These images contain the Report’s Appendix which outlines the dissenting opinions presented by three of the 14 task-force members that voted against the Plan’s housing options.
The pages of the Report are provided in their entirety as it was submitted to the city by the Task Force. The yellow annotations present alternative views to the positions and recommendations made by the majority of the commission and represent the position of some members of the Task Force who believed there are other options.
The Task Force was comprised of 14 members.
- 3 of the members were advocates for affordable housing,
- 9 were involved with commercial real estate development in one way or another, and
- 2 were involved in community activities.
The Final Task Force Report on the six main activities (called Initiatives) represent a consensus view; AND, IT WAS NOT UNANIMOUS.
- All of affordable housing advocates were not able to find agreement with the others; and, voted NO on Initiative One dealing with housing.
- As a result, although they voted YES on the other 5 separate Initiatives in the Plan, they had to vote NO on the plan due to its major impact on the North End.
The Appendix of the Task Force Report contains the dissenting views the advocates (David Couchman, Melanie Noble-Couchman and Meghan Shannon-Vlkovic) as to their reasons they could not support the consensus report.
The ALTERNATIVE …. as described in the Appendix:
- Page 47 – Is an alternative proposal for housing that was reviewed in the final Task Force meeting representing the views of three advocates. Presented by David Couchman.
- Page 50 – Is the justification as to why the Task Force official plan failed to address the issues facing the Task Force; it also contains links to sites for further research. Links to the reference sites will need to be accessed separately. Written by Melanie Noble-Couchman.
- Page 53 – Outlines additional concerns, reasons for voting NO, and examples as to how other cities are addressing the issue. Links to the reference sites will need to be accessed separately. Written by Meaghan Shannon-Vlkovic.
A review of the Appendix will give a different perspective as to how the North End can be “revitalized”, “Addition without Subtraction”, without having to do massive displacement of the residents which would cause destabilization of the North End’s workforce, public schools & enrollment, and major changes in the socio-economic profile of the area by reducing the ethnic diversity.
To download a printable version of the pages showing these comments, please click here.