Mixed-Use Washington @ Walnut | Newtonville

[Equilibria]

Classic intolerant elitist hypocrisy: diversity for thee, homogeneity (none of those people) for me. So Newton.

I don't think it's any more "Newton" than it is "Wellesley," "Needham", "Weston", "Lexington," etc. The difference is that those towns aren't being asked to build significant housing projects what seems like "all the time". Right now, the City is discussing this project and another in Auburndale, has approved and is waiting for Austin St. and Riverside to begin construction, and just had the first informational meeting about a huge mixed-use development on Needham St. That seems like a lot to people, and a lot more than any of the towns I listed above are even considering.

I can see where a resident of Newton would look at their peer communities under the 40B threshold and wonder how they can be lumped in with Dover and Lincoln. A significant part of the northern half of the city is worker housing that resembles Waltham and Watertown more than Waban.

I'm a big supporter of increasing Newton's density, but many people don't see themselves as a peer of Somerville and Cambridge, and resent that others do just because they have a Commuter Rail line.

P.S. I also think it's important to differentiate NIMBYism from elitism (or racism). I wouldn't be surprised if many of these neighborhood activists would welcome a low-income housing development if it consisted of single-family homes.

 

[JeffDowntown]

I'm a big supporter of increasing Newton's density, but many people don't see themselves as a peer of Somerville and Cambridge, and resent that others do just because they have a Commuter Rail line.

COUGH! COUGH! -- I believe they also have a couple branches of the Green Line (unlike Somerville). (Although obviously not directly in Newtonville, but within Newton.)

 

[Equilibria]

COUGH! COUGH! -- I believe they also have a couple branches of the Green Line (unlike Somerville). (Although obviously not directly in Newtonville, but within Newton.)

Quite true. I was referring only to Newtonville.

 

[HalcyonEra]

I don't think it's any more "Newton" than it is "Wellesley," "Needham", "Weston", "Lexington," etc. The difference is that those towns aren't being asked to build significant housing projects what seems like "all the time". Right now, the City is discussing this project and another in Auburndale, has approved and is waiting for Austin St. and Riverside to begin construction, and just had the first informational meeting about a huge mixed-use development on Needham St. That seems like a lot to people, and a lot more than any of the towns I listed above are even considering.

I can see where a resident of Newton would look at their peer communities under the 40B threshold and wonder how they can be lumped in with Dover and Lincoln. A significant part of the northern half of the city is worker housing that resembles Waltham and Watertown more than Waban.

I'm a big supporter of increasing Newton's density, but many people don't see themselves as a peer of Somerville and Cambridge, and resent that others do just because they have a Commuter Rail line.

P.S. I also think it's important to differentiate NIMBYism from elitism (or racism). I wouldn't be surprised if many of these neighborhood activists would welcome a low-income housing development if it consisted of single-family homes.

While Newtonites may want to view themselves as a peer comparable to the towns you mention, that is simply due to their relative average incomes combined with their "villages" mindset.

The fact is that it is a city of 85K compared to Lexington at 31K, Needham 28K, Wellesley 27K & Weston 11K. And it is dense only in so far as there is virtually no undeveloped land aside from protected areas. What it is, given its closer proximity to Boston, is incredibly under-built, since it also has the green line to go along with the commuter rail.

I don't necessarily view this nimbyism as racism, but it sure wreaks of elitism. This site faces the Pike and I'd hardly call Washington St in this stretch as congested. 40B frightens the old guard every time it is used as it conjures up images of 60's and 70's era " projects" but I really have yet to see a concrete example of where it was used and destroyed the fabric of a community as so many think it will.

 

[Equilibria]

While Newtonites may want to view themselves as a peer comparable to the towns you mention, that is simply due to their relative average incomes combined with their "villages" mindset.

Not to derail things completely, but that's a little condescending. Newtonites have right to view themselves and their community however they want. As much as I (a native but not a current resident) might want to see the City playing its proper part in increasing the housing stock and making the most of its transit lines, it's not like the Green Line was put in to be a catalyst for new urbanist transit-oriented development. It dates from the 19th Century, and was built to provide large suburban estates with a train route to Boston. That holds a little less for the Commuter Rail (which was built for speculative village construction) but I think it distinguishes Newton from, say, Somerville. If Somerville wants GLX then it should be prepared to support the development we now expect around stations - and it has. Enthusiastically.

The fact is that it is a city of 85K compared to Lexington at 31K, Needham 28K, Wellesley 27K & Weston 11K. And it is dense only in so far as there is virtually no undeveloped land aside from protected areas. What it is, given its closer proximity to Boston, is incredibly under-built, since it also has the green line to go along with the commuter rail.

Who makes the rules about "how built" a community should be (zoning codes, but I'm asking rhetorically)? NIMBYism is irritating because it's hypocrisy - I want this stuff, but not near me. I don't feel like trying to protect the small-town feel of a village one's lived in for decades is morally wrong. I disagree with it - development in Newtonville presents an opportunity to heal the scar of the Turnpike, reunite the neighborhood, and improve walkability to amenities - but I recognize the value of going back to my own village and finding it familiar. You spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to move to a place for a reason, after all.

I don't necessarily view this nimbyism as racism, but it sure wreaks of elitism. This site faces the Pike and I'd hardly call Washington St in this stretch as congested. 40B frightens the old guard every time it is used as it conjures up images of 60's and 70's era " projects" but I really have yet to see a concrete example of where it was used and destroyed the fabric of a community as so many think it will.

I'm honestly not sure I can come up with an example of 40B at all. Developers keep threatening it, then backing off when the City backs down. I don't think that that invalidates my point, though. Removing a major development from all local review and control is a dangerous prospect even in an obstructionist environment.

 

[HalcyonEra]

Not to derail things completely, but that's a little condescending. Newtonites have right to view themselves and their community however they want. As much as I (a native but not a current resident) might want to see the City playing its proper part in increasing the housing stock and making the most of its transit lines, it's not like the Green Line was put in to be a catalyst for new urbanist transit-oriented development. It dates from the 19th Century, and was built to provide large suburban estates with a train route to Boston. That holds a little less for the Commuter Rail (which was built for speculative village construction) but I think it distinguishes Newton from, say, Somerville. If Somerville wants GLX then it should be prepared to support the development we now expect around stations - and it has. Enthusiastically.

I didn't mean to be condescending but rather making a point that it is a very expensive city with a small town mentality as the citizens do identify with their villages. That said, lots of towns have changed dramatically since the 1800's but the nimby mindset of protecting their area at all costs has resulted in a market with extreme housing costs.

Who makes the rules about "how built" a community should be (zoning codes, but I'm asking rhetorically)? NIMBYism is irritating because it's hypocrisy - I want this stuff, but not near me. I don't feel like trying to protect the small-town feel of a village one's lived in for decades is morally wrong. I disagree with it - development in Newtonville presents an opportunity to heal the scar of the Turnpike, reunite the neighborhood, and improve walkability to amenities - but I recognize the value of going back to my own village and finding it familiar. You spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to move to a place for a reason, after all.

I don't like the the law either per se as it really does punish the community by letting a developer do what they want, within reason. It is well intended to avoid the working class being forced to live far away from their jobs or crammed into "affordable" places. State policy through 40B desires housing stock to be 10% affordable or else 40B can be used to circumvent local zoning. It's very hard for an expensive community in greater Boston to adequately maintain that threshold but there are many exceptions and slowing down of the process if they are making efforts to hit the %.

I'm honestly not sure I can come up with an example of 40B at all. Developers keep threatening it, then backing off when the City backs down. I don't think that that invalidates my point, though. Removing a major development from all local review and control is a dangerous prospect even in an obstructionist environment.

I'm not sure if you are referring to Newton specifically, but there have been many 40B projects throughout metrowest in the past 10-15 years. The problem is, that for whatever reason, when a community gets targeted the proposals come in droves. Natick faced this when the first tower across the mall was proposed. They fought it through the courts to the bitter end, costing a ton of money, and of course, lost, and multiple times at that. In the meantime a slew of other 40Bs in more desirable areas of town came in got built much to the chagrin of the locals. They got very lucky when the 2nd and 3rd towers by the mall came along and the town smartly worked with the developer to get them above the threshold and it all stopped. Alternatively, Southborough has had a few rammed through around the 495/9 interchange with the latest proposal resulting in a couple of different lawsuits, petitions for a selectman recall & ZBA member removal, along with allegations of impropriety. Bottom line is that it's a total cluster out there, led by people protecting their property but once these things get built there is usually no issues with the developments themselves.

If Newton hasn't faced much of this and they are significantly below the threshold (keeping in mind the affordability rate is based on the town's median household income not a state #), you can be sure that other developers are closely watching and don't be surprised to see many more proposals. The issue with Newton as opposed to some of the outlying areas is the acquisition cost and the number of units required to hit the margin. 40B development in Newton has to be big or it's not going to work financially. And here, the developer absolutely needs that density to make the project work.

 

[dwash59]

I'm honestly not sure I can come up with an example of 40B at all. Developers keep threatening it, then backing off when the City backs down. I don't think that that invalidates my point, though. Removing a major development from all local review and control is a dangerous prospect even in an obstructionist environment.

Avalon at Newton Highlands? 47 Goddard? 54 Taft?

The fact is that it is a city of 85K compared to Lexington at 31K, Needham 28K, Wellesley 27K & Weston 11K.

I think it is worth pointing out that Lexington currently meets the affordability criteria under 40B and has a housing production plan in place to continue meeting the criteria.

On the other hand, Newton pays lip service to affordable housing, but cannot even put together a housing production plan that would allow them to get a temporary exemption by producing some affordable housing.

 

[West]

Mostly outstanding editorial by Jake Auchincloss, a member of Newton's City Council who has been quite solidly supportive of this proposal:

http://commonwealthmagazine.org/economy/the-dissonance-of-zoning-and-immigration/

That bit at the end about automated cars? I'd have replaced that with a bit about boosting T quality of service and thereafter ridership, and reducing the need for parking tat way. I found his projection about automated cars unconvincing, and that's where the "mostly" comes from in my first sentence. But it's his column. The rest of it was very much on target.

I put this at this Newtonville development site, because he was very much tying his argument to that, but maybe it would be suited for some other threads: it's pertinent to way more tan Newtonville, or even just Massachusetts.

 

[West]

Possible good news, the city council is at least still talking and may actually be open to negotiation:

http://newton.wickedlocal.com/news/20170309/orr-block-redevelopment-compromise-on-horizon

One possible angle is that perhaps the City could just rezone the front portion along Washington Street but not the back portion, and thereby avoid the need for a 75% vote in council for the rezoning. It has looked like they are a vote or perhaps two short of reaching that 75% but could have enough votes at the 66% level to rezone. It is not clear yet whether that shift of approach in fact works on the legal front (shifting vote threshold), it's also not clear what sort of development trade-offs that would require from Korff (maybe back up to six floors up front but less in the back?), and then once he and the City figure that out, it's not clear if it works in his pro forma (I doubt his team has had the chance to even run numbers). That's a lot of ifs.

Also in the Tab, a pretty good looking editorial very much on the same tangent, taking the City to task on 40B-related topics:

http://newton.wickedlocal.com/news/20170315/my-view-40b-or-not-40b

I have heard a lot of support around town for this proposal, and I've heard that the Council members are hearing it: the NIMBYs are not drowning it out.

 

[Equilibria]

APPROVED

http://village14.com/2017/06/19/newton-city-council-approves-washington-place-project/#axzz4kSYsZC7I

 

[West]

All three of the candidates who have to date announced bids for mayor are on the City Council. Two of the three - Fuller and Lennon - voted in favor of this zoning change and special permit. The third candidate - Sangiolo - voted against. I'm pretty certain this vote and the associated issues will be a significant factor in the race.

 

[BosDevelop]

All three of the candidates who have to date announced bids for mayor are on the City Council. Two of the three - Fuller and Lennon - voted in favor of this zoning change and special permit. The third candidate - Sangiolo - voted against. I'm pretty certain this vote and the associated issues will be a significant factor in the race.

Crazy that a 150 unit apartment building could be a significant factor in a mayoral election in a city of almost 100,000 residents.

 

[West]

Crazy that a 150 unit apartment building could be a significant factor in a mayoral election in a city of almost 100,000 residents.

Well, I was trying to imply that the "associated issues" I mentioned were bigger than just this 150 unit development. If the 150 unit apartment building were truly sui generis, it wouldn't matter much. But there's been lots of bruising fights over development in Newton, and there's a proposal to add 950 apartment units in Upper Falls, so there's bigger fights to come.

Also, look at some of the other typical hot points for city mayoral elections. Crime? Not much in Newton. Schools? Generally excellent and enjoying continual support from the taxpayers; OK, there's some crowding issues, but the elementary school replacement program is addressing that pretty much on schedule and on budget. So while there's plenty to talk about on schools in Newton, it's mostly in the realm of how to continue having success and managing school age population growth as empty-nesters leave and families arrive; there's no terrible crisis. Much needed replacements of fire stations are proceeding apace. I don't hear a lot of complaints about the parks.

So..... PD, FD, schools, parks all doing either well or at least OK..... on the list of things within city government control, that brings us to: land use and development issues. Now THERE is a hot point in Newton politics. This 150 unit proposal has been a battle on this front, and this vote is one of those moments where candidates had to put their cards down on the table, face up, for all to see, within a time frame not so far out from an election that everyone will forget. Not crazy for this to be a focal point at all

 

[Equilibria]

The Washington Square developer is promoting a road diet plan for Washington St all the way from West Newton.

http://www.nnchamber.com/news/WashingtonSt

IMO, some parts of this are good (relocating the green space in Washington St's vestigial curve toward the neighborhood) and some are puzzling (where is the traffic going toward W. Newton Square on a two-way rotary segment coming from?)

Likewise, I see people loving the massive public plaza in W. Newton Square but being concerned with the HUGE number of people who seem to be congregating in every open space, doing outdoor Millennial things (beer gardens! barbecues! cornhole!), regardless of the context of the space. I realize this is a low-cost animation, but some variation would be appreciated.

Finally, I hate the default design they chose for the center platform CR stations, but I love the fact that these are being visualized by someone. The MBTA hasn't ever done it. I also love that they casually propose busting out a wall of the Star Market to create station access from the south. I'd hope that in real life that goes along with a full redevelopment of the property.

 

[CBCArch61]

The Washington Square developer is promoting a road diet plan for Washington St all the way from West Newton.

http://www.nnchamber.com/news/WashingtonSt

IMO, some parts of this are good (relocating the green space in Washington St's vestigial curve toward the neighborhood) and some are puzzling (where is the traffic going toward W. Newton Square on a two-way rotary segment coming from?)

Likewise, I see people loving the massive public plaza in W. Newton Square but being concerned with the HUGE number of people who seem to be congregating in every open space, doing outdoor Millennial things (beer gardens! barbecues! cornhole!), regardless of the context of the space. I realize this is a low-cost animation, but some variation would be appreciated.

Finally, I hate the default design they chose for the center platform CR stations, but I love the fact that these are being visualized by someone. The MBTA hasn't ever done it. I also love that they casually propose busting out a wall of the Star Market to create station access from the south. I'd hope that in real life that goes along with a full redevelopment of the property.

That was pretty impressive! My girlfriend lived over on Galen Street for two years, but we would use Washington Street to go down to Cabots sometimes and on days where i hated the pike and needed to get to Rt. 16. Overall I love this scheme and would love to see something like this happen.

One thing that struck me was the rail ROW. The default station design doesn't bother me, because the reasons you mention. They are at least trying to look at the possible improvement. But the bigger thing that bothered me is the width of that ROW. If I remember correctly, the failed Auburndale station wasn't initially a center platform because the ROW was too narrow. Does the ROW grow as it moves east?? Would there actually be enough room here to put center loading platforms like this???

 

[Equilibria]

That was pretty impressive! My girlfriend lived over on Galen Street for two years, but we would use Washington Street to go down to Cabots sometimes and on days where i hated the pike and needed to get to Rt. 16. Overall I love this scheme and would love to see something like this happen.

One thing that struck me was the rail ROW. The default station design doesn't bother me, because the reasons you mention. They are at least trying to look at the possible improvement. But the bigger thing that bothered me is the width of that ROW. If I remember correctly, the failed Auburndale station wasn't initially a center platform because the ROW was too narrow. Does the ROW grow as it moves east?? Would there actually be enough room here to put center loading platforms like this???

See the discussion in the comments here, including our old friend F-Line.

http://amateurplanner.blogspot.com/2017/02/good-intentions-bad-plans-and-7-million.html

 

[CBCArch61]

See the discussion in the comments here, including our old friend F-Line.

http://amateurplanner.blogspot.com/2017/02/good-intentions-bad-plans-and-7-million.html

Thanks!

 

[12345]

And Korff is just getting started. He is now looking to remake the entire two-mile stretch that parallels the turnpike, one property at a time. He envisions a modern, more narrow boulevard lined with protected bike lanes, parks, and cafes — a corridor akin to Mass. Ave. in Cambridge where people might be more interested in strolling than in hurrying through.

At the east end of Washington Street, he is assembling up to 15 acres around the Whole Foods supermarket. Further west, behind the West Newton Armory, properties including the Barn Family Shoe Store could become home to as many as 450 housing units and 60,000 square feet of shops. (If a development there is approved, the Barn is expected to stay open, though it may relocate nearby.)

https://www.bostonglobe.com/busines...Xi4J7k21lK/amp.html?__twitter_impression=true