question.
Fig also for the record I do trust you. I don’t trust those who have an agenda and are snarky and smug toward people with a different view or are just trying to work it out.
No change isn’t an option. It’s the scope and speed of change that were talking about.
Being so close, this may have a dramatic effect on my neighborhood … maybe positive, maybe negative, and that’s what I’m trying to work out.
You may spend a lot of time here, and of course are entitled to an opinion, but at the end of the day if you don’t live here you go home to your home in your neighborhood.
Only the people that live here can have the perspective of the people that live here.
Maybe it’ll be great, maybe it’ll suck. That’s what I’m trying to work out.
Greg, First thank you for acknowledging the presentation of your post. I know this ain’t easy.
Yes, I do trust those folks you mentioned.
I don’t trust those who are pro-development at all costs or Pro fordable housing at all costs. A good example is Sean Roach who said in a post last fall that he sees everything through the lens of climate change, or Jerry Reilly who said in the post last week that his job is to promote development.
Even you, being the director of the chamber. Your job is to promote development and growth, I’m not so sure you are free to say anything to the contrary.
I’m not saying that anyone is untrustworthy, its not about character. It’s about how much weight I give your words in the context of this conversation.
I actually have a lot of respect for someone like Emily Norton who’s job is to look at the world through a climate change lens but is representing a constituency that often favors their rights as landowners. It forces her to really examine issues and make hard choices. I certainly don’t always agree with her but it’s useful knowing that she has to go through that thought process.
@Greg
“Bob seemed to be telling Chuck (who btw lives in West Newton and not that far from Nonanum) that his enthaisiam for Olivia’s was somehow misplaced because Chuck was an outsider by virtue of neither a long timer nor Nonantum resident.”
NO.
STOP twisting Bob’s words.
He offered a contrary perspective to Chuck’s. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing suggesting that Bob was dismissing Chuck’s viewpoint because he was an outsider, nor suggesting long-term resident’s perspective matters more than others. He does make clear that he believes long-term residents’ perspectives should be valued more than they are.
This is simply dishonest.
Stop misrepresenting what other people are posting.
STOP.
Greg – Mike didn’t say he didn’t trust people who don’t live here. He said he didn’t trust people *with an agenda*. He said that he *does* trust Fig, for example, but that people who actually live in the neighborhood have a different perspective from people who visit/shop/work in the neighborhood. I spend a lot of time down the Lake, but I don’t live there, so I while I might have thoughts about a development or other things that happen in Nonantum, I would never presume to think I know as much about that village – or what’s best for that village – than the people who actually live there.
Greg, sometimes you take a portion of someone’s comment and hastily respond to just that portion without any regard for the fact that it’s within the context of a larger statement.
@Greg: “People are divided. But I can’t take credit for dividing them, I’m just acknowledging it exists.”
I actually think you much more than acknowledging it. You feed into it.
“Pat: I totally share the desire to grow Newton’s commercial tax base through business attraction and retention. But new businesses will not elect to locate here if we do not address a chronic housing shortage, while, established businesses here consistently tell me our housing shortage is a prime impediment their ability to hire.”
By chance, do you know why PTC is moving out of Needham? Not enough housing for it’s worker bees and young talent or rather not the kind of “scene” – active nightlife, etc. The last time I was at TripAdvisor, I asked where most of their worker bees live. The response was that most of the young folks, live in Somerville but most of their older workforce, 30+ ,live in Needham or Newton.
\
@Amy: Great question.
It used to be the mantra in real estate was “location, location, location.”
Now it’s “workforce, workforce, workforce.”
And PTC says workforce was a major factor its decision to move to the Seaport (even though the company will be paying a lot more in rent to be there).
PTC’s decision aside, the Boston/Cambridge innovation economy has a significant halo effect. Employers and entrepreneurs are looking to locate and/or expand into the inner suburbs. But they’re going to choose those communities where a workforce exists and/or can follow.
If we build workforce housing, provide interesting amenities and transportation options, we have a significant opportunity to grow our commercial tax base.
Don’t do these things and we will lose these businesses (and their tax dollars) to communities that do.
Fig really hits the nail on the head. I agree with every single word including his next to last paragraph.
“I’d rather attempt to steer the ship in the direction of increasing long term affordable housing, open space, bike lanes, new commercial shops, senior housing, parking in the back, better lighting and sidewalks, barriers to the Pike, nicer landscaping, pocket parks and community areas, and other things I care about. To do that some of those projects might be bigger than my taste (Orr Block). But I’d push for as much as possible in improvements, plan as much as possible, and try and have a rational process not dicated by a desire to stall out change. That doesn’t mean just giving in the developers, and it does require real leadership from the council and the mayor. And it certainly won’t satisfy everyone. But nothing will.”
This way forward is the only that has any merit.
@Greg: So when you say “workforce” – where are they living that PTC wants to attract? Do they all live in Boston or is it just easier to get to Boston/Seaport area than it is to get to Needham by public transportation?
The seaport is isolated from all but the wealthy who can afford to live nearby. The public transportation there is awful. The city even allowed the developers to pay into an affordable housing fund or build affordable housing in an area where the land isn’t as expensive so it’s become one of the wealthiest, most white areas of the city.
That’s not to say that Newton doesn’t need more workforce housing to attract more business tax base here, it does. And Newton doesn’t allow developers to build market rate housing here without including affordable housing in the development itself. It’s just not the reason a company would move to the seaport. The nightlife, yes.
I agree with Fig that you really can’t go the route of no development because it is happening so it is important to try to have impact on the direction it takes. I feel like a lot of people on this board are focused on one aspect and are not willing to see a hybrid vision or collaborate with other viewpoints.
Yes I would love to see safer biking across the city but not everyone can bike either physically or always has the time. I like to stop in at George Howell and though I have walked from the Highlands that took quite awhile. 🙂 So often my decision to stop there is determined by whether I can find a parking spot to stop quickly. The approach needs to be multi dimensional and work for sometimes competing needs. The loveliness of Newton is the unique villages and the opportunity to go to different sections and have different experiences. Thus in some way each village reflects a bit of local flavor. I think people often feel connected to their village but that makes us stronger as a city.
Outside of Washington St I hear about Northland and especially Riverside and wonder are these areas being created for people to live/work in the same area.. a different demographic than exists today. Thus not catering to people who exist within our city but newcomers.. somewhat a different take on the original theme of this poster of pitting older timers vs new timers. I wonder perhaps in someways if this new demographic/developments will be disconnected from the broader city. I really would like to see new development provide opportunity for seniors and people of all economic levels however I wonder if we will just end up with lots of apartment/high end condos.
We want more businesses for less tax burden on residents but then are told the business need more workers/customers so they say we need more residents in these developments. People want density near transportation so there are less cars on our roads however the current transportation (T, Commuter Rail) leave a lot to be desired in reliability. People say there will be more investment in transportation if there are more people riding public transport. Both are chicken and egg type of problems.