Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2021 The Somerville Times. All rights reserved.
The housing activist group YIMBY (Yes In My Back Yard) believes there are strategies available to effectively increase housing in the city, even as densely populated as it already is. — Photo by Bobbie Toner
By Ian Erlichman
Criterion Development Partners are constructing a new residential building in Somerville. According to the city’s SomerVison plan, this project is just one of 871 units under construction in Somerville since 2017.
As Senior Landscape Designer Luisa Oliver, admitted in the SomerVision reveal, “Somerville is a very small city and it’s densely populated.” So why would we attempt to squeeze more housing into a city that is the 16th most densely populated city in the nation? Jeff Byrnes, founder of a housing activist group called “YIMBY” (Yes In My Back Yard), doesn’t believe that Somerville’s dense population is a problem.
“Look at a city like London or Paris,” Byrnes urges. Paris is roughly three times as dense as Somerville, and equally as dense as New York City, yet it spares itself “towering buildings and high-rises,” he pointed out. According to Byrnes, the secret to Paris’s residential system lies in their efficient use of space and emphasis on walkability: a strategy he believes Somerville could and should emulate in the coming years.
Somerville’s burgeoning “YIMBY” movement calls for increased housing development in the hopes that it lowers housing prices, promotes racial integration, and increases walkability without losing the city’s hallmark neighborhood aesthetic. “We want to expand housing opportunities for any and everyone who still lives here, wants to stay here, and wants to come here,” said Byrnes.
To make room for incoming and current residents, Byrnes suggests we go up and in. “Over 80% of Somerville is residential buildings … one, two, three unit houses with very few apartment buildings,” said Byrnes. Despite its apparent density, Somerville “does not make efficient use of its size. We could fit more people and still retain what makes Somerville great.”
One way to fit more people is to go up, by constructing “five, six, even seven story buildings” in places like Davis Square, Byrnes said. While building more residences increases the concrete, it also cultivates a diverse set of people and cultures. “You don’t disrupt the feeling of those places, those vibrant areas,” Byrnes stated.
Although YIMBYs are all for affordable housing, and the inclusionary zoning that facilitates it, Byrnes emphasized the need for housing across all income groups. “Affordable housing is an immediate answer for those who have the least means, but it doesn’t address those of some means.”
Because Inclusionary Zoning in Somerville requires all new housing developments to allocate 20 percent of its residences to low-income renters, landlords must raise the price of the remaining 80 percent of residences to account for the lost revenue. That is, if there isn’t an alternative source of revenue. One solution to this problem fits snugly into the YIMBYs mental image of Somerville’s future: building in.
According to a study by the Furman Center, an effective boot to stamp down inflated housing prices are density requirement exceptions. The study concluded, “IZ policies that provide density bonuses and exempt small housing units produce more affordable housing.”
In order for landlords to keep prices at market value for those renters “of some means,” they must be compensated for the losses they inherit from their low-income renters.
The YIMBY vison of America’s future cities involve dense, homey residence buildings that connect to large open side-walks and bike friendly streets. It’s a dream that implores us to bring the close warmth of Paris streets to the bulging cities of America. The question is: are the people that own residences in Somerville now willing to change?
If you found this article of interest, please consider sharing it.
Allowing the building of larger buildings sounds like a zoning change, which could be reasonable. My only ask is that we have a plan in place where the changes are introduced gradually. Have the growth targeted at current commercial centers and have it radiate out
People seem to overlook the fact that squeezing more people into an already crowded city can increase tensions between people. Imagine a cage where you have a dog or two, and then start putting more and more of them in the same cage. Before long, they start to turn on one another.
We don’t need more people. What we DO need is better areas in which to live, more open green spaces where people can walk and enjoy the city.
The “American Dream” was never to live in an apartment, but to own one’s own home and raise a family. Why do we need to be a carboy copy of cities like Paris or London? Why can’t Somerville simply be a good city for families to live in like it used to be?
These cities mentioned have also been the target of terrorist attacks. Do we really want to be this kind of a city? The more people in a given area, the harder it is to protect them all. You can only look after so many people at a time. I don’t care how well-staffed or ready our police or fire departments may be. They’re only human. They can’t take care of everybody.
It’s ironic that the movement is called “Yes, In My Back Yard.” If they have it their way, there won’t BE any back yards, only high-rise apartments that block out the sun. That’s not what a city should be about.
Maybe the next big thing will be moving underground. Plenty of space there. Just dig beneath the sewer system and keep going. We’ll even get a built-in garage, and nobody will mind because we won’t be able to see any of it.
Far as I’m concerned, we can’t YIMBY fast enough.
Yeah? Name city in America where this worked and didn’t gentrify the surrounding area. Name one place where the community members who had been there long enough to recognize the before/after difference declared that their neighborhood was more affordable, more racially diverse, and more ‘homey’ after all of this YIMBY development had been crammed into every nook and cranny possible.
And using London or Paris, both of which have slowly grown up over 500+ years and are in countries with generous public benefit schemes, as a comparison or model is ridiculous. Instead compare this any community in the US that has already been gutted by this hyper-development, free market gentrification mentality.
YIMBY’s are for no restrictions. Not a nice “vision”. We will be packed like sardines, while nearby towns protect their green space. YIMBY articles state that folks think they are in with the developers. Dangle a few low-income apartments …please don’t fall for this.
Well, Matt, we would mostly have that if the Aldermen would vote for the new Zoning that has been in front of them for a couple years now.
But apparently they are incapable of actually doing anything, they just want to talk and debate and collect a check for not making a decision.
I am from London. Paris and London both have superb public transport – subway and buses. You definitely can live there without ever needing a car. In London most of the central metro area has at least 2 to 3 subway stops within a 1/4 mile. Heck, London has built quite a few new subway lines and light rails in the past 25 years. They are even building a brand new cross rail link which connects east and west London (opens in December 2018). The same cannot be said for many parts of Somerville, especially East Somerville, and Winter Hilll area. So to compare Somerville to Paris or London is insane. Somerville is a small segment of the Boston metro area (Yes, I know it’s technically not in Boston). Where are all the new cars that come in going to be parked? It seems like progressives just assume that none of these new people are going to have cars. That’s a pretty big assumption.
I live near a building going up in west Somerville on the N. Cambridge line. This new construction is being built on a street with NO curbs, NO sidewalks, and the building is constructed right to the street! How is this smart city planning? Does Somerville even have city planners? But, hey, who cares when that dumpy tripledecker that my landlord bought in the 80s for only 200k is now work 1.7million! Those of you paying $1m for a condo here, good luck. I’m moving to Dorchester.
I have to second the sentiments that call out the comparison to London and Paris as ludicrous. These are major cities built over a millennia that have impeccable infrastructures. Somerville is in no way comparable and would choke on a further population increase. However, even beyond that it doesn’t get at the underlying issue: the Boston metro area housing market is out of control. Just like the Bay Area and Seattle and San Diego. If the population were holding steady, adding more housing might help, but its not. Every year more companies open up offices in the area (pharma in Cambridge, Amazon in the seaport) driving prices higher and higher. Tearing down the century-old Victorian houses that give this city its history and character will only serve to smoosh more overpriced condos into the market. Fat cat real estate developers will get a little richer while diversity and affordability continue to shrivel. It is a joke to pretend otherwise. Leave my backyard alone. It is tiny, but I love it.
This is astroturf. Somerville residents who don’t stand to profit from new construction do not want the intense development that seems inevitably slated to come. In Union Square, grotesque, abominable and shoddy buildings are being thrown up as fast as developers can ram them though. The end result will be the transformation of Union Square, a vibrant and diverse neighborhood, into a soulless assemblage of cheap and nasty dormitory buildings. A few developers will enrich themselves at the expense of the community. Disgusting.
Assembly Square is a great example of why YIMBY, as it seems to be currently conceived, is a disaster for livability.
Cities throughout Europe, including Paris and London, do have higher density than Somerville. Those city’s have no “secret”. Most importanly, they have convenient, affordable, and reliable public transportation. They have wide pedestrian-friendly sidewalks. They have bike lanes on the sidewalk side of parked cars. They have cafes on the sidewalk where patrons can nurse a coffee or libation for hours. They have trees.
Building taller, more dense residences in Davis Square is a prescription for destruction. Davis Square is already choked with automobiles. Bicycle riders risk life and limb to traverse it, or even to store their bikes while using the T. Pedestrians already fight against traffic. With all due respect to BFresh, how will the residents of some new high-rise obtain their groceries without using a car?
There is nothing “progressive” about building high-density residences and ignoring the centuries of human experience about how to make a city livable — starting with Paris, London, Vienna, Berlin, Munich, Prague, etc. etc. etc.
BMac, 100% right about the Aldermen sitting on their hands on zoning. I’ve been through the nightmare of trying to fix up my home in this city. I only managed to get through the process because I’m crazy stubborn. We have zoning that makes trying to get anything done in this city an expensive nightmare. That’s a major factor in the cost of new housing.
The objections I am hearing in these comments are:
1) Somerville doesn’t have enough transit to support more people (except for the Red Line and the Green Line). Nobody is investing in new transit capacity.
2) Apartments are bad because Real Americans love owning houses with lawns.
3) Becoming a major cultural and urban center just invites terrorism, so Somerville should avoid becoming important.
4) We should learn from European cities instead of doing what the YIMBYs say and learn from European cities.
5) There are too many cars in Davis Square, so we shouldn’t make it easier to get around without a car.
Aaron, I appreciate your concise summary. Smart, transit oriented growth should not be that hard to enable and encourage. One of the things I have concern with I’d not just displacement of people, but also of small, non – large national chain business. Assembly may be a draw because of the outlet style shops, but they don’t create the dynamic environment that we all love about Somerville.
All in YIMBY here. I moved from tiny Town USA to Boston because of the public transit and the ability to bike everywhere. Somerville has plenty of space up there in the sky. The transportation problems are solvable (self driving paratransit is coming probably within single digits years, well before we could get many of these buildings constructed).
You can tear down my house and build a 10 story in it’s place as long as I get a unit or two equivalent square footage. Happy to share the land with some new co-owners.
YIMBY is no more helpful that NIMBY as a way to think about development – the reality is far more nuanced. Buildings are not just statistics and are more than the ideas used to justify them – they are real physical places that shape the lives of those around them.
There is, of course, another option – advocating for carefully considered, creative, sensitive new development which enhances what is already great about our vibrant, diverse neighborhoods and squares, and brings changes which will make them even better places in the future.
This means balancing preservation with growth, balancing new building with the creation of new open space, and promoting good design instead of evaluating projects based solely on how much tax revenue they generate or how much in “community benefits” can be extracted. This means promoting good design and regulating bad design. Design is a creative process, and it is surprising how little understanding of this process there is in Somerville, which promotes itself a home for creative people and innovative thinking.
I think most residents want to see good development, and will continue to challenge poorly considered, arrogant proposals which fall short of the vision the community has set for its own future over many years through Somervision and other planning processes. They will also continue to be frustrated by how little progress has been made towards the creation of new open space, which is our city government’s responsibility and which is absolutely critical to making dense places healthy and comfortable to live in.
Just to clarify, the actual title of the group should be YIYBY, (yes in your back yard), as it’s other people’s neighborhoods that get crapped up, not those of the members of this group. “YIMBY” erroneously implies some sort of sacrifice / generosity on the part of its proponents.