Riverside Development | 333 Grove Street | Newton

Details on the revisions:

- This is now a 40B project and negotiations have been entirely with the MBTA - the City doesn't really get a say anymore.
- The neighbors had been pushing for more affordable housing and got it. Despite now using only half the site, it's now 602 units, 33% affordable, instead of 550 units, 20% affordable.
- All non-residential portions of the project are gone (which is part of the 40B qualification and also a product of Mark Development jumping on the lab bandwagon at the moment the bottom fell out).
- The roads have gotten less complex, but project access is still from a two-way Recreation Road. Getting there from 128N now requires traversing a roundabout at Grove Street.
- The parking garage for the MBTA now accommodates 2/3 of what was originally proposed, the other 1/3 remaining in surface lots up against the station. The implication of this is that if the MBTA ever wanted Mark Development or another developer to build on the remaining lots, that development would need to devote space to a second garage (or Riverside loses a big chunk of its park-and-ride function). It doesn't seem like the planned garage can be expanded toward the station.
- No special provision is made here for intercity buses as far as I can see - they would just use the turnaround at the station entrance.
- The $10M that was meant to be used to improve walking trails in the area has been reduced by half, note that as a 40B they could have simply eliminated it. I recall the trails actually costing $3M, so maybe all the planned improvements can still happen.

Mark Development still has no financing for this. They had a 40B proposed already at Dunstan East, which they just sold because they couldn't find financing for it either. Construction is planned to begin in 2025 and last into the 2030s, which basically punts on finding financing under current interest rates. Chances that Mark Development can actually deliver anything, anywhere? Remote, in my opinion. They seem unreliable and incompetent, particularly as Northland proceeds apace without any drama. If only they had switched sites, since this one, as TOD, is way more important.

1698756850943.png
 
Equilibria said:
- The neighbors had been pushing for more affordable housing and got it. Despite now using only half the site, it's now 602 units, 33% affordable, instead of 550 units, 20% affordable.
Click to expand...

That's a mistake by the neighbors. Unless that's a ploy to keep the project dead.
 
jklo said:
That's a mistake by the neighbors. Unless that's a ploy to keep the project dead.
Click to expand...

It was a ploy to kill it, yes, but he didn't make these changes to please the neighbors. He's proposing a 40B because his lab deal with Alexandria fell apart. The neighbors had nothing to do with this.
 
40B with a pool though?! That's pretty good. Also, the MBTA plot will be sold off/ leased for development eventually.
 
The problem is with this project, that even with the Green Line, Auburndale is very auto centric. 40 minutes to Park (even when fixed...) The market rate units are going to be a tough sell, and 33% affordable means there's going to be more pressure on ensuring they can find enough buyers at 800+k a pop.
 
jklo said:
The problem is with this project, that even with the Green Line, Auburndale is very auto centric. 40 minutes to Park (even when fixed...) The market rate units are going to be a tough sell, and 33% affordable means there's going to be more pressure on ensuring they can find enough buyers at 800+k a pop.
Click to expand...

It's 40 minutes to Park Street, but only 20 minutes to Longwood, where I bet most of the people will be working (at least, that's the case at Woodland).
 
I cant remember the particulars here, what is the reason why they are trying to get a single developer to create a whole masterplan and build an entire neighborhood here all at once, vs breaking the whole site into individual plots that can be developed individually over time from many different developers? Wouldnt spreading around the risk like that make it way more likely to be finished vs trying to get 1 developer to build an entire neighborhood from scratch to completion at a far away green line stop out in nimbyville?

They city could create its own masterplan and break all of the lots into individual pieces that could each be sold off and built on one at a time. You can entice the first developer to build here and then another one comes and each one that builds adds another piece and the area becomes more and more built up and desirable. It should be wayyy easier for 5 individual developers over time to each build a single 5 over 1 here vs one developer trying to build an entire neighborhood.
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
I cant remember the particulars here, what is the reason why they are trying to get a single developer to create a whole masterplan and build an entire neighborhood here all at once here, vs breaking the whole site into individual plots that can be developed individually over time from many different developers? Wouldnt spreading around the risk like that make it way more likely to be finished vs trying to get 1 developer to build an entire neighborhood from scratch to completion at a far away green line stop out in nimbyville?

They city could create its own masterplan and break all of the lots into individual pieces that could each be sold off and built on one at a time. You can entice the first developer to build here and then another one comes and each one that builds adds another piece and the area becomes more and more built up and desirable. It should be wayyy easier for 5 individual developers over time to each build a single 5 over 1 here vs one developer trying to build an entire neighborhood.
Click to expand...
I wish this was the case with most of these big developments around the city. Most of the time, someone just sells a huge tract of land, but here? It would've made a lot of sense. Maybe it comes down to pushing infrastructure costs onto the developer instead of the city.
 
stick n move said:
I cant remember the particulars here, what is the reason why they are trying to get a single developer to create a whole masterplan and build an entire neighborhood here all at once here, vs breaking the whole site into individual plots that can be developed individually over time from many different developers? Wouldnt spreading around the risk like that make it way more likely to be finished vs trying to get 1 developer to build an entire neighborhood from scratch to completion at a far away green line stop out in nimbyville?

They city could create its own masterplan and break all of the lots into individual pieces that could each be sold off and built on one at a time. You can entice the first developer to build here and then another one comes and each one that builds adds another piece and the area becomes more and more built up and desirable. It should be wayyy easier for 5 individual developers over time to each build a single 5 over 1 here vs one developer trying to build an entire neighborhood.
Click to expand...

Because the MBTA isn't a master planner? Master developers have done fine at North Quincy and Wellington before.
 
Somewhat related, it appears that Riverside Center (the office space next door) sold sometime in 2023 for about half of what was paid in Jan 2020. They of course tried the lab space conversion but that failed.

I wonder how empty it is these days...
 
The MBTA Board voted today to approve the latest evolution of plans to redevelop Riverside. Apparently the 2023 revisions above were never fully approved, so they'd been proceeding under the 2021 plan up to this point. Now, it's been split into phases. Phase 1 will still be entirely residential, but with numbers that more closely match the original 2021 project - 545 units, of which 20% will be affordable, with surface parking for the T. Phase 2, if it gets built, would be mixed use which, by its concept, still includes 150k of lab/office that may be deleted at a later time. The T is apparently requiring a minimum of 175k sq ft of development, regardless of composition. Phase 2 would also include about an additional 100 residential units and an additional garage to replace the surface parking.

It appears that the phase 2 garage could be further extended towards the T station if needed for additional capacity, and that the T will still retain control of its parcel closest to the station itself for further development.

1000036199.jpg
1000036201.jpg
1000036203.jpg
1000036211.jpg
 
I'm glad there are hard deadlines on this - every Mark Development project I know of (beyond the first one in Newtonville) is either failed, sold, or on-hold.
 
What will they do when the new longer Type 10's come? Will there be some room to put them there, as well as a wash room for them? Not trying to complain, but they'll have to be stored somewhere when not in use. Unless they'll be stored somewhere near the GLX. :unsure:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top