Campaign Week in Review - 3/15/19: Over 700 Doors Knocked, Land Use Committee, Allen and Beethoven Safety Updates

This week’s update comes directly from me, but my campaign organizer Irina will be back next week.

Door-Knocking Milestones

With the beautiful weather this week, I got through a lot more doors in Newton Highlands, Upper Falls, and Waban – 308 more in fact, bringing my total to well over 700 so far. As of yesterday, I had talked to more than 200 people face to face since February began. (I’ve also heard back from folks who weren’t home when I stopped by but got my note and literature.)

Overwhelmingly, these conversations have been very positive and interesting discussions about the issues facing Ward 5 residents. I heard a lot this week about sidewalk plowing routes, the proposed retail marijuana site on Elliott St, the need for affordable housing, concerns about specific developments, and much more. I talked to several parents of classmates of mine at Angier Elementary School, and I even talked to one of those classmates in person. (He will be voting for me!)

Two specific conversations I wanted to highlight from this week: First, a senior voter in Newton Highlands wanted to know whether the Mayor’s new ride-share program would transfer her unused vouchers from the existing senior rides program. I emailed the Mayor’s office on Saturday to find out, and they were on it immediately, working to get me and the resident an answer. The specifics are still being worked out, but yes, you will be able to transfer old vouchers. Second, I spoke to a 92-year-old voter in Waban I had met during my 2016 campaign, and she told me she is terrified of what climate change will mean for her 5-year-old grand-child. She’ll be voting for me in this year’s election because of my unrivaled commitment to urgent local climate action that matches the severity and scientific timetable of the crisis. 

I also heard from a lot of Upper Falls residents this week about their frustrations that they are not feeling heard by the City Council on various issues. They also feel that there has been a long history of people in other parts of Newton using their influence and affluence to push things into Upper Falls instead of their own backyards, particularly at the height of the industrial factory period, with all its accompanying pollution. I think this equity point is a fair question to bring up, and it’s no secret that I have always supported bringing housing for everyone to Waban to help address that disparity. If I’m elected, I will certainly be trying my best to represent the entire ward as a whole across all its villages and not just Waban, where I live. I also believe that if my family hadn’t already been living in Waban for generations, we would in no way be able to afford to live here. Probably only a place like Upper Falls would welcome someone like me, if I were a new resident. Upper Falls has long been more of “a community for everyone” than much of the rest of Newton, and we can learn from their experiences when we really listen to residents there.

Land Use Committee Northland Presentation

On Tuesday, I attended the Land Use Committee's latest meeting on the Northland proposal, which mostly covered ground I went over in my recap last week at the Highlands Area Council. The focus of the presentation this week was on the changes made in response to the peer reviewer team working for the city. (Northland hired a yet further peer review team to check the first peer review and that team concurred so they made the proposal reductions.) Committee Chairman Schwartz tried to keep the focus of Councilor questions (and public comments) away from transportation (and parking) this week so it can be dealt with again at an upcoming hearing without getting too far off-topic from the revisions. One interesting question about renewable energy on site was similarly deferred to the May presentation on sustainability specifically.

Key points this week

• One extra revision (teased last week): Building 8 is now designated as All Age Friendly, but remains not restricted to seniors, in line with advice from the Newton Council on Aging. (Several Council on Aging members gave Public Comments affirming that point.) The building and units for Building 8 will have a range of amenities & design elements aimed at seniors and people with a number of disabilities to make it easier to live there and not need to go to assisted living or long term care somewhere else. Councilor Lipof (who has pushed for senior only units) asked if Northland would consider leasing space to a senior or long term care home operation. The answer is no. Northland’s team cited "social support" not "institutions" as the goal and said they are not trying to be "in the healthcare business." A planning board member asked if the extra Accessibility options in Building 8 will be available inside all units in all buildings. The answer suggested it won't be standard but moddable so they could be added as desired.

• The Community Building & Community Playground have been shifted south along the Greenway to try to integrate it better to the Upper Falls Village Center. Councilor Rice asked how tall the Community Building by the greenway will be. The answer was one (tall-ish) story. The presentation this week was way more specific about park design...and it is a lot more than I had realized from prior presentations. I don't know if Newton has any parks like this yet. Council President Laredo asked them to consider winter condition uses for the proposed parks.

• Total project net municipal revenue estimate is now revised down to $1.07 million annually, according to the city's peer reviewer. (I think some people are rightly wondering if that is now cutting it kind of close on the margin for the city’s point of view, especially if another recession were to hit.)

• Chairman Schwartz asked more about the new Laneways, trisecting two of the previously big buildings where the parking garages have now been undergrounded. The designers compared it to European streets/plazas where vehicles can traverse if needed but only secondarily to pedestrian traffic & restaurant uses.

• Councilor Greenberg asked Northland to go to 140+ affordable and middle income units, more in line with draft changes to the affordable housing inclusionary zoning ordinance. The current plan for 123 is closer to existing ordinance. Northland is still declining to go up, but I assume later negotiation will occur.

Waban Area Council

Thursday night, I was at the monthly meeting of the Waban Area Council. Agenda items included updates on Friends of Quinobequin, the Allen/Beethoven street safety projects, charter reform, zoning reform, Waban Area Council goals for 2019, and an explanation of a Finance Committee item for the City Council regarding Angier School money (which was basically just the city paying itself back an internal loan from the beginning of the re-design process back in 2013, now that the reconstruction project has officially been deemed closed).

The key takeaways Thursday were on street safety on Allen Ave and Beethoven Ave (one year after a community forum on the problem): Total citywide street safety budget is $150k/year only, but these 2 streets are high priority due to the speeding epidemic there. One reason costs are high even for small changes is that all underground utilities were run along the edges of Allen Ave instead of down the middle. Unfortunately, the streets weren't reconfigured during the Zervas reconstruction, when it might have been easier, ostensibly because the absence of Zervas and its subsequent enrollment levels at its new size meant the city had no data at the time to do a "data-driven" street redesign. But here are the planned changes and things still under debate:

1. Allen Ave will get bumpouts at two cross streets on the west side, to be built this summer or fall. There will be a crosswalk to Richardson Field at one of the bumpouts. (It was asked whether this will this fix northbound speeding on east side. City engineers have said yes because it makes the street narrower overall, which slows traffic)

2. Beethoven Ave is too narrow for bumpouts, but the city is debating a big raised table at the Richardson crosswalk for safety. Councilor Rice said public needs to write in to advocate for this. The Fire Department has been slightly pushing back on that specific table, citing response times to potential Zervas emergencies.

3. Crossings at the aqueduct for Beethoven & Allen are still being debated. City has some concerns that sightlines on the hill might be too short, so pedestrians might try to cross thinking it's safe & get hit by a car (but also that is basically true now)

4. There won't be a stop sign added at Puritan. Legally it's not allowed because it's regulatory not for street safety, but also it doesn't promote safety because drivers either roll through or stop but then accelerate suddenly.

5. The public (including some Zervas PTO parent neighbors there Thursday night) remains concerned about parking overflowing into nearby streets and endless idling queues to get into the blue zone by the school (which lead to air pollution and blocking driveways)

One other Waban note, but not from the Area Council meeting, is that the Planning Department says the re-developer for 20 Kinmonth Rd (the former nursing home behind Waban Market) is currently proposing to build “24 residential units in the existing building” but no additional details are available yet. Thanks to my fellow housing activists for staying on top of this inquiry.

If you would like to make a donation to my campaign to help me stay ahead of the competition, you can do so here.

Campaign Week in Review - 3/8/19: Zoning and Affordability, Buses and Shuttles, Local Business Challenges

by Irina Costache, Campaign Organizer

This past Sunday, Bill got a bit more door-knocking done despite the continued winter weather and this week he attended a number of community meetings. Some of the many issues voters brought up this week were renewable energy, the need for improvements to public transportation, the problem of outsourcing of certain city services, and (as usual) road repair after all the winter potholes this season.

So-called Better Bus Project

On Monday night, Bill attended a rescheduled MBTA community meeting regarding possible bus route changes that Mayor Fuller has been speaking out against, some of which would affect Ward 5 (more info further below). Held at the Watertown Police Department, the presentation mainly consisted of posters placed around the room repeating information from online, so disappointingly there wasn’t much new info. Bill was able to submit comments on Route 59 changes and speak with various Newton and Watertown residents, including former Watertown City Councilor Aaron Dushku who talked about the new dedicated bus lanes in Watertown. Because of how much space single-occupancy vehicles take up, a lot of the time there are more people riding the bus in the dedicated bus lanes than all the people driving by themselves in their cars in the adjacent lanes. Former Newton Alderman George Mansfield also expressed concern to Bill that the Route 52 bus serves people with disabilities and elderly riders who would otherwise have no easy transit access if their part of the route was eliminated under the current proposal. More on that later in this recap.

Local Businesses

On Tuesday morning, Bill met with Greg Reibman, head of the Newton Needham Regional Chamber, in order to hear about the challenges faced by our local businesses. One such challenge that Greg highlighted was landlord absenteeism and storefront vacancies. Bill asked a number of questions about the role of the government to intervene in some of these problems. We’ll be following up more with local businesses to hear about what is and is not working for them in Newton, as well as their ideas for solutions.

Housing

Tuesday evening, Bill went to the monthly Engine 6/Liveable Newton meeting of affordable housing activists held at Union Church in Waban. The agenda covered zoning reform, Washington Street, Riverside, inclusionary zoning, and Northland. Here is a quick recap of the key points:

• Zoning reform impacts on housing affordability

  • A key concern among attendees regarding zoning reform was that the current proposal doesn’t zone density along all public transit lines. Another voiced concern was that small homes (which tend to be more affordable than large ones) aren’t buildable by right in many of the areas where there are mostly large homes.

  • Another comment concerned equity in the proposal, posing questions about why some neighborhoods were being preserved as-is while other, already dense neighborhoods, were only adding density.

  • One other point was brought up by Sean Roche, a community activist who often writes at Village 14 and on twitter, who argued that multi-family homes should not be prohibited in any lots, as the current zoning reform draft suggests. Zoning for exclusively single-family homes should be eliminated, he argued, so that every residential lot would allow by-right construction of at least two- and three-family housing. (Single-family homes would still be permissible under this idea, just not the only thing allowed.) Another member noted that the support in Newton for climate action and environmental sustainability is more widely backed than the support for housing affordability, saying that this is likely the best way to argue against exclusively single-family zoning for new construction.

  • The full City Council will be meeting on March 19 to hear a new model for projecting the fiscal impacts of future development. March 12 is the deadline for public comments on the 2nd draft of the Washington Street Vision.

• One final housing-related item, which Bill promised to follow up on at the Engine 6 meeting – On March 4, the Department of Planning and Development released a Development Review Team Meeting Snapshot. One mentioned submission was in regards to 20 Kinmonth Road, the recently closed nursing home behind Waban Market. The submission for review was described as a special permit to extend the nonconforming use to allow a multi-family dwelling. We contacted the Planning Department staff this week to inquire more about this proposal, but the Department stated that they had no additional information from the developer yet. We’ll keep following it.

Newton Highlands Area Council: Northland, MBTA Buses, Charter Revisions

On Thursday night, Bill attended the Newton Highlands Area Council monthly meeting, which addressed the Highlands impacts of the Northland project, the MBTA Better Bus Project, and Charter revision proposals, among other things. These are the most noteworthy points from the night:

• Northland’s team was there to address questions, focusing on the Highlands, in a small group setting ahead of their next Land Use Committee hearing next week. The Northland site is in Upper Falls, but Needham Street marks the border with Newton Highlands and the project site is close to the Newton Highlands’ village center, so both neighborhoods would be greatly affected.

  • Thursday’s discussion touched on some recent changes to the plan, such as the reduction in Building 6, which had the largest mass due to a large, above-ground parking garage. The building is now getting smaller as parking goes underground. This undergrounding of parking, along with reduced total parking (and retail and a bit of housing), made possible the split of Buildings 5 & 6 into several buildings trisected by greenspace walkways and courtyards.

  • Street parking around Northland’s central green has been eliminated in order to promote pedestrian safety and accessibility.

  • On the issue of parking requirements broadly, Northland’s team spoke about evolving away from the 1970s approach to parking planning (which was to build parking capacity for the peak days of the year around Christmas) and rather towards building parking based on more typical year-round needs.

  • The transportation hub building has now been moved onto Needham Street, which helps to add walkthrough permeability along the street and probably makes it more convenient for pedestrians and vehicles to get to.

  • In response to a question from Bill, they said that undergrounding the parking wouldn’t affect the culvert for the brook being restored above ground in other places, as they are building around it.

  • Shuttle fares continue to not be disclosed, but it was stated that those prices would be based on levels low enough to encourage ridership at the levels they’re aiming for to manage transportation demand and get enough people to avoid driving.

  • Councilor Rice inquired if the shuttles could run to the Eliot T station in order to avoid every shuttle dropping at Newton Highlands. Northland said that this route doesn’t work, but that they have been considering a routing to the village center in Newton Center.

  • Northland also commented that  the shuttle is primarily being designed for commuting, which is their explanation for the relatively unimpressive frequency of service proposed.

  • Bob Burke expressed concerns about whether the Green Line could handle the increase in ridership from the Northland and Riverside projects. Northland responded by saying that this concern was one of the reasons for why they planned shuttle routes into Boston or Cambridge, instead of just to the nearby Green Line and commuter rail stops.

  • Building on that, Nathaniel Lichtin asked if Northland had conducted a capacity study for ridership on T lines similar to traffic impact studies. It did not sound like they had.

  • Northland also said that they met with the Newton Council on Aging, which they report is opposing the concept of segregated senior-only housing blocks for the site. This is something that some city councilors had been pushing for.

  • Proposed reduction in retail space in the current plan revision would reduce projected Saturday traffic by 50% compared to the earlier version

  • Bill also asked some additional questions about the project, inquiring about tax revenue projections before and after the reductions in retail square footage (somewhat decreased, though still a net gain, but at least less likely to add further commercial vacancies) and also about the controversial Oak St entrance/exit (no further proposed changes since they added some street bends and other speed-reduction measures to discourage heavy usage, but they remain convinced it is necessary to have at least a minor entrance/exit there, despite concerns raised by some Upper Falls residents)

• The Area Council meeting also addressed the MBTA Better Bus Project, where the Route 59 and 52 changes would affect Newton Highlands. Both of these routes are long with low ridership. The change to 52 would eliminate the alternative route over Nahanton/Winchester and just maintain the middle schools route. The 59 would eliminate the Elliot St Lincoln St alternative route.

  • By eliminating these routes, frequency on the main routes would increase, but negatively impact those who don’t live or work near the main routes.

  • Another concern is in regards to some elimination of Route 60 service around the Chestnut Hill Towers housing project and service westward from there into Newton.

  • The Area Council voted to send an official letter to the T containing comments opposing service cuts, consistent with the mayor’s letter on the Better Bus Project

• Charter Revision updates from Councilor Rice:

  • Following extensive comments from the public in a hearing this week, the City Council Programs & Services Committee voted to eliminate any charter changes to Area Council. These changes would be pushed to a next round of possible revision.

  • The Committee pushed making a decision on the question of a minimum voter turnout threshold to validate ballot referendum results to next month.

• The Walnut and Pinecrest townhouse project by Four Corners was voluntarily reviewed by the Fair Housing Commission this week for accessibility, affordability, and other fair housing questions. Nothing was flagged by the Commission, but the developers were reminded that any affordable units must include utilities and other such costs in the pricing of affordability. (One affordable unit is proposed at the moment.)

Campaign Week in Review - 3/1/19: Understanding Zoning Reform

by Irina Costache, Campaign Organizer

On Saturday, Bill knocked on doors in Newton Highlands south of Route 9 and heard from voters about city services and street repair conditions and traffic in Newton! On Thursday, he was also able to sit down with a Ward 5 business owner in Waban Square to learn about the challenges faced by local businesses – including the damaging effects of low pedestrian traffic and housing unaffordability for potential employees.

Other updates/events from this week:

• A constituent recently emailed Bill about whether Newton is considering implementing gender neutral/ all gender/ non binary restrooms in public facilities in Newton, like nearby towns. The Mayor's LGBTQ+ Community Liaison, Holly Ryan, confirmed that this is in the works!

• On Sunday, Stop & Shop workers voted through their union, the United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1445 union, to authorize a strike if negotiations for fair pay and benefits fail. If a strike happens, it will affect the new Stop & Shop on Needham Street in Ward 5. Please do not cross any picket lines.

• Bill attended Rev. Howard Haywood’s funeral at Myrtle Baptist Church on Sunday. A well known community activist, one of the Reverend’s final messages was that there is still work to be done in Newton. He hoped that it will become a model of true racial integration.

Zoning and Planning Committee

Bill has been attending community meetings and discussions on Newton’s zoning reform since last fall. It would be the biggest redesign in more than half a century. But for many of the sitting city councilors, their first deep dive into proposed zoning redesign came this past Monday. Bill attended that City Council Zoning and Planning Committee meeting, which was about the Planning Department’s newly released “Buildout” model. This model shows how every lot in Newton would be zoned – and more importantly how much could be built on each residential lot under that new zoning – under the February 2019 draft of the proposed reform. Comments, especially objections, from the public during this phase will shape changes the next draft. (They have already adopted changes to a preliminary draft based on public feedback since October.)

Monday night featured a great presentation by the Planning Department on a very complicated topic, and we have undertaken to try to write out some key points, highlights, and figures from that presentation in a way everyone can hopefully understand. You can check out the PowerPoint from the City as well.

The top goals for the zoning reform (set back in 2011) consist of increasing lot conformity, reducing speculative teardowns, and promoting broader community objectives such as climate change response and demographic diversity. One overall concern with the zoning redesign came from Councilor Crossley (Ward 5-at-Large), who argued that the proposed rezoning actually hews too much toward conforming toward already existing realities on the ground (i.e. preserving single-family zoning, as opposed to re-zoning for more multi unit new construction, since that affects other city goals on affordable housing, the environment, etc.). On the other hand, some councilors feel the proposed reform is too great a change already.

Understanding the buildout model:

• The Planning Department emphasized that the buildout does not calculate what is likely to be built (that is shaped by market forces, individual preferences, and design trends), but rather it calculates the maximum possible construction citywide “by right” (i.e. without special permits or re-zoning) under the proposed new zoning.

• For all residential lots, the buildout model shows: the maximum possible massing of buildings on a lot, the maximum possible lot splits (only viable new lots), the maximum possible residential units (with no commercial blend), and speculative teardown vulnerability.

• Speculative teardown vulnerability is calculated to find a tipping point of whether the rezoned lot would allow re-developers to sell the new home for at least 2.4x what it was bought for (assessed value is used as a baseline), if the new unit can be at least 3,800 sf above ground, AND if it can be sold for $600/sf or more.

• To further underscore the difference between maximum buildout vs likely construction, the Planning Department also noted that under current zoning, owners could already build by-right 2,000 more housing units in Newton because only half of the buildable square footage in residential zones have been built. Around 47% more capacity could be added without any reform. Simply changing what is allowed in some zones won’t necessarily change what is built because everyone is already not maxing out.

• There are a few zoning code changes for lots which affect the allowed buildable area, and modifying each of them in one direction or another when drafting the proposed reforms can greatly change the maximum buildable construction. The Planning Department said they act like “levers” on what is allowed. These levers are: minimum lot frontage (the narrowest side to side width a lot can be along a street), minimum setback (shortest distance from the lot line to the building), maximum lot coverage (the most square footage that the structures like a house, deck, pool, etc. can cover of the total lot), and minimum lot size (area) & depth (length from street to the back line). Note here that “lot coverage” replaces a less comprehensive “Floor Area Ratio” (FAR) in the existing code.

• One tradeoff in the draft is making it a bit more viable to subdivide a lot and build two smaller units as a way of compensating people who were expecting to be able to sell a big lot to a teardown developer. Another tradeoff would require new buildings to be built with deeper setbacks from lot line, but it is expected that this could push more people to add additions onto existing buildings getting closer to the lot lines, since additions are not governed the same way as new construction.

• How tightly rules should be written for expanding non-conforming buildings compared to how strict the lot coverage requirements would be on new building construction was a matter of debate during the meeting.

• The Buildout model of the February 2019 zoning reform draft finds that up to 2% more residential lots could emerge in Newton, given proposed changes to lot size requirements.

New zoning districts:

The new zoning code would create all new district categories, replacing any current ones. There are four that are primarily residential:

• R3, the densest, would be designated onto 5,728 existing lots.

• R2 is the most expansive, designated onto 11,964 existing lots.

• R1, the least dense, would be designated onto 3,541 existing lots

• NG, the least common and also partially commercial, would be designated onto 207 existing lots, all on the outskirts of village centers.

You can check a map and see your home’s proposed zoning designation here. Broadly speaking, Upper Falls will be mostly R3, Newton Highlands (within Ward 5) will be mostly R2, and Waban would be split between R2 and R1 with most of the R2 being east of Chestnut St and most of the R1 being west of Chestnut St. Again, these largely reflect current densities (or at least densities as of the year 2000, to set a benchmark regarding future teardowns.)

Key numbers from the maximum buildout scenarios (i.e. if every possible lot split allowed in the February draft reform happened and all possible lot areas are built on to the fullest extent permissible by right):

• R3 – Here, the teardown risk falls from 44% to 11%, with the at-risk units dropping from 2,691 to just 681. The max allowable housing units (compared to maximum possible on those same specific lots but under current code) slightly increase from 12,065 to 12,557. The Planning Department noted the difficulty in incentivizing small 2 units in new construction instead of 1 unit to 1 unit teardowns in the market area being proposed for R3.

• R2 districts would grow total allowable units by 4% (12,784 allowed now to 13,478) and teardown vulnerability would decline from 4,161 units at risk to just 476 units at risk (from 33% down to 4 or 5%).

• R1 generally has very large single family homes with very large yards. The maximum possible building scenario rises to 4,088 units, and the teardown risk grows to 64% (up from 42%) under maximized lot splits, but in another scenario grows only to 44%. Council President Laredo (Ward 7-at-Large) asked if teardown concerns are the same for R1 as other residential zones, adding that deciding on a policy for lot subdivision and the city’s objectives on that point is a place for legitimate debate within the Council.

• The Neighborhood General residential-commercial district (if built as 100% residential with no commercial) would increase from 1,150 current max units to 5,691 under the draft. The Planning Department also advised that NG district includes a few big properties that they believe should be zoned to another category, greatly cutting the aforementioned figures. They also emphasized that a 100% residential build would never happen, since it’s a semi-commercial district as well. For NG zones, under the current proposal, the teardown risk rises from 25% to 81% in that unlikely max build scenario. But Council President Laredo cautioned that the intention of creating NG transitional districts approaching village centers is actually for re-development specifically so “teardown vulnerability” as a concept is not as applicable in the way it is for R2.

This meeting focused entirely on the buildout model. At an upcoming ZAP committee meeting, changes being proposed for process – how projects are reviewed, special permits, variances, etc – will be addressed.

We hope that helps everyone understand the proposed zoning reforms a bit better, but please feel free to email back with followup questions.

Campaign Week in Review: 2/22/19 – Successful Fundraiser, Upper Falls Area Council, Debating the Issues

by Irina Costache, Campaign Organizer

Despite the winter weather this week, Bill was able to knock on 78 more doors in Ward 5! He also held a successful fundraiser this past Sunday at the Waban home of affordable housing activist Fran Godine. At this event, Bill spoke about the regional housing crisis and how housing policy affects our goal of making Newton a community for everyone, and then took questions from attendees to facilitate discussion of this and other issues.

(If you weren't able to attend the fundraiser but want to support the campaign, please make a contribution now!)

Contribute

On Thursday, Bill attended the Upper Falls Area Council. The agenda featured a commentary/discussion from Councilor Auchincloss on Northland parking, as well as discussions of the Riverside project and city charter reform of Area Council. Here are the night’s key points:

• Northland:

  • Councilor Auchincloss (Ward 2 at Large), who sits on the Land Use Committee, was present to respond to a letter signed onto by the UFAC about parking minimum requirements. The letter favored more parking than currently planned. Auchincloss has been making the case that the parking should actually be lower than the limit requested by Northland (1,950 spaces). Northland needs a waiver already, given that the standing city ordinance would require about 3,000 spots for the size of their project. The existing ordinance is something Bill has supported changing due to concern that it greatly over-emphasizes parking relative to our overall interests as a city and relative to nearby communities’ similar requirements. Auchincloss argued that by reducing on-site parking limits in the special permit phase, Northland would be forced to fully maintain an adequate transit operation and design uses for the site in a way that could actually support the lack of parking, rather than just meeting a bare minimum requirement and then encouraging people to drive anyway because there’s no incentive for them to keep up the alternatives. A concern from the community with limiting the on-site parking is that drivers may just begin to park in nearby neighborhood streets around the project.

  • Due to insufficient market demand in the area as flagged by the city’s peer reviewer of the project, Northland has recently announced a reduction in the proposed project, cutting retail space from 185,200 sq ft to 115,000 sq ft (and cutting housing units from 822 to 800, but not reducing the number of affordable units planned!). The retail reductions in particular would reduce the projected traffic. Voters or councilors who strongly favor increased commercial space but not residential stock increases probably won't be happy with the retail space reduction in the plan, but these folks also usually have concerns about traffic, and office/retail land uses actually add more traffic than residential does. And of course, despite the financial advantages of added commercial land use, if there isn’t a market demand for it (at least in a specific area), then we have to take that into account.

  • Another recent change is the planned elimination of the above ground parking garage (now putting a garage underground), as well as a 20% reduction in planned parking.

  • Councilor Rice asked the representative from Northland about senior housing. The developer said that they are committing to constructing “all ages” housing, not senior specific homes. These units are designed with accessibility to, and interest for, all types of residents in mind, including seniors, but Northland is still in talks with councilors over the senior-specific issue.

• City Charter Reforms from Programs & Services

  • Last week in our update, we talked about the Waban Area Council where a counter-proposal concerning reforms to the City Charter was presented by a city council subcommittee. This week, Councilor Rice was present in person at the Upper Falls meeting to address further questions. As noted last week, the two key changes that aren’t simple administrative corrections are language regarding Area Council creation (moving more control to the City Council’s discretion as opposed to being laid out in the charter document explicitly) and the change to requirements for a valid ballot referendum campaign. Last Friday, Bill spoke to Councilor Krintzman (formerly of the Charter Review Commission) about the latter point to find out more. The threshold to get on the ballot would get a slight but not prohibitive increase (from 50 signatures to 250), and a participation threshold of 20% registered turnout. In other words, a referendum would fail if less than 20% of registered Newton voters cast a yes or no vote on it, even if more of them voted yes. However, there is some concern on this point because a number of citywide general elections in fairly recent years actually had total turnout below 20%, and 2015 just barely reached that threshold. That’s bad for many reasons besides referendum validation. But perhaps turnout would increase with ballot questions to vote on, rather than just candidates? Still, it’s worth having a conversation about the 20% proposal. There was a spirited discussion about it at the Upper Falls Area Council meeting.

  • The first week of March will include a Programs & Services full committee meeting to hear public comment on these and other proposed changes recommended out of the Subcommittee reviewing charter updates.

• Riverside project

  • Continuing recent appearances at other area councils, the Upper Falls Area Council heard opposition statements concerning the project from Lower Falls. There were no major additional details since the last visioning meeting (discussed in last week’s update).

Other Updates/News This Week:

• This past weekend, we were saddened to hear news of the passing of our fellow community member and supporter, Rev. Howard Haywood. A well known activist for affordable housing and a recipient of the City's Human Rights Award, he will be remembered dearly by Newton. For those who wish to attend his funeral and wake, the services will be held at Myrtle Baptist Church, 21 Curve St., West Newton. Wake: Sat., Feb. 23rd from 4 pm to 8 pm. Funeral: Sun., Feb. 24th 1 pm.

• One issue many older voters have brought up with Bill during this campaign is their concern about how to get around if they are not able to drive themselves. This can lead to social isolation and other problems, so it’s something we do need to have an answer for. Interestingly, in her State of the City address on Tuesday evening, Mayor Fuller announced a new transportation assistance program for seniors. She said that the service will be reliable and affordable, and provide easily identifiable vehicles, vetted driver who will walk passengers to the door, an real time ride hailing. We’ll look forward to learning more on that soon!

Campaign Week in Review: 2/15/19 – Visioning, Waban Area Council, and More Door Knocking

by Irina Costache, Campaign Organizer

This past Sunday, Bill attended a visioning meeting concerning the Riverside T station site on the Lower Falls/Auburndale village line. Held at Williams Elementary School, the packed meeting spent time answering questions from the audience mostly to clarify the visioning process (and how related or unrelated it was to the proposal on the table from the developer), which did not leave much time to discuss the public’s broader vision for the site. (People did write down comments about their vision on poster sheets on the walls around the gym.)

Despite the cold and snowy weather, Bill spent time canvassing on Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday! This week, he knocked on 112 doors in Ward 5, and heard from voters about their environmental concerns, senior and affordable housing, and Newton schools.

(If you'd like to donate to help us pay for our campaign literature as Bill goes door-to-door, please make a contribution now!)

Contribute

On Wednesday evening, Bill was at another reception in Waban for the Suzuki School of Newton, as it joins the community in Waban Square.

Finally, on Thursday evening, Bill attended the monthly Waban Area Council meeting. The meeting covered new issues from the public and the Riverside visioning process, as well as featured a discussion of the report from the City Charter Reform subcommittee and updates on the zoning redesign. Here is a recap of key points from the meeting!

• Issues from the public

  • Proposed marijuana shop opening for four corners (by a different developer than the one proposed and withdrawn last year)

  • Possibility of getting Northland mitigation funds for various intersections further away from the project, including closer to Rte 9

  • Attention brought to the fact that WAC has not heard updates on solutions from the city about speed problems on Allen Ave and Beethoven Ave since the public forum last spring

  • Interest in closer coordination between the Friends of Hemlock Gorge and the Friends of Quinobequin

  • Talk of the DCR eventually aspiring to build a riverwalk along Quinobequin and whether or not they are moving forward on part of that soon

• City Charter presented a counter-proposal from city council subcommittee. This built on last week’s announcement from Councilor Rice that a Programs & Services Subcommittee has completed a one year review of two years of the Charter Commission process. Here are some key things to know:

  • No major changes that would require a re-vote by the city – mostly just re-introducing the minor administrative changes recommended in the ballot question

  • However, one of the proposed changes affects neighborhood area councils. It would move some of the definitions away from the charter and into the city council ordinances

  • There is also a proposed change that would change the threshold for signatures to get local ballot initiatives on the ballot

  • There are no proposed changes to size or composition of city council, in contrast with both the 2017 ballot question and the 2017 lame duck session proposal from city council

  • Councilor Rice (not present at the WAC meeting) has been advocating for wording to protect existing area councils, but also wants to make it easier to form new area councils as well. He will be chairing an upcoming public hearing on the proposed charter revisions at the Programs & Services full committee

  • Bill remains committed to finding improvements to the city charter that have broad support, since Ward 5 voters did narrowly support the 2017 proposal on the ballot, although the city as a whole did not. (This view is not shared by the Area Council.)

• There was also a brief zoning redesign discussion, but most public discussion is in limbo until the citywide buildout is released in the final week of February showing how each lot’s zoning would change under the current draft overhaul of the code.

One final word: Don't forget our upcoming campaign fundraiser for Bill on Sunday February 17. More information available here.

Campaign Week in Review: 2/8/19 – Door Knocking Begins, Housing Proposals, and More

by Irina Costache, Campaign Organizer

Last Saturday, Bill volunteered at the Newton Highlands Soup Social, serving delicious soup on a cold day from various Ward 5 and 6 restaurants to a big turnout.

This week, given the beautiful weather, Bill officially kicked off the canvassing effort, knocking 167 doors in Ward 5! Many of the voters reached were concerned about improving safety and accessibility of city roads, sidewalks, and bike lanes. Affordable housing was another key concern people brought up.

(If you'd like to donate to help us pay for our campaign literature as Bill goes door-to-door, please make a contribution now!)

Contribute

Bill also participated in the monthly Engine 6/Livable Newton meeting at the Union Church in Waban, where zoning reform and inclusionary zoning requirements were the main focus.

Finally this week, Bill attended the Newton Highlands Area Council meeting, where issues concerning both wards five and six were addressed. Here is a quick recap of the most noteworthy points from the meeting:

• Main Issues/Items addressed:

  • Walnut St special permit for a residential development

  • Proposed Elliot St retail marijuana retailer

  • Riverside proposal

  • Charter Commission process

• Walnut St

  • Adjoining lots near Whole Foods are being proposed for a small housing development, but a lot of revisions have been made in response to community feedback

  • One lot is proposed for a 2-family (built by right), while the other lot proposal plans to build 7 units and requires a special permit

  • 9 total units are proposed across the multiple properties, with private underground driveways and garages

  • The proposed units will be for sale after construction

  • One of the proposed units would be affordable

  • This project is not related to the proposed development nearby on Beacon St by a different owner

• Eliot St. proposed retail marijuana site (currently permitted for medical)

  • There were no new announcements on this issue since the Upper Falls Area Council presentation by the owners. Traffic remains the top lingering concern for residents. The owners believe that the traffic and parking management plan for the marijuana site as well as appointment-only rules and staff levels mean they will actually have slightly less traffic than the salon and take-out restaurant uses previously on the site before it became vacant.

• Riverside development proposal

  • The Lower Falls Improvement Association presented their objections to the Riverside proposal to the Area Council. They have been making presentations at various meetings around the city.

  • The visioning process for the site kicks off this Sunday afternoon at the Williams school

• Charter Review Process continues

  • Councilor Rice announced that the Programs & Services Committee has completed a one year review of two years of the Charter Commission process, since the overall Commission proposal was unsuccessful at the ballot box but had plenty of widely accepted elements of minor changes

  • Rice said there is now a counter-proposal as a result of this review, which will be coming up for committee and council votes soon

One final word: Don't forget our upcoming campaign fundraiser for Bill on Sunday February 17. More information available here.

Howard Haywood endorsement

I am incredibly honored to have the endorsement of the Rev. Howard Haywood, one of Newton's most esteemed community leaders.

Rev. Haywood's Endorsement:

"As a Newton native and as Pastor Emeritus of Myrtle Baptist Church, I have worked for many years to make our city a more inclusive, loving, and welcoming place – especially on housing justice for people of all races and incomes. Bill Humphrey is running for city council on the notion that Newton can and should be 'a community for everyone' and he has made housing for all one of his top priorities. This is an issue Bill has already been vocally committed to in recent years. Because of this, I am endorsing him for the open Ward 5 city council seat in 2019."

Here's why I'm running for Newton City Council next year

In June, at the urging of friends and neighbors who supported my previous run for office, I announced I planned to seek the Newton City Council seat John Rice said he would be leaving in 2019. In the months since, I've been continuously participating in community meetings across Ward 5 and getting feedback on what people want from their new ward councilor in the next term and how my ideas might be able to make a difference. I continue to learn new things each week that will help me represent the ward I grew up in. Now my campaign is really kicking off.

Here's why I'm running for City Council:

I'm running because we need big ideas for the 2020s on how to make sure Newton is a community for everyone. We need a healthy natural environment with safe, clean, and convenient transportation options for all our families. We need to address the region’s housing crisis so that people have a place to live in Newton whether they grew up here, grew old here, or just got here. We need to preserve and expand the cherished public services that have made our city great. As a young, lifelong resident of Ward 5, I believe I can bring a unique new perspective to the job of representing Upper Falls, Newton Highlands, and Waban on the city council in the next decade – and continue the prompt and reliable constituent services work for everyone that we've come to expect as Ward 5 residents. Many of you have known me for many years via the Newton Public Schools or met me as I knocked doors for progressive causes and candidates, and I'm looking forward to getting to know those of you who don't know me yet. I hope to earn your support in 2019.

My new campaign website has a detailed platform of where I stand on the big issues facing Ward 5 and Newton.

If you're already on board and you're able to make a donation, you can do so at the button below. Otherwise, I look forward to seeing many of you at the doors in a few short months. Any help is appreciated!

Contribute