Dear Editor,
Wednesday evening, May 7th the Eye on Watertown Podcast had the pleasure to have as our guests Josh Rosmarin and Jacky van Leeuwen, Members of the Steering Committee of Housing For All Watertown.
Housing for All Watertown’s mission is to build a broad coalition of residents to advance local policies and projects in order to expand housing options. My understanding is their focus is on finding solutions to current housing challenges for both current and future community members.
Advance in the mission statement for Housing for All Watertown is used in the context of pushing forward policies and projects that expand housing options.
The group has also been involved in efforts to combat ethnic – and income-based discrimination in Watertown’s housing market.
We found that Expanding Affordable Housing has been in the forefront of their efforts and has pushed for more affordable housing units as part of the MBTA Communities Act Plan which aims to increase housing near transit hubs.
The Housing for All Watertown’s group and its approach has been deemed by many as one of the most ambitious housing advocates in the state.
Our first question to our guests related to the MBTA Act and Watertown’s proactive actions toward meeting the state’s overall housing needs and the 4,000 plus units discussed.
We did not discuss Governor Maura Healey’s administration statement that there is a need for increased housing production and has set a goal of 222,000 new housing units by 2035 to help lower costs statewide.
We asked our guests about the number of Multi-Unit dwellings in Watertown and their percent of occupancy. It was explained that Watertown’s occupancy rate is consistently high.
Their studies have found that vacancies are 1% or lower. Housing is tight in Watertown. However, the primary concern that Chris Chapron and I expressed was how much density and the height they are pushing for. It is also apparent they are influencing policy decisions in the City; fore Developers are being allowed significant heights over former restrictions.
My personal belief is the incentive to allow additional heights for affordable units is non-existent and is creating Pent House Units for those willing to pay more. It would be interesting to see what they are seeking in rents or condo listings for these units’ vis a vis the top floor. In addition, do we have the capability or capacity of monitoring the Developers activities. That is, what follow-up are we doing?
Furthermore, economically speaking about development in the Square and how it is going to assist existing businesses in the Square; we never hear anything about how the people are going to get to the Square. Is it by bus or automobile and if by automobile where are they going to park?
New food and beverage and retail businesses are going to be of first interest over existing, established businesses in the Square.
I don’t think our Contractual Planners has set down and given any solid numbers as to what percent they can expect in comp sales over the previous year. So economically, the positive influence on local is unknown and should not have as much weight as given.
Chris and I both said that growth is important; however, our concern centered on the type and height of the buildings especially looking at the elevator tower for 104-106 Main Street. We know that without growth or development a community dies.
All of the new development in the city has not led to lower housing costs or any moderation in cost. In Business and Real Estate, it is location, location, Location. And Watertown is in a perfect location.
When I first came to Boston, fellow workers in the clinic told me to live either North or West of Boston because the commute was horrible from the South on the Southeast Expressway. I don’t know how I got in touch with Dick McBride but he stewarded me to Watertown.
Four thousand new units in Watertown would comprise about 1.8% of Massachusetts’ goal of 222,000 new units by 2035. Watertown has been cited alongside Boston and Cambridge as a leader in multifamily housing approvals, contributing significantly to regional housing supply.
However, if the 222,000 new housing units were evenly distributed across 177 cities and towns subject to the MBTA Communities Law Zoning, each town or city would need to add about 1,254 housing units to collectively meet the state’s goal.
Chris and I believe Watertown should be recognized for its proactive development and given flexibility infuture obligations, rather than continuously carrying more than its share of new units. Arguably one can say Watertown may have already fulfilled or exceeded its obligations under this law, given its prior development efforts.
We asked what the group is doing regarding regional cooperation. Regional coordinationor poolingwould allow municipalities to coordinate housing efforts, ensuring growth is more evenly distributed rather than concentrated in a few areas.
Chris and I feel that since Watertown has already developed substantial multi-unit housing, the City should receive credit toward future obligations, while towns with restrictive zoning should be expected to accommodate more housing.
Clyde Younger
Co-Host, Eye on Watertown
View the Eye on Watertown Podcast episode with Housing for All Watertown by clicking here.