After reading Somerville resident Eric Cochrane’s July 23 guest column about how “supporting new housing is the moral thing to do,” in which he criticizes opposition to a “Hawley Street” development in Northampton, I debated whether to refute the numerous inaccuracies and misassumptions within it. (Full disclosure: I am one of the many opponents, one who lives on Phillips Place, the side street that most of the building would face.)
A friend said not to waste my time. After all, Cochrane might have reasons for speaking in support of planning boards and developers and basing his advocacy more on opinion than fact. But I decided it’s always worth putting forth facts. Here are a few.
He writes that “despite the Planning Board’s approval” of a five-story, 54-unit “market-rate” apartment building, “intense vocal opposition has sprung up.” So question one, is it wrong to oppose government acts, by such means as speaking at public hearings? He notes that our ward councilor, Quaverly Rothenberg, has joined us — is representing one’s constituents not a councilor’s key task? He says opponents are “even threatening to circumvent the democratic process and take legal action to prevent” the project. Last I heard, it was still part of the democratic process to go to court.
He questions why we have “not offered any alternatives” to the project’s design, when in fact we have proposed a number of options, including a building of fewer stories or the townhouses that the developer originally proposed for the site. He asks why we haven’t pushed for a design that matches the style of our 1800s-era houses, when, having done so, we have been offered a slightly modified design that could be “Anywhere, USA.”
He posits that our homes are “possibly beyond their shelf life,” displaying ignorance of the significant maintenance and renovation the properties have undergone over the last 50 years — and surely, before that. Maybe the writer looked us up on Google street view? If he comes to my neighborhood, I’ll be happy to point out the painstaking, thoughtful, loving actions taken to keep the houses functional, comfortable, and sustainable for residents: a wide spectrum of students, retirees, families with young children, Gen X, Y, and Zers …
And that’s just what he got wrong in the first three paragraphs. The implication that opposing an apartment building is immoral — and, so then, are the opponents — is really at the core of what makes this ill-researched, arrogant column so offensive. Our neighborhood has at least as much multifamily housing as single-family, including recent developments just at the start of their shelf life. Those against this project are
for affordable housing. If we question what is truly gained from this project and point out what could be lost — the opportunity to build distinctive housing on a human scale with green space, a structure that doesn’t tower over its neighbors and generate traffic and parking congestion on a small side street — is that immoral?
And what if our questions seem to fall on deaf ears within city government? Cochrane ends his piece by talking about the need to elect progressive public officials. He’s right there,
Northampton desperately needs officials who listen and work with constituents, admit errors, and are fully informed and committed to finding humane solutions to the problems it faces.
Faye Wolfe lives in Northampton.