I agree that the City village rezoning “survey” in play is inadequate. More needs to be done to inform residents about the nitty-gritty building height proposals. Detailed maps for the areas under consideration must be supplied for any result to be meaningful.
But the larger question, not broached, is the nature of the village center. Newton’s precious village centers will be seen, in future, to have historic interest. Yes, they look backward. That’s a good thing. I hope they will continue to exist as more than relics in photographs. We need and have dense residential and commercial districts elsewhere in Newton and the metropolitan area. Newton needs to hold on to these village oases of human scale, where small businesses can breathe in modest, distinctive, and affordable quarters.
Newton has a right to be a suburb. The profit-centered development world is rushing ahead to urbanize. I love Coolidge Corner and the Prudential Center, but humans do, and will, need alternatives, places of relative refuge from the din and impersonality of the city. Newton offers these alternatives. I don’t think we need to apologize for not wanting to cram many tiny, cookie-cutter apartments into our villages. Or for keeping the street-level shops, with 2-3 stories (no higher) above. Or for rejecting bulky corridors of buildings with no space between or variation in design.
The arguments for density that I hear tell only part of the story. They ignore the human need for air and light and green space—and variousness. Density can have benefits, but I don’t see that Newton’s current thinking takes into account its social as well as infrastructure effects. Though perhaps cumbersome, special permits serve a purpose in protecting our landscape. And that protection is at the heart of zoning. Let’s move with care.
Naomi Myrvaagnes