Mixed-Use Washington @ Walnut | Newtonville

gyro

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
From today's globe:
RenderingWashingtonWalnut.jpg

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/west/2016/02/12/newton-block-targeted-for-renewal/qwU3ZsCjk7EWE0XIan4MbJ/story.html
 
Good development in a good location. It's a shame this is replacing a handsome, pre-war building. I hope the Austin Street development comes through, as that is replacing a parking lot.
 
Good development in a good location. It's a shame this is replacing a handsome, pre-war building. I hope the Austin Street development comes through, as that is replacing a parking lot.

Agreed. Only a portion of it replaces a handsome old façade (the portion on the corner). That portion farther down Washington replaces something with a bunch of crappy aluminum siding that might be hiding a handsome façade. Or might not.

This is one place where the 101 Arch Street approach of preserving a façade while going taller with a stepped back new core, might be aesthetically pleasing. I don't always like that approach, it is badly bungled at times. But I'd be open to it here, at least as a possibility, since the old building on the corner is a good piece of old fabric. And if the other part has lost its old façade, that could be part of the compromise: save this, go ahead and raze that.

Otherwise, though, I want Newton to be doing lots more of this (speaking as a Newton voter), especially in Newton Centre. If the whole building needs to be replaced, I will live with the loss of that nice old part.

Newton's Board of Aldermen approved Austin Street on December 8, one of their last big acts before renaming themselves City Council. It ain't built yet but it's approved.
 
Agreed. Only a portion of it replaces a handsome old façade (the portion on the corner). That portion farther down Washington replaces something with a bunch of crappy aluminum siding that might be hiding a handsome façade. Or might not.

This is one place where the 101 Arch Street approach of preserving a façade while going taller with a stepped back new core, might be aesthetically pleasing. I don't always like that approach, it is badly bungled at times. But I'd be open to it here, at least as a possibility, since the old building on the corner is a good piece of old fabric. And if the other part has lost its old façade, that could be part of the compromise: save this, go ahead and raze that.

Otherwise, though, I want Newton to be doing lots more of this (speaking as a Newton voter), especially in Newton Centre. If the whole building needs to be replaced, I will live with the loss of that nice old part.

Newton's Board of Aldermen approved Austin Street on December 8, one of their last big acts before renaming themselves City Council. It ain't built yet but it's approved.

I'm not terribly concerned about the architecture, but I'm a little concerned about a lot of locally-owned businesses getting kicked out in favor of (doubtless) bank branches, Xfinity customer service centers, and the like. Ugly buildings have cheaper space. It seems like this guy's heart is in the right place, and I'm all for the density, but this is a lot of disruption and folks may just close up shop.

I'm also not loving the focus on Newtonville as opposed to (as you noted) Newton Center. I can roll my eyes at the NIMBYs complaining about parking, but honestly, they kind of have a point in Newtonville. Inside-128 Commuter Rail is not transit. Building apartments next to it is TOD only in the sense that people could theoretically commute to Back Bay and South Station by train, but that's not most people and it's very inflexible. The Pike trench also screws Newtonville out of any sense of a "village center," no matter how pretty and pedestrian-friendly the buildings are.

Now, if the City would start turning the screws on Shaw's to rebuild the Star Market into a mixed-use development on its parking lot, which would wall off the trench and remove an eyesore (and a terribly laid-out supermarket to boot), then we might be getting somewhere.
 
Newtonville Camera would be a real loss.
 
Otherwise, though, I want Newton to be doing lots more of this (speaking as a Newton voter), especially in Newton Centre.

+1. Especially the Newton Centre parking lot.
 
This would be a good place for the city council to get creative on mitigation asks. Instead of the endless squabbling over some tiny percentage on unit count, go for some swap of tax breaks in return for ten year lease to (for example) Newtonville Camera a their current lease rate plus a modest inflation escalator.

This turnover of small business is a sad feature of this sort of development. I don't know if it can ever be stopped or even fully mitigated against, but I'd rather see the city fight over that than over parking or density.

The business rental rates are much of what prevents these kinds of proposals in Newton Centre. As much as everyone (me included) hates the over-proliferation of bank outlets in Newton Centre, they pay good rent, which generates the sort of values that, along with the onerous approvals process, makes developers leery. And so they go to Newtonville, where there are more marginal businesses generating lower rents, because of that crappy turnpike in front of them.
 
This would be a good place for the city council to get creative on mitigation asks. Instead of the endless squabbling over some tiny percentage on unit count, go for some swap of tax breaks in return for ten year lease to (for example) Newtonville Camera a their current lease rate plus a modest inflation escalator.

I like the idea of being creative for mitigation. Designate a retail space that is reserved solely for retail companies whose headquarters are in Newton, or something like that. Or instead of subsidizing housing to be sold below market rate, they could (help) pay for Newtonville Station to be rebuilt to ADA-compliance: something that has to be done and will benefit their residents and the neighborhood immensely.
 
I like the idea of being creative for mitigation. Designate a retail space that is reserved solely for retail companies whose headquarters are in Newton, or something like that. Or instead of subsidizing housing to be sold below market rate, they could (help) pay for Newtonville Station to be rebuilt to ADA-compliance: something that has to be done and will benefit their residents and the neighborhood immensely.

Bigeman -- anytime that kind of mitigation is proposed it ends up costing more and failing in the end to deliver the desired outcome

Let's say that you hypothetically make a city ordinance the majority owner has to live in Newton

So Jose opens a Taqueria and shares the ownership with his Brother-in-Law from San Juan and so Jose lives in Newton for 5 years with his 51% -- everything looks grand

Jose get's two offers to sell his interest 1) to his daughter and son-in-law who live in Needham and 2) to a Global Taco Chain with a local franchisee who lives in Newton

Or say Jose starts spending his summers on the Cape with his wife and after a couple of years of having two houses sells his half+ to his chief cook who lives in JP and Jose retires to the Cape

Which of these then complies with the letter and the spirit of the ordinance?

No -- these market distortions are not worth the pain and suffering
 
Article in the Newton Tab:

http://newton.wickedlocal.com/news/...posal-to-redevelop-newtonville-block/?Start=1

Not a lot new. Bu one useful tidbit I didn't see in the Globe articla: the developer tossed out the idea of improvements to the Walnut Street bridge over the Pike, along with T station upgrades, as possible gives to the City in return for greater density. He downplayed the idea of a greenway deck over the Pike, as that would clearly be vastly beyond the financial scope of this development to carry. I'd prefer a station upgrade if the T is actually ready to make use of it effectively (not sure about that), even though I'm over on the Green Line side of town.

One hysterical bit: someone in the crowd shouted out "gentrification" in response to the possibility of existing businesses not being able to afford to come back at the newer, almost certainly higher retail rents. I'm sympathetic to that issue; I wouldn't mind seeing one of the mitigation bargaining chips being relocation assistance to the businesses being displaced, and there's still a decent amount of underutilized retail space along Washington in Newton for them to go to if they had help. But, having noted that sympathy: gentrification complaints from Newtonites? This town has been undergoing relentless gentrification for decades. You can still find a handful of elderly folks who remember when this was a mill town. When they finally sell their (usually quite modest) homes, there often ensues a tear-down, with the replacement home being double or triple the square footage. The income delta between buyer and seller is often probably ten or more orders of magnitude.

If the person complying of gentrification at the meeting was one of the elderly retired mill workers from over in Nonantum (seems like the main last bastion, I think), OK, fair complaint coming from them. But .... that battle was lost a long long time ago. If the cry of gentrification came from anyone who has bought a house here within the last twenty - thirty years ... I'd suggest that person go look in the mirror. And then stop embarrassing the rest of us who live here.
 
You can still find a handful of elderly folks who remember when this was a mill town. When they finally sell their (usually quite modest) homes, there often ensues a tear-down, with the replacement home being double or triple the square footage. The income delta between buyer and seller is often probably ten or more orders of magnitude.

Sadly, in Newton and everywhere else, perfectly fine mid-century ranches and split-levels (that's right, ranches and split levels, some of the most rational, common sense, reasonably sized houses ever built in America) are being bulldozed for vulgar, bloated "status" McMansions because apparently whoever has the most square footage wins.
 
Article in the Newton Tab:

http://newton.wickedlocal.com/news/...posal-to-redevelop-newtonville-block/?Start=1

Not a lot new. Bu one useful tidbit I didn't see in the Globe articla: the developer tossed out the idea of improvements to the Walnut Street bridge over the Pike, along with T station upgrades, as possible gives to the City in return for greater density. He downplayed the idea of a greenway deck over the Pike, as that would clearly be vastly beyond the financial scope of this development to carry. I'd prefer a station upgrade if the T is actually ready to make use of it effectively (not sure about that), even though I'm over on the Green Line side of town.

One hysterical bit: someone in the crowd shouted out "gentrification" in response to the possibility of existing businesses not being able to afford to come back at the newer, almost certainly higher retail rents. I'm sympathetic to that issue; I wouldn't mind seeing one of the mitigation bargaining chips being relocation assistance to the businesses being displaced, and there's still a decent amount of underutilized retail space along Washington in Newton for them to go to if they had help. But, having noted that sympathy: gentrification complaints from Newtonites? This town has been undergoing relentless gentrification for decades. You can still find a handful of elderly folks who remember when this was a mill town. When they finally sell their (usually quite modest) homes, there often ensues a tear-down, with the replacement home being double or triple the square footage. The income delta between buyer and seller is often probably ten or more orders of magnitude.

If the person complying of gentrification at the meeting was one of the elderly retired mill workers from over in Nonantum (seems like the main last bastion, I think), OK, fair complaint coming from them. But .... that battle was lost a long long time ago. If the cry of gentrification came from anyone who has bought a house here within the last twenty - thirty years ... I'd suggest that person go look in the mirror. And then stop embarrassing the rest of us who live here.

West -- just picking a minor nit -- not even Berni believes that there is
income delta between buyer and seller is often probably ten or more orders of magnitude

Let's just assume the seller is an elderly lady with just social security income of $1000 per month -- call it an even $10,000 per year [$1x10^4] -- the income gap you specify would say the buyer -- would have an income of 10,000,000,000 X 10,000 == 1X10^10 X 1x10^4 == $1x10^14 -- the GDP is about $20T or 2x10^13

I think that you meant a factor of 10
 
This seems like a really nice development along with the proposal across the Mass Pike. We used to live just a few blocks from here on Norwood Avenue. I really do miss the area, but we are guilty of taking advantage of the real estate boom in Newtonville. We sold our condo in 2006 for over double what we paid in 1996. It was a very good investment that allowed us to move to the South Shore. Newtonville is a great little village with a lot going on, but the transit connection on the commuter rail isn't that convenient or pleasant. If this development helps improve the T-Stop, that would be a big win for the area. For the 10 years we lived here, I was almost always on the South side of Newtonville village from the Mass Pike. Washington Street wasn't that pleasant to walk and not much there. This could really connect the Walnut Street Corridor on the south side of the Mass Pike over to the Washington Street Corridor on the north side.
 

Compare the above with the current proposal, which is now more honesty portrayed in daylight instead of night (always beware nocturnal renders) and Lois like your run of the mill cheap shit... Which of it were the usual stretch of Washington-on-the-pike would be fine, except this development is demolishing some of the few decent old buildings on Washington... Look at the globe article or the streetview for the northwest corner of Washington... This is NOT an improvement. I'm with the NIMBYs on this one.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/r...ville-block/2lIZHzuBOadjVcQXDT3hPO/story.html
 
Agree. The buildings they want to demo are great, urban old buildings.

The replacement looks like the sort of crap they put up in the pumpkin-patches-turned-insta-TODs in the Philly exurbs. You can imagine an unkempt CVS on the ground floor. Cheap as hell.
 
BTW, the developer, Robert Korff - to assuage the town - has gone and made the proposal much crappier than before. Thanks for nothing, Korff.

newtonville.png


Developer modifies plans for Newtonville block

Local developer Robert Korff has modified his plans to raze the block of buildings at the corner of Washington and Walnuts streets in Newtonville to build a 151-unit apartment and retail complex after hearing from neighbors at a community meeting last month.

Korff met with Newtonville residents again recently, and outlined changes that include his purchase of the Sunoco gas station on Washington Street and four multifamily homes on Washington Terrace, just behind the Sunoco station.

In addition, he has reduced the proposed height of the building from six stories at its highest to five stories.

[...]

Other changes to Korff’s original proposal include widening the outside plaza from 25 to 40 feet, adding significant landscaping, creating approximately 2,000 square feet of indoor community space, and separating the fronts of the Washington Street and Walnut Street buildings into two separate buildings.

karoun%20(1)-1929.jpg


http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/re...ville-block/2lIZHzuBOadjVcQXDT3hPO/story.html
 
Yup. Except for the welcome added density, that's a massive downgrade.
 

Back
Top