I’m glad I wasn’t drinking a glass of milk this morning when I read Katheleen Kouril Grieser’s latest TAB column in opposition to the redevelopment of the Orr Block Building in Newtonville.
Because even in a year where political discourse has veered off into ugly directions, Kouril Grieser’s assertion that projects like the one businessman Robert Korff has proposed for the corner of Washington and Walnut Streets is “reversing the American Dream” is stunning.
If I understand Kouril Grieser’s position correctly (and, granted, she can be confusing) seniors, singles, young families, childless couples or anyone else who might believe an apartment in Newtonville close to transportation, a grocery store, a pharmacy, great restaurants, an arts center and other amenities would be a great place to live are — unbeknownst to them — “settling” for something less than the American Dream.
In addition, Kouril Grieser declares, those same misinformed apartment dwellers are ALSO “destroying the dreams of everyday Newton residents” who choose to and/or are able to live in a house with a garage and a back yard.
You need to read the whole thing, but here’s two excerpts:
As more settle for units without owning land, they become vulnerable to the economic and political power of those who do. But suburbs, with less density and income inequality than urban areas, still offer a housing ladder for Americans, including the record numbers of minorities buying houses, backyards and economic security.
and
Newton is a caring community of generous, hardworking people at all income levels. There’s nothing “welcoming” about displacement or destroying the dreams of everyday Newton residents. Our city councilors are too intelligent and responsible, I believe, to vote for Korff’s request, because it hurts Newton.
Korff’s proposal for Washington Place does nothing of the sort. It takes an unattractive, outdated collection of mismatched, underutilized buildings and replaces them with a thoughtful, historically-respectful design, courtyard, brickwork and step backs that will enhance the visual appeal of Newtonville.
It will bring new customers and vitality to our village businesses, open up new opportunities for existing businesses that may choose to move there or for new business enterprises. It provides a public space dedicated to the arts, new crosswalks and improved bike lanes.
And it provides homes for our seniors, our differently abled people, our Millennials, our young couples and others who are struggling to find housing that meets their needs and/or lifestyle and really don’t need Kouril Grieser’s demeaning or dehumanizing their choices or them.
The one thing Washington Place will indisputably not do is destroy anyone’s American Dream.
Speechless
Does this mean that when I’m not longer able to deal with a yard, shoveling, household maintenance, but would like to stay in the community that I’ve called home for 35 years, that I’m “settling”? Not only is this not “settling”, it’s exactly what seniors want and need in order to remain in Newton.
If you want to destroy my dream, force me to move to a community where I don’t have a social circle, friends, or best loved places because there aren’t sufficient housing options for seniors in Newton.
This makes no sense whatsoever. To me, it says “fit into the Newton mold or leave”.
“It will bring new customers and vitality to our village businesses”
How so? Based on what data? If during my constant driving around, I see with my own eyes businesses leaving the villages and buildings, and the new retail space on Elm Street in West Newton remaining empty a year after construction, what, beyond the “newness” of this project, guarantees that any business (except for the excellent Shoe Barn’s stated desire to move), would, in fact, show up and rent there? All I have read is a generic wish list of businesses that would move in, not actual businesses nor have I even seen a simple plan to attract them with a REALISTIC vision of the parking and lack of public transit.
– There is naturally occurring affordable housing in that area now. This project will be a net gain of all of four “affordable” units. How is that worth this kind of disruption and effort?
Removing the emotion / desire to stir the pot on both sides, no one has yet to answer my other question:
This developers own numbers state that they expect no more than 25 children to move into this complex and that the net gain to the city in tax revenue will be 206K+ a year. As I’ve stated before, simply 12 additional children into the system wipes that “gain” out, and given the history of the use of apartments such as those over on Grove Street in Auburndale, this will be most likely be both the trend and eventual reality. In all scenarios, I see the city and taxpayers as losers, the developers and their paid underlings including their outside marketing firm as big winners, and the things I care about such as affordable housing, remaining stagnant and eventually made for the worse.
Buzzwords and shields such as “doing it for the children” or “affordable housing for seniors” are not being matched in this reality and I wish their use would cease.
Here’s the paragraph that made my head spin.
Since Newton has surpassed its required contribution of state-recognized (“SHI”) affordable housing, the City Council has regained the power to demand higher percentages of such housing from developers, not less. Korff’s offer of 15 percent SHI units doesn’t even match state standards. His 10 percent “workforce housing” isn’t recognized as affordable housing by the state. Kor.ff’s project won’t improve our SHI standingInstead, it endangers hard-won 40B immunity and local land use control.
Where to start?
* Newton has surpassed its required contribution of state-recognized (“SHI”) affordable housing – Newton has NOT met it’s goal of state-recognized affordable housing. They tried to claim that they had and the state shot the claim down.
* Even if Newton had met the state’s SHI target that would not give the City Council “the power to demand higher percentages of such (affordable) housing from developers.” It would in effect do the opposite, it would prevent developers from building 40B affordable housing in Newton.
* .Korff’s project won’t improve our SHI standing – To be very clear, Kouril-Greiser and the Newton Village Alliance have shown zero interest in building ANY affordable housing in Newton. They have fought virtually EVERY proposed project that included ANY affordable housing. They’re only interest in meeting the state’s SHI (affordable housing) target is so that Newton can stop any project all 40B projects that would include additional affordable housing.
Kouril-Grieser’s regular Tab columns always make my head hurt to read and infuriate me with their inherent purposeful misleading trains of garbled thoughts.
There are plenty of people I know and respect who hate the state’s 40B affordable housing program. They are clear and honest about it. They value local control of zoning over what they view as an ineffective state program for increasing affordable housing. They value keeping their neighborhoods unchanged over attempting to address the pressing issue of lack of affordable housing. That’s fine. That’s honest. I just don’t happen to agree with that outlook.
Kouril-Grieser’s columns are something quite different. She regularly writes columns full of garbled and misleading statements that appear to be suggesting that her goal is to address the issue of affordable housing in Newton when in fact her goals have nothing to do with addressing affordable housing. As far as I can see, her organization has actively opposed VIRTUALLY EVERY SINGLE proposed project that included ANY component of new affordable housing in Newton.
Her opposition to all attempts to increase affordable housing in Newton are not just limited to opposing the dreaded 40B projects. She and the NVA have been equally outspoken in opposition to loosening the accessory apartment regulations to allow more affordable units within our existing housing. As far as I can see, Kouril-Grieser’s only interest in affordable housing is in using it as a confusing smokescreen to cover her nothing-but-the-status-quo agenda
I’d be fine IF IT STAYED WITHIN EXISTING ZONING laws. 3 maybe 4 stories. Not 5. Otherwise, why have zone LAWS. Just call them zoning suggestions.
Well said Jerry & Greg!
The government of this City really needs to start to decide if they are committed to the thoughtful future vision of our wonderful community!
Continual proposed improvements in this City seem to be viewed as a play ground for politicians -who truly forget their role as responsible servants to serve the People of this fine City .
We need productive , open minded Government!
When is enough enough !
Really liked the original six-story version, but this is still a good plan that will dramatically improve that stretch of Washington Street. Question is: Will there be 18 votes to rezone? If you take the Austin Street “yays” (with Jake Auchincloss in place of Marcia Johnson) plus one more, it would pass. I have heard Councilor Ciccone might be more favorable to this than he was Austin Street. That would make three-quarters majority.
Yes, the editorial is incorrect when it states Newton has met its required minimums. The correct thing would be Newton is hoping, wishing, dreaming and litigating that it has met its required minimums. But that so far the court has shot down such hopes and dreams. (and rightfully so based on a read of the rules, but hey, I’m just a anonymous poster who is a meanie, what do I know?)
Not to defend her position at all, but I can certainly separate my lack of enthusiasm for the Orr Block project from this editorial.
And I’m not at all enthusiastic. Perhaps if the city had actually met/fulfilled/planned any of its vaulted improvements to the village center. You know, the spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down. So there was a meeting Monday night to FINALLY do that. I’m told that it was rather weak, and we’ve suddenly lost many of the promised improvements. Anyone care to comment who was at the meeting?
Tough to convince my neighbors to accept major change to our community when the city doesn’t follow through with its promises. Many of us were supporters of Austin Street because of many factors. One of the big ones was the transformation of the village, bringing it up to date and less of a concrete jungle. More plantings, benches and mini-parks, historical lighting and better fascades, traffic calming and the like. Seems like we are getting bike lanes, and curb-cuts. You want to increase density in my village. I’m ok with that. But with that investment should come MAJOR improvements to the village. Can’t figure that out? Then you are about to lose a large group of previous supporters.
Hey, just because I’m not a huge fan of the editorial doesn’t mean the project doesn’t stink. I welcome someone convincing me otherwise with actual project data. Show me the public benefit.
Andy:
Why do you like it? At this point I don’t see how it will “improve” washington street. New isn’t always better. This isn’t an empty parking lot. This is a unique cluster of buildings that had some cool shops on it already. I’m under no illusion that those shops will stay. But why should I go to bat for the increase in density. Let him build to the zoning code or convince me that his project is better for the public good.
And curb cuts aren’t public benefits. The city did those on Lowell and Washington and we didn’t have to swallow a large project to get them.
It’s gotten more difficult to support this project because our local representatives didn’t negotiate hard enough for affordable units and other valuable amenities. The City should have squeezed a lot more out of this developer, and I’m disappointed in what appears to be the final result of negotiations. Newton could really use a mayor who understands the fundamentals of real estate development. That becomes even more important as we move further into our post 40B era. I disagree with those who think Newton has not met its’ 40B obligation. And I believe it’s time for this city to commit to a new standard of 12% real affordability. I say “real” affordability because of the way 40B includes every market rate apartment in a development as an “affordable” unit. I’d like to see 12% of the residences in Newton actually meet the state established standard of “affordable.” That’s something only achievable in the absence of 40B.
What Jerry said!!! I love it when Jerry gets on his soapbox!
Fig-Are you saying that this project should be nixed because N’ville hasn’t gotten planters, benches, and historical lighting? Many mini-parks in Newton are planted and maintained by citizen volunteers who want and value mini-gardens. Visit the Newton Highlands garden. Do you think that happened because the city has the extra funding to plant and care for such a beautiful garden? It doesn’t now, never has, and most likely never will. Look at the playgrounds in the city. When we moved here in the early 80’s, many schools didn’t have a playground and now they do through the efforts of PTO’s and parent involvement. The efforts of citizen activists get these projects done – not just in Newton, but in all communities throughout the country.
I lived in Newtonville for 25 years. The question for me is what should be preserved and enhanced and what part would benefit from rebuilding. The section on the south side of the Pike is attractive and has historic value. In my opinion, the Orr block is rundown and is not worth saving. I’m particularly troubled when people say that the apartments are “naturally affordable”. I’m sure some apartments are in good condition, but landowners have not maintained other units to an acceptable living standard.
Hi Jane:
C’mon now. Your comment back was dismissive. The citizens of Newton aren’t expected to repair sidewalks, make structural improvements to villages, install lighting, etc. Is the West Newton improvements being paid for by your intrepid band of citizen warriors? Nope. You are not exactly representing my viewpoint fairly. You are attempting to take the beautification and improvement items that were promised to the residents of Newtonville by the City and make them optional improvements best taken care of by citizen volunteers. Except, that wasn’t what was promised. This isn’t the same as playground improvements. The city and the counsel recognized that major changes were being proposed to Newtonville because of Austin Street, recognized that a major facelift was needed for the village. It is 2017. We have one meeting in the last 3 years, remarkably when Washington Place/Orr Block is up for a vote. The mayor’s editorial states that the developer has pledged to support the Walnut street redo. Terrific. Tell me the amount of the support, the dollars to be held by the city in reserve.
Look, personally I like the old buildings, and I think if they were rehabbed that would be the best option. We preserve history, we preserve scale. Folks on this blog should know that I’m not afraid of development, and that I understand zoning law. I’m also a fan of history, and historic buildings. The Orr block looks rundown but it could be rehabbed and brought back to form. But I understand I can’t make the developer do that, and for the price paid, I’m under no illusions that he will.
So I get that this project will likely happen in some form or the other. But the city has time and again left Newtonville behind. We are getting a massive self-storage unit on Newtonville Ave in a residential neighborhood. Many of us supported Austin Street but we’ve seen no benefits that were promised. We are now being asked to support another very large development in our village again. West Newton has large village and traffic improvements coming (well designed and deserved). Auburndale has an updated commuter rail station coming (finally but shouldn’t all commuter rail be handicapped accessible). Cabot Elementary has been pushed to the back and delayed. Other villages when faced with similar situations (historic building for a school, large proposed development, etc) were treated differently (I’m looking at you Waban).
So don’t tell me that citizen activists get these projects done. Of course they do. But that is a cop out and you know it. I can say that about any major action taken by Newton on public property. Should the residents of Newton build their own school? Mow their own parks? Install their own lighting and traffic lights? Repair their own sidewalks? Repave their own streets? Just because collective citizen actions can maintain or build a minipark doesn’t address the issue at hand. I’m talking MAJOR renovation of a road Jane. I’m talking updating major streetlights. I’m talking built in planting beds with concrete. I’m talking traffic calming measures. When has a Newton organization EVER had to do any of these things. Government has a role. Multiple city councilors made promises regarding improvements. And after living here for 12 years I catch on to a thing or two as well. It may not be 25, but it is certainly long enough to call the city out on its bull. And there is a lot of bull coming from the city right now.
Look, I’m not trying to be unreasonable. I recognize the economics. I’m saddened by the loss of history and scale, but sometimes that happens. I applaud the additional affordable housing. I applaud the transit oriented development. This has some of the same features I liked about Austin Street. But it is not enough. The developer is asking for a major concession. The return to the city AND the village should be major as well. He can of course build to zoning specifications and do none of this. But he’ll leave millions on the table.
He wants to change the density of my village? Fine. Let’s push him to make the project AND the village beautiful.
And for the record Jane, pushing the developer to do this IS citizen activism. I’ve built my fair share of playgrounds and I’ve gotten my fair share of concessions. The result is the same.
And the record, I’m going to miss those shops. That was my barber, my camera store, my restaurant, my gas station. I liked the ballet store, the old bead store (since closed) and the ballet school added village character. I’m worried the post office is next.
Replacing those shops with top of the line commercial space is terrific for the developer. But I’m guessing we are trading village shops for major chains. The developer knows how to develop a CVS. Does he know how to develop a village?
This is fundamentally different in my mind that the Austin Street lot. We argued about parking, but it is easier to measure parking, spaces gained and spaces lost. I’m telling you this is also about village cultural and relationships with these retailers that go back decades.
I recognize the economics, and realize that the ship has sailed. Many of the shops have left or will leave shortly. But I think I’ll remember the north side more fondly as the historic buildings filled with quirky shops. Please take that into consideration when you describe it as run down and not worth saving. Run down? Probably so. Not worth saving. Says you. Not me.
Off topic: the Walnut St. improvement process the city is following is exactly the same — one year later — as the process followed for West Newton. Even the $2-3M budget is the same. Compare the project pages on the city website:
http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/planning/parking_transportation/west_newton_sq_n_enhancements.asp
http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/planning/parking_transportation/walnut_street_enhancements.asp
Everyone with any form of constructive input should attend the meetings, send email, add pins to the WikiMap linked on the page. I guarantee that robust input — and the city’s new-found willingness to actually budget for these projects — is the force behind what’s shaping up to be a massive improvement in West Newton. Newtonville deserves the same, and can get it.
Go Fig!!!
Doug:
I appreciate the link. We’ll see. I’ll judge it by the actual results, and by the full funding PLUS the amounts promised due from the Austin Street project.
Ugh, what an entirely ugly, appalling, embarrassing, and insulting editorial by Ms. Kouril Grieser. Jerry’s reply is excellent and far more than is deserved. Apologies for interrupting your entirely reasonable debate on the Orr project!
Mike:
You wrote: “[Actual 12% affordability is] something only achievable in the absence of 40B.”
Please explain. How does 40B prevent development of non-40B affordable housing?
Oh, Fig, really now. I never meant to be dismissive. 😉
As I recollect, you are quite focused on benches, lighting, and plantings. Two of those three things are within the range of citizen groups.Meanwhile, Newtonville is getting a new elementary school, has a HS that serves as a community center, the senior center, the New Arts Center. Not bad if you ask me, but the complaint department seems to be open 24/7.
I’ve lived in three villages, feel no attachment to any, and note that activism is seen differently in each village. I happen to like that my current home isn’t village-focused. It’s not so bad.
Jane, I don’t really have anything concrete to add to this thread, but what new elementary school are you referring to?
Cabot? It’s not getting built from scratch – it’s a rehab of one section, and a new addition of another section. I didn’t realize Cabot was the Newtonville elementary school. I think of Horace-Mann as being in Newtonville, and that’s in deplorable condition.
I can’t wait for everyone to comment and discuss the development proposed for 24 acres on Needham and Oak streets and Tower Road, and Charlemont. Mixed use office, retail, and 940 units of housing! Makes the projects with 200 – 300 apartment units look really good to me.
Cabot is most definitely a N’ville school. Students in N’ville who lives south of the Pike and east of Lowell Ave. attend Cabot. If you live anywhere near the village center on the southside, your kids go to Cabot. I lived 3 blocks from the village center and my kids went to Cabot. Also, the inside of Cabot rehab will essentially be a new school that’s in compliance with state standards. Unfortunately, the focus of the discussion has been on the outside of the building, but the inside will be completely new.
Horace Mann is absolutely in deplorable condition which is why most people favor sending the students to Carr permanently once Cabot is complete. That means N’ville will have 2 new or updated elementary schools.
@Sean– 40B gives developers the upper hand in controlling the size and location of their development. The number of affordable units is fixed statutorily. We can require a higher number of affordable units [as well as other benefits] from a large developer when 40B is removed from the equation. The Austin Street deal provides good evidence of what I’m suggesting. I’m happy to give you other examples that support my opinion as well. In the case of Washington Place, it appears to me the city’s negotiators dropped the ball by not demanding enough affordable units and amenities, proving we need someone at the negotiating table who understands the financial dynamics of large residential projects.
Jane:
C’mon now, read my post. “benches, lighting, and plantings”. So you’ve kinda taken my focus on a complete village overhaul and decided to dilute it to “benches, lighting and plantings”. First, that is not at all representative of my concerns. Second, while new seating areas, new historic lighting, and new landscaping are certainly part of a village makeover, to describe it in such simplistic terms is basically your way of making your argument by such definition. As in, this is easy stuff, best done by the beautification non-profit, not city work at all. Can’t Beautiful Newtonville buy a few benches. A few planters with some nice new plants. Doesn’t that get you 2/3rds of the way there? (sneak peak to the rest of my post. Nope.)
So the benches are actually large scale removal of concrete, creation of set areas for seating, combined with major landscape urban design. The lighting is historic lampposts with improved bulbs, at a greater than current location frequency (more posts per foot), and at a lower height. Think Wellesley downtown, or Dedham historic area. For a great example of this go out to Pittsfield MA, and look at the amazing job they did on their historic North street area. Those types of curb cuts, historic lighting, new built in stone benches and landscape areas are what we should be shooting for. Not a few random benches and plantings. We’ve got that already. This is fixing the heat sink concrete based village center. Making it more pleasant to spend time in. Compared to most of the better run cities and towns our villages are an embarrassment. Even Boston has figured out that charm and urban design matters. It matters a lot. It matters for traffic calming. It matters for pedestrian safety. It matters for our merchants. It matters for walkability. It matters for beauty and charm. And the landscaping matters too. The little plantings that have sprung up along Washington Street funded by non-profits and your local community are terrific. They cost a few hundred per. The improvemnts I’m talking about will cost over a million. You try fundraising for that. We fund our govt for a reason…
Look, I’m not anti-development. But I’m also not so pro-development that I look at things just from that focus. Or just from an affordable housing purpose. Or just from a housing for elderly/empty nester purpose. I take a wider approach. And I start with this:
If we are going to build so much in our village centers, if we are going to increase our urban density, what are we doing on the other side of the equation besides providing more housing? Are we also making cooresponding improvements to our village centers to make them more livable, more walkable, more beautiful? Are we making changes to make our villages places to gather? Because just adding housing, no matter how great that housing is and how great affordable housing is, is just part of it.
And this type of major overhaul has been promised, again and again and again. Village improvements have been on the radar since Mayor Cohen’s days. And these new developments can jumpstart them, can improve the improvements, can allow us to become more ambitious in our scope. Let’s not give up so easy.
As for how Newtonville is treated, I think the facts speak for themselves. Not trying to complain, just pointing out the facts. Would a storage facility or a single room occupancy for formerly homeless open in Waban? I happen to love Newtonville, have no desire to move to Waban, and just want to make my village center better. This is a once in a generation change in Newtonville. We can end it with a beautiful redone village. Or we can end it with new traffic lights and bike lanes. Let’s aim bigger.
My point is this: to say that Newtonville hasn’t had improvements just isn’t accurate. It has the single largest community center in the city within walking distance of much of the village, complete with athletic facilities, a swimming pool, and a theatre and it’s brand new. The rebuilding of one of the elementary school is about to begin, and there are plans to deal with the H-M population. Just because those aren’t on your priority list, doesn’t discount the fact that N’ville has probably received more city funding that has provided more amenities than any other village. All of these improvements make N’ville more pleasant, livable, walkable, etc.
I am and have always been solidly behind the affordable housing projects that accommodate families, seniors, and millennials in Waban. I’m not village-bound or focused so I don’t really get it the whole village thing. I’ve lived in three of them and each has positive aspects and some needs, but they’re all pretty nice if you ask me.
I assume you know that Wellesley has had 24 successful overrides. We’ve had 2. The two communities aren’t comparable when it comes to anything that requires significant funding. In Wellesley, they ask and they receive. In Newton, we grovel and beg and have managed to pull off 2 overrrides in 35 years.
Jane, are you calling the high school a community center? Just want to make sure I understand. Because I live near the high school, and while it occasionally has community amenities, most of the time it is used as a high school. Not a community center. The pool has very limited hours, the track and fields don’t exactly welcome the neighborhood kids (and host no community weekend sports) etc, etc.
As for getting its fair share, I don’t count the high school for that reason. It provides marginal benefit to the village as anything but a high school. I will certainly give credit for a redone Cabot, but since we keep getting delayed it is difficult to give too much credit there at this point. I love the landscape improvements to the Senior center (paid for by CPA funds I believe). But this is about promises made and promises kept Jane. Do you not recall Linsky telling multiple audiences that the funds from Austin Street will be used to improve the village? This improvement process started years ago. And still, nothing. Same dying trees, same dangerous pedestrian crossings, same concrete village. Best place to run your errands say the folks who don’t live here! We’ve got that going for us I guess.
And I know you support affordable housing everywhere. That’s one of the reasons I like you and your posts Jane. But calling out Waban for the village’s dismal record in supporting any type of outside the box housing facility is telling the truth. And it is telling the truth to say that if a hundred unit complex tried to open near the Waban T station (which is a better transport hub) there would be sudden cold feet from certain politicians. Or should I remind you about the lies told about Engine 6?
As for comparing Newton to Wellesley, you are completely right. Wellesley looks like Wellesley because it has been willing to spend more money, for better or worse. Some of that is that Newton has been poorly run in the past years, and that we are paying for the delayed maintenance and pensions. Part of it is keeping property taxes far lower.
But you ignored my other examples? Does Lee, MA not have a great village center? (IT DOES!) Does Pittsfield? (DITTO!) Look at North Adams too. All those are towns in Western MA have a far weaker tax base. But amazingly enough they’ve managed to come up with plans over many years to redo their village centers. Some of it was smart uses of federal and state grants. Some of it was forcing developers to help fund such changes collectively. Some of it was community will and donations.
Look, I’m not trying to pick on you. We agree on a lot of stuff. But my goal is that in 3 years, especially if we are blessed with both Austin Street and Washington Place, we are also blessed with a beautiful village center. That we add people of all economic levels and give them a better village to live, to work, to play, to eat. And I think the city is far more focused and dedicated (partly due to developer pressure and skill) towards the additional apartment buildings than it is towards the village improvements. They should be tied together and go hand in hand.
A good start would be knowing how much Orr Block’s developer is going to reserve for village improvements. How about a pledge of a certain reserve for the village, replenshed on a yearly basis from a percentage of rents? I can think of dozens of possible solutions that have worked for other communities.
Life is imperfect, we don’t always get what we want, change is hard, and with it there is sometimes collateral damage. Having been schooled, i’ve come to the conclusion that i’ve been dwelling on the wrong side of history and been gravely out of touch with what Newton “wants” for many years, so i am “all in” on this project and probably the Upper Falls project as well. Thank you to all for this reeducation, some right here on Village 14! Large scale developments are visually, practically and emotionally trying. As a neighbor and survivor of Needham St developments for many years, i can promise that you will all get through it and life will go on. There is a clear need for more housing, we have plenty of room in our schools for more students, and a good many residents support more development and retail opportunities.
I have met and spoken to KKG and i’m aware of the Newton Villages Alliance history of actions to squash any new housing throughout the city. One relatively small scale development on Goddard St was the subject of litigation sometime back that was initiated by an NVA member. If there are words that can be described as hate speech i would say
“importing poor people” would qualify. The breath taking hypocrisy of the NVA NIMBY movement is numbing. No matter how much dissembling, pivoting, walking-back, obfuscating and distracting the NVA does, members of the group- individuals and some Newton Highlands Area Council members are solidly on the record as having supported past large scale developments and political candidates that have supported large scale development throughout Newton. Avalon Bay Needham St is one example. One would ask what exactly has changed? Do explain.
I watched a little of KKG’s, manic, angry, indignant presentation to the city council the other night and it took me about three or four minutes to decide that whatever she was selling i wasn’t buying.
I’m going to put two things out there:
1) Cities with only one village center can make that place look great. You need only look over the border to Waltham: They’ve been working on their city center and new plantings, curbs, and olde-timey LED lights delineate the area. It’s a transportation hub, and there’s a ton of foot-traffic supporting dozens of businesses. There’s a number of parking lots, but you’ll almost always be a 5-10 minute walk from where you want to be. The whole center is actually a village center. We have “13” village centers, which means in terms of concentrated population and amenities we actually have none.
2) Supply and demand actually applies to housing. Unless there are a whole lot more units built in Newton there isn’t going to be anything for the “middle-class” (and I doubt there’s much now). We’ll just be a suburban MA version of Manhattan; the rich who can afford to buy in, and those in various subsidized or “affordable units.”
In my opinion, when most of the houses I see sell go for $800K+, when I see the call for “no new anything” it really screams more “protect my investment in this property.
Of course, eventually I think that the joke will be on us no house in my neighborhood has gone for less than 650K or to to a family with no kids; in the last 7 years out of the 20 houses on my street, 3 changed hands for net 5 kids into the schools. The only reason people are moving is is because of the schools – it’s certainly not the state of the roads, or access to transportation, or curbs (I miss curbs). My piece of Newton looks worse than an exurban subdivision in Missouri; but Burr school is great, and so if they can afford it parents will but what they must to get their kids in.
For all of the talk of business, without growth and a focus on making some subsets of our 13 actual functioning village centers we might as well start talking about how we’re going to go forward (read: overrides) as a bedroom community propped up by our schools.
I agree wholeheartedly with what Anne wrote and offer this extension. Not only do we have 13 village centers that are, mostly, dying a slow death, there’s been substantial investment in other commercial districts, which compete with the village centers. Chestnut Hill Square, Needham Street, the Street.
What we need to revitalize our village center is people. Density.
Sean, if our 13 village centers are dying a slow death, someone should tell that to the landlords who are charging close to boston rates on rents. Dying a slow death how exactly? You can certainly point to the vacancies in Newtonville, but we just filled up a few of those, and a certain percentage of vacancy (less than 10%) is normal.
I think folks are looking at the village question incorrectly. Each village compares to a small town. Some, like Newtonville, Newton Center, West Newton, Nonantum and Newton Highlands have enough of a commercial base to be something more. Other villages have major streets like route 9 or Needham street so they lose that village feel. So let’s focus on that subset that can act like mini-hubs. You say that if we add more density the village will come back alive. I’m saying that is just one piece of the puzzle. If this is a “build it and they will come”, don’t you need to build the full baseball field and not just the bleachers? Improve the village AND add density?
Anne, for the record, smaller towns (like Lee) have managed to make their city centers look great. It just takes will and leadership. And a focused planning department. And some citizen backbone. Don’t give up so easily.
One positive about this project and Austin Street would be completing additional cross streets to Walnut Street with improved (or new) retail. That’s more restaurants, more shops, more of a hub. But if you want to keep those folks in Newtonville, add amenities like public spaces, outdoor cafe areas, aesthetic qualities. Very important.
Imagine side-stepping huge macroeconomic trends and realities across the United States and the entire developed world to instead blame the existence of apartments in the suburbs for killing the dream (not universally held anyway) of owning a house with a yard.
I just googled Lee, and it is beautiful! But Lee had an advantage Newton doesn’t: it’s one town with one center. Within that lovely stretch of Main St I note the:
town clerk (town hall)
main fire dept
post office
supermarket
pharmacy
8 restaurants and cafe’s
other stores
Good for Lee! (but zooming out, looking for the next nearest town – it seems that Stockbridge has a “blink and you’ll miss it” village center …) Lee also has the advantage of being a local hub and entrance to the pike, and that the next exit (and town) is miles off.
I think that it’s most comparable to West Newton (which has all of those things, and foot traffic from the T), which is certainly a place I think that we should be focusing our efforts. (I don’t know if Newton Corner is savable, if it should be saved, or what an improved/saved Newton Corner would look like).
If everyone in Newton was committed to shopping in their square first, then the squares would thrive (think of the 50’s housewife walking to market because the car went to work with her husband). But the world has changed, and I run most of my errands at lunch, or in major shopping trips revolving around grocery stores on weekends. I’m not going prioritize my village center if it takes more time than my current routine.
Here is an important PSA for the NIMBY in your life: “Talk to your friends about zoning.”
You’re welcome.
Fig-When it was built, NN was billed as being a HS that would also serve as a community center and it’s done that well. The track, the fields, the community meeting space, the Community Ed program, are all walkable, well used, and significant additions to the village.
I agree with much of what Anne said. The villages aren’t dying but perhaps are evolving in a new direction. Local businesses can’t depend on the nearby residents and remain solvent in this day and age, which is why I’ve questioned the concept of village centers as being mini-towns of interest to just its local residents. The presence of a village center has virtually no influence on where I shop or spend my time and/or money. I currently live in Waban but maintain my allegiance to the locally owned pharmacy in A’dale, prefer the Whole Foods in Newtonville to the one that’s a mile from my home, the movie theatre in West Newton, and the hardware store in Nonantum. I’m a known customer in each of these places and I assume they appreciate my loyal business. Newton is and always has been one city and benefits when residents are committed to a citywide perspective with an eye to village development.