THIS TOWN'S LAST STAND

 On March 27, 2023, I used the title of a blog post to make a statement and ask a question. The statement half of the title was WATERTOWN IS A SMALL CITY WITH A TOWNISH VIBE.

My Google stat counter tells me that about 1,000 of you were interested enough in the subject matter to view that blog post.

The question half of the title was: SHOULD WE KILL IT OR KEEP IT?

Now, one year later, I realize that the title’s question should have been: SHOULD WE ALLOW OUR GOVERNMENT TO KILL IT?

The unstated subject of that post was development − how much should we allow and what should it look like?  But now, we really need to take a closer look at the word we.

That issue of preserving or killing the townish quality that has managed to hang on by its fingertips has never been more pressing than it is at this moment. If you do not know that, it is probably because you have your hands full dealing with everyday life and because we no longer have our own print publication, known as a newspaper, staffed by reporters and opinion writers.

If even one of our former newspapers had managed to survive, you would have been reading about the next stage of Watertown development – The Watertown Square Area Plan − while sitting at your kitchen table, or in your preferred coffee shop, or on your bus ride into Boston or Cambridge. It would be the citywide buzz and it would be loud and practically inescapable.

I will remind you that there was very little buzz leading up to the development of the Pleasant Street corridor. Once it was built and staring us in the face, many of you showed up at town-wide meetings, loudly complaining about canyon construction, erected without setbacks or green space, and without reasonable access to the river that now runs hidden behind walls of steel, glass, and concrete.

“We needed the revenue” was the town’s response, along with, “We had to work with the developers that were interested in Watertown.”

Then began the development of Arsenal Street, where a new, savvy wave of developers listened attentively to the public, addressed their concerns, offered concessions, and then built out every square foot of their property just as they had always planned on doing.

Some of you loudly voiced your anger about the developers’ broken promises and the useless meetings that were nothing more than the stock-in-trade song-and-dance routines that are a fixture of their traveling road show.

 

“Developers need to make their projects profitable” was the town’s response. “If we don’t give them what they want, those developers will take their business elsewhere.”

As the great P.T. Barnum told us, there’s a sucker born every minute. It’s unfortunate when some of those suckers happen to be the very public servants in charge of protecting our community.

Well, what’s done is done. But can we learn from it? Hopefully yes. Because what has happened in the recent past is nothing compared to what is happening right now.

If one of our former newspapers could magically reappear, and you were reading recent editions with your morning coffee, The Watertown Area Square Plan would have been front-page news for weeks. The headline for the edition immediately after the February 29 Watertown Square Plan meeting might have been:

CITY PAVES THE WAY TO BUILD 6,320 RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN WATERTOWN SQUARE

In the next edition, there might be an editorial titled:

6,320 Residential Units Likely to Place Over 8,000 New Residents in Watertown Square

Between the articles and the editorials, we would all become painfully aware of the decision-making process that will destroy whatever is left of the townish vibe that Watertown has been able to retain despite the escalating urbanization that threatens the city’s character, quality of life, and sustainability.

Where did the number 8,000 come from?

Based on what we’ve been seeing from developers, 6320 residential units will consist of some studios and a very few three-bedrooms but most will be one and two-bedroom apartments and possibly some condos. So there will be single occupancies, couples, roommates, and small families. Conveniently situated in the heart of Watertown, the units will be in high demand and command premium rents.

So, let’s be conservative by assuming an average of 1.3 individuals per residential unit, where Watertown would be required to accommodate and digest an influx of more than 8,000 new residents over a relatively short period of time.

Are you ready to move to Worcester?

But don’t panic yet. The social architects that are driving this train have given us an option.

Their alternative plan calls for only 2,631 units. At an average of 1.3 occupants, this would saddle our townish little city with a mere 3,420 new residents smack in the middle of Watertown Square. Aren’t you relieved?

I’m sure that both of these plans were hatched after rigorously exploring their impacts on public safety and infrastructure. We can’t hire enough cops, as it is, and that recruitment drought has no end in sight. Will we be piling an unsupportable load onto the police department’s shoulders and just hope for the best?

Much of our underground infrastructure was installed sometime around the Calvin Coolidge administration. What don’t we know about its ability to take on what nature has started throwing our way, like the kind of thousand-year storm system that recently hit Attleboro?                             

                                                 

 …and the one that recently hit Leominster.

 

Does anyone truly know the real capacity of our sewer system and how thousands of new toilet-flushing humans perched near the Charles might lead to the perfect disaster that robs us of our most precious natural asset?

I’m sure the city has all of this figured out. They’ve just been working on it behind the scenes. Unless they're just rolling the dice.

Hey, at least they’ve given us a choice. Two “popular” options. How great is that!

But, wait! Something is missing here.

What’s missing is the number 1,701. That’s the number of units that the almighty Commonwealth of Massachusetts has mandated that we build to do our part in ending the housing shortage.

But here’s the thing. If you’re going to run a shell game…

 …that famous con job, dating back to ancient Greece − where the hand always proves quicker than the eye − you play it with three shells and one pea. Not with two shells and two peas.

Because with two shells and two peas, you are only fooling the people who are not gathered around the table, watching the game. Of course, maybe that’s the whole cynical idea.

It’s still a con job. It just requires less skill and more arrogance to pull it off.

(I don’t know whose hands those are in the picture, manipulating the shells. I hope they don’t belong to the city manager, as some people suspect. Mr. Proakis, say it ain’t so.)

Under close examination, even the 1,701 makes very little sense for Watertown (more on that at another time.) But why was it not presented by the social architects as one of our choices? Where on earth did it go? Did it just slip through the cracks?

Well, that brings us back to that old song and dance routine, which in this case is more of a parade.

And this time it’s not the developers who are the star performers. This time it’s a town-wrecking ensemble comprised of city councilors (the fringiest of the progressive fringe), activists (guided by a national agenda), consultants (density is their middle name), and our in-house planners who never saw a plan they didn’t like.

 (Can you name these two of Watertown's three fringiest city councilors?)

Oops! I almost forgot. Besides the fringy councilors, the scripted activists, the outsider consultants, and the bend-over-backward planners, there are the cheerleaders who use their megaphones to shill for the shell game.

Here's a quote from Greg Reibman (he, him), President and CEO of the Charles River Regional Chamber (they, them) who lives in Newton:

“While many communities are proceeding cautiously as they create their MBTA Communities compliant plans, the majority of nearly 200 attendees at a community meeting in Watertown last week indicated in a straw poll that they want the city to go big in unlocking opportunities for new multi-family housing in and around Watertown Square.”

Oh man, does that ever capture the moment! A majority of a whopping 200 attendees, watched the shell game and played their role in determining the single most consequential change ever to happen to this city of more than 35,000 people.

What could possibly be wrong with that picture?

Folks, there's trouble in River City.

Our local government has become a social media machine. If you are not online, you don’t exist. If you have not shown up at meetings, it’s because you weren’t interested, not because you didn’t get the word or because you were working the night shift or your second or third job, or running a business, or you couldn’t get a babysitter or were caring for an elderly parent.

If 200 people vote with their sticky notes and answer questions using a QR code, it can be assumed that they are speaking for all of us.

With so much at stake, if this government actually gave a damn about what you think, rather than just plowing ahead with their own ideologic vision, they would have come up with a plan to canvass your neighborhood and knock on your damn door.

Maybe, while there’s still time on the game clock, we should find a way to knock on theirs. Or we can just throw in the towel.

Your choice. 

 

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown