In 1970, the committee work on the Board of Aldermen was often conducted in private. The public and Aldermen were, at the whim of the chair, prohibited from attending committee meetings.
With the decision to prohibit the public from using graphics at Zoning Redesign meetings, is ZAP returning to those days of closed government? Or, is this an echo of the present-day disruptions seen in Washington?
The question is why should a City Council committee be allowed to hold hearings, take up time allotted to the public, showing pictures and graphs to support their multi page, complicated, zoning proposal, ask for public comment, then, deny the public to opportunity to use graphics to explain their concerns? Particularly, since many members of the Council have expressed the benefit of “pictures” to help them understand the complexities of zoning.
In every legislative body, democracy is, once again, at risk of suppression.
Is it true that the chance public debate may enlighten voters and change public opinion about zoning redesign is the reason it is not an acceptable option in the governance of our city?
We need to speak out against the “no picture” order or it will remain in effect for opponents to the plan prepared by the Department of Planning and Development “Under the direction and guidance of the Newton City Council Zoning and Planning Committee (ZAP), . . .”. [P&D Dept Memo 11/23/2022]. Councilors Baker and Wright should be congratulated for speaking up for our rights to be heard. I was surprising to hear councilors that have said, on many occasions, that pictures were important speak against allowing visuals at the meeting.
Other than developers and those associated with the building industry, most Newtonites are for the goals and against the results of Zoning Redesign because we are uncertain if the new apartment buildings can be supported by our present municipal infrastructure; the plan is detrimental to the environment; it is not designed to provide low- and moderate-income housing; it is destructive of our cherished village environment; and it is injurious to our local businesses who, most likely, will not return after construction.
We need to re-engage the public, not just those expected to support the demolition and rebuilding of our villages. So far, the outreach by the City Council seems to have been directed, mostly, to those who will receive real or imagined benefits from zoning redesign. Those who will suffer from a change in the quality of our city life have not been informed, invited or encouraged to address our problems. Concerned citizens have had to seize opportunities to speak and ask questions. Questions that remain unanswered, such as:
Why does the definition of a half story conflict with state law that defines a half story for tenement houses? State law defines ”Tenement house”, as any house or building which is to be occupied as the home or residence of two or more families. I believe that definition applies to most homes in Newton.
Why are we not incentivizing the building of residential units for families with children rather than allowing a profit margin to be considered as a priority?
Why are we replacing grass lawns and play areas with cement and asphalt heat islands? “Heat islands are urbanized areas that experience higher temperature than outlying areas. They are “Structures such as building, roads, and other infrastructure absorb and re-emit the sun’s heat more that natural landscapes”.
What has happened to our tree canopy?
Why are we reducing parking in our business districts?
Why have we eliminated our requirement that landlords provide a parking space for tenants, as part of the unit rental?
Graphics are an important part of a presentation explaining why these issues need to be addressed and answered before a new zoning law should be adopted.
ZAP should revise its rules to allow reasonable public participation.
We need to understand what our future villages will look like.
Peter F. Harrington is a senior member of the Massachusetts Bar,
a past Vice President of the Newton Board of Aldermen and
a former three-term member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives.