I was greatly surprised that Ward 2 candidate Dan Gaynor, in the October 22 debate with David Micley, vociferously disputed his opponent’s claim in a recent campaign mailer that he (Gaynor) supported buildings as tall as 6 stories on Walnut Street. (In the mailer text, Micley wrote: “… he supports drastically exceeding the state requirement including zoning for 6 stories in Newtonville ‘by right’ whereas I do not.”) Gaynor repeatedly argued that Micley was lying — not mistaken, but lying. Gaynor added that he supports a maximum building height of 4.5 stories.
(Listen to the candidates for yourself: https://youtu.be/3p2IyE2kxZk)
The problem is that Gaynor’s own written statement undercuts his words at the debate. Answering the NAC’s recent survey, Gaynor wrote that he “supports a maximum building height of 5.5 stories with affordability incentives that would require 25% of the units to be affordable rents.” (See the Newtonville Area Council website at https://www.newtonma.gov/government/neighborhood-area-councils/newtonville.)
Beyond that, I would argue that the difference between 5.5 stories (as stated in Gaynor’s survey answer) and 6 stories (in Micley’s mailer) is a quibble; 5.5 is a euphemism for 6, since the so-called “half floor” is full height but set back a small distance from the front and the back of the building. Actually, 5.5 stories are the exact same height as 6 stories, so referring to 5.5 stories as 6 is a better expression of the truth. See page 13 here.
As I see it, the crux of the matter is the discrepancy between Gaynor’s 4.5-story position at the debate and his 5.5-story position in the NAC survey.
Please, candidates, voters deserve a civil discussion and consistent positions.
Susan Reisler
Newtonville
