Ever get the feeling you’re being herded down a path without knowing why?
Sometimes that feeling is just a feeling but sometimes it’s a voice in your head, warning you that something is fishy here.
Watertown has been adding housing units and will continue adding housing units. For the most part, people are okay with that, though they may object to the size and appearance of some of those structures.
The current
argument is about the number of new units being proposed and the location of
those units.
At first, there
were two options on the table. The first option called for by-right zoning
changes that would allow for 6,320 new housing units and the second option
would allow for 2,631.
The latest
option put forward by the design team calls for 3,133 new units.
All of these
units would be located within the Watertown Square Area Plan.
A longtime Watertown resident, who is also a prominent
local builder, predicted that 6,320 units would result in about 16,000 people −
almost half of our current population – being crammed into the Watertown Square
Area.
Those who
are clamoring for higher buildings and maximum density are thrilled by this
prospect. They tell us that in addition to helping solve the state’s housing
crisis, the maximum density will make Watertown “more vibrant.” We could become
one big Arsenal Yards.
By
comparison, the latest option of 3,133 units might seem much more palatable, if
you consider potentially 8,000 new residents being added to the population and
placed in one small section of the city to be a good idea.
The group of
well-organized and highly vocal residents who are clamoring for higher
buildings and more density might reluctantly settle for the 3,133 option. But
how about you?
How do you
feel about suggestions to replace the parking lot behind CVS with apartment
buildings?
Are you
excited by the prospect of having congested sidewalks that feel like being in Costco the
day before a snowstorm?
It’s called
vibrancy and if you’re not on board, it’s because you are old, or boring, or a
NIMBY, or all three.
And finally, how do you feel about being deprived of a third option that makes a lot more sense − the missing option of 1,701 units, required by the state’s MBTA communities mandate? Many of us share the opinion that even 1701 adds too many units to Watertown Square. Following the lead of other communities, we could fight it (based on units already built or are currently online to be built) but we won’t fight it because we don’t happen to have a firebrand in government or in the community to lead that courageous charge.
But, we hear
absolutely nothing about the 1701 option mandated by the state. Not from the
consultants. Not from the staff. Not from the City Manager.
We might
call it the Big Shush.
Here’s a comment made on March 29, in Watertown News from Donna Leone (whom I do not know), which pretty much sums up my impression of the public process:
“One thing that has stood out to me from
these meetings is that the presentation team are not just urban planners and
designers, they’re a sales team, and they’re good at it. Fortunately, it’s
encouraging to see that many aren’t buying what they’re selling, myself
included.
Until
the questionable voting issues are resolved, and other options and alternatives
to the housing side of this project are put on the table, I can’t in good faith trust that these meetings are
being conducted in an honest and unbiased manner.”
Yup! Very slick dog and pony shows and a very lax voting system, allowing people to vote anonymously, and multiple times, and permitting voting by non-Watertown residents. This is meant to pass for solid data?
Donna Leone’s
comment continues:
“As far
as my reading of Mr. Proakis ‘s response I understand that this doesn’t mean
that 1,701 units plus the additional units will be built, but it does serve as
an open invite for developers to come in and take over the square.”
True. No
commercial property owner within the newly rezoned Watertown Square area will
have to sell their property to developers to build apartment buildings –
unless, of course, they get an offer they just can't refuse. I bet, in this
housing market, those offers are already in the works.
And one more
thing about grading what we’ve seen of the public process −
Promotion
gets an “F.”
The Manager
and his team began the public meetings by expressing their delight at the
excellent turnout.
We are a
city of about 35,000, of which about 25,000 are registered voters. Each of the
Watertown Square meetings drew fewer than 300 attendees. Promotion for the
meetings has been almost exclusively through social media.
Here’s what
doesn’t get done:
Large
signage placed on the delta and at other high-traffic locations throughout the
city, advertising the times and locations of the meetings.
Notices of
the meetings included with property tax and water and sewer bills mailed to
homeowners.
Oversized,
glossy postcards of the kind sent by candidates to registered voters during
election campaigns.
Actual
door-knocking. With all the new large-salary employees being hired by the city,
who do not live in Watertown, this outreach might double as a great education
and orientation experience for those new hires who think they are now working for
Generic Town, U.S.A.
I am aware
that many of you who are saddened and enraged by this tricky takeover but have
remained silent, are not sheep. You are just fed up and cynical. But,
seriously, what does it cost you to rouse your friends and neighbors and start rattling
some cages at city hall?
Just pick up
the phone or send an email to every councilor and the Manager and tell them you’re
wise to the Big Shush and the only vote you want to cast and the only box you
want to check is for:
1701 AND
DONE!
If they
ignore you or suggest that you get on the path to progress, their answer is
essentially this:
Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown
