For perhaps the first time since Julie Cohen became the TAB’s editor (but at least for the first time in a long, long, time) the TAB has published a local editorial! I don’t agree with it (and that’s not because Cohen takes a shot a me, I’m more troubled by how unfair she is to Brenda Noel) and Jerry Reilly did a better job saying something similar here the other day. But I hope this is a sign of things to come in 2020. We need more places for opinions, not fewer.
Breaking news: The TAB publishes an actual editorial!
by village14 | Dec 24, 2019 | Newton TAB | 19 comments
Greg,
I agree with you that the TAB Editorial’s criticizing your criticism of RightSize as being “disrespectful” and “disturbing”, is unfounded and wrong. Clearly you are correct in stating that the RightSize petition for referendum “threatens” Northland and is “disturbing” to Northland proponents. Your characterizations are completely accurate.
And I believe the Editorial’s praise of Mayor Fuller is completely misplaced (on behalf of the Northside proponents). Mayor Fuller’s failure in exercising savvy or proactivity in shepherding the process — particularly in the window between the City Council vote and submission of RightSize signatures — has lead precisely to the debacle we now face over Northland, that is, referendum rejecting the Special Permit and years of delay and unknowns.
Whao… a Christmas Miracle. Greg and Jim agree.
Re the TAB editorial, there are two points I would take issue with:
1. The implication that I might have “accosted” this city councilor is in error. If asking the question ..” are you a registered voter in Newton ?”, is ‘accosting’ someone, I guess I’m guilty as charged.
2. This same councilor’s description of me as “an anti- housing advocate”, also needs correction.
For 9 years, (2008-2019 ) as a home owner in Waban, I watched 8 properties (12 units of naturally affordable housing), all within 200 feet of my place, meet the bulldozer. These were replaced with 12 , million $ + condominium and single family homes.
Grannies, an electrician, a number of elders, renters, and school children chose or were forced from their homes, all the result of too liberal and too generous zoning regulations that encourage demolitions and discourage neighborhood diversity.
I’m all for housing, just not the sort that lowers the quality of life for existing residents and taxpayers of the city. And that includes projects like Northland whose benefits accrue to the development industry, and not to the residents of Upper Falls, or those of us suffering the traffic delays already existing in that part of town.
Not so fast Ghost of Christmas Present aka Chuck!
I actually disagree with Jim about Mayor Fuller’s role here. Her Planning Department did a great job helping craft a wonderful project that rightfully earned 17 yes votes from our city councilors plus support from environmental groups, housing groups, seniors, the League of Women Voters and many Upper Falls residents too.
This project will add greatly to our region’s economic vitality and provide desperately-needed housing for local workers, seniors and millennials. I’m glad she didn’t back down to Right Size’s threats and hope she will play an active role is building consensus if there’s a referendum so we can break ground on this transformative project in 2020.
Chuck,
In Greg’s position as head of the local Chamber of Commerce, he cannot criticize, nor be seen concurring in criticism of, Mayor Fuller (or any Mayor of Newton at least during their tenure) — and that is totally appreciated and understandable.
Greg,
Assuming, and even more so because of, what you say that the Northland Project was “wonderfully crafted”, “will add greatly to our region’s economic vitality” and “provide desperately-needed housing…”, the Mayor majorly failed in not “playing an active role in building consensus” critically among Right Size, developer and city, BEFORE the signature submission put the referendum on auto pilot to success (making breaking ground in 2020, to say the least, an impossibility). Modest mutually agreeable plan modification, only achievable through the Mayor or her representative actively convening RightSize (with if need be permit revision) would not only have crossed the goal line, but the game would be over — with both teams winning to boot.
Instead, all odds are on the referendum process winning — albeit both sides will end up losers in the longer run. And THAT is the tragic failure here.
So generous of Mr. Bill to allow those who, you know own property in his neighborhood, you know, dispose of it as they more or less wish! Such magnanimity. Such restraint. A model Wabanite if ever there was one. If only he were my neighbor.
@Elmo,
“you know”, I didn’t dispose of my neighboring properties,.. profit motivated developers put those folks out on the street, “you know”, because it’s our political fathers and mothers “you know”, who haven’t seen fit to protect the little affordable housing we have left, “ you know ?
“You know”, you should only be so lucky to live next door to a NIMBY like me.
Northland break! Merry Xmas and happy holidays!
Great idea Matt. Let’s check back in June.
I found the editorial in the Newton TAB to be right on! I agree the level of conversation and discussion of this project should be more evenly tempered. What if Brenda Noel was standing outside Whole Foods gathering signatures for her nomination papers if this is okay – then it’s okay to gather signatures for a referendum petition. I understand Greg’s role as the President of the Chamber to advocate in behalf of his dues paying members but the citizens of Newton have every right to object to the size and scope of the project.
Bill fails to understand that if we didn’t have such strict zoning those single family homes could have been replaced with badly needed dense multi family housing. Either that or he’s being intellectually dishonest.
The people who were “forced” from their homes – more likely they sold their homes – got top dollar because a builder rightly determined that a large new construction single family home would sell for a lot of money. I can all but guarantee you that if we allowed multi family housing, that builder would have built more, less expensive homes and more families would have been able to move in and start paying taxes and hopefully become your friends and neighbors. Get rid of single family zoning, build more homes, and stop being a NIMBY.
I’m sick of saying people who defend low density are to be treated with respect. They promote racist, environmentally damaging, and unsustainable laws and should be rightly called out for it.
On a further note, I believe the 800 housing units proposed for Northland needs to be scaled back. I think a compromise can be reached that scales back the number of housing units for commercial space. Lets’ not kid ourselves, no amount of traffic mitigation is going to reduce the daily bumper to bumper traffic congestion on Needham Street nor is this project going to fix the overcrowding at Countryside Elementary School.
MrButch
…”that builder would have built more, less expensive homes “…
So instead of building one home for 2.5M, he would get to build 4 condos for 1M each…
What… you thought they would build 4 condos for only 500k each out of the goodness of their own heart.
Based on the density argument, hong kong and Manhattan would have the cheapest real estate…
oh and it’s density would also be so environmentally friendly the air in those cities would rival the countryside.. no traffic also!
Theory does not match reality
Peter,
Too late for compromise. The city let that boat sail. Developer post-Northland will undoubtedly seek the max allowed under law and with no obligation vis a vis Needham St., Country Side or anything.
Jim,
If the Referendum passes there will be compromise. The Developer has too much at stake not to come back to the table.
With all these developments going on simultaneously Newton will just become another Framingham.
Peter,
If the referendum passes, it would appear that the developer would proceed under 40B, yes?
Wait, so are people worried that Newton will become more urban like Cambridge or have the suburban sprawl of Framingham?
Bugek, a 1m condo is cheaper than a 2.5m house…
Why is it a bad thing that the builder can make more money and also four families can live somewhere, each of them paying less than 50% of what a single family home would cost?
I already had this conversation with you in another thread, but if you want to keep bringing up the same false arguments, have at it. PER HOUSEHOLD carbon footprints are lower in high density neighborhoods.
The areas in New York where prices have risen the most are areas where no new housing has been built (East Village, Upper West & East Sides). You can have a dense neighborhood that also does not build any new housing, and the same effects I describe play out. Density in Newton is virtually nonexistent, so we need more of it.
Also if you want to bring up traffic in NYC, nobody owns a car in NYC because they don’t need to. There is an extensive public transit network which allows people to live car free, and most shopping can be accomplished on foot.
Sorry @greg…taking a Northland break for Xmas does not extend thru June. Can’t shut me up that easily. :-)
Sticking to the original post about Julie Cohen’s article. Councilor Noel made her bed long before she stepped a foot into Whole Foods. Her whole, “if I am hurting, the community will help me… and I will help the community” speech on the night of the Northland vote was IMO, nauseating, as she quickly pivots to trying to censor and block Bill’s right to petition – simply because his views do not agree with her’s.
And the entitlement behind, “I’m not going to get lunch here ever again” and falsely calling a whole swath of fellow citizens “anti-development advocates” is exact opposite of her brand when she ran for re-election, that of a “social worker trying to help people.”
Well done, Julie Cohen!