A Boston Globe story reported this week on a survey of Newtonville residents about the proposed Austin Street development. The survey was conducted by the Newtonville Area Council.
According to the article, the majority of the respondents would rather see a smaller project with more parking. Here’s the details on the survey results.
The survey was well done and thought out I felt. The one thing with parking is that both users as well as businesses tend to believe more parking is needed than is actually utilized. In many cases businesses believe a majority of customers come by car and thus want more parking. When shopper intercept surveys are done, (couple examples here in the Boston area come to mind) businesses have usually way overestimated the amount of their customers that come by car vs other modes. Now is this the case here, no I don’t think so, but the estimates on need both by residents as well as shop owners is likely exaggerated to some extent. The city completed a flawed parking study in that it was too long ago, before a lot of things started happening in the village. I would expect a Friday or Saturday evening for all parking to be at capacity if not over capacity, and it is.
Part of the problem is the disconnect and the lack of access to the parking on the north side from businesses and parking on the south. The pike has a big influence, as does the pedestrian accessibility of Walnut @ Washington. We have plenty of parking (the Verizon accessory lot is seriously never used, I have even seen some folks using it as a kiss and ride pickup spot) in the village. Folks will always want front door parking, and if that is the case there should be a higher price to make sure capacity is ~80%. but we need to reconnect the village in order to better utilize the space we have at the very least.
That said as many of us in the city work on improving transit access, bike, and ped access, the shift of mode that customers are utilizing to go to Newtonville will change, as will adding new residences in the Austin development. The parking survey was valid at the time it was done, but I still believe a new survey should be completed with oversight by the area council so that the results will actually be trusted (the belief the city/contractor somehow cooked the books on the old survey seems to runs much higher than it should…)
Look, I truly believe parking is a bit a red herring here. Yes, parking will go down in the new proposal. But the lots are empty ALOT of the time, and there is lots of parking within a few blocks. I would love it if parking was more expensive during the busy periods to encourage rapid turnover.
I’m in support of the projects at Austin Street. Affordable housing would be fine, so would elderly housing. Any developer using the lot should pay market rate for it, and those funds should be funneled into the village for REAL improvements. Even with 80 spaces at Austin Street, with the parking at Washington Street across the Pike we will have more parking than any village besides Newton Center.
The Austin Street lot is not an appropriate site for housing. We need parking amid green space development, trees and lots of them as well as flowers. Let’s build an area that draws people for a positive experience. Commuters to the city need a place to park. Set aside an area for them within the development. If you want to build dense housing then allow it to be built on the grounds of Aquinas College.
The Aquinas space is huge and if it is used for dense housing it will cripple the infrastructure in that area. As it is now the school is overloaded and continually looking to slice and dice classrooms to increase occupancy. The site itself was at one time an estate that featured many trees and a large pond as well as a man made pond the foundation of which was recently removed. The space itself could be returned at least in part to another green space with trees, walkways, small children’s play grounds and accommodate a section of living space that could be dedicated to seniors and veterans in Newton as well as some small shops, a cultural center, youth center or eateries.
A multi use facility would be more appropriate than dense housing in an area that can not handle a huge increase a lot that size could hold. However if the dense housing is the direction the city should try and work with the contractor to increase the infra structure that will be needed to support a huge housing facility and not throw the cost of infrastructure improvements back on the tax payers of Newton. The Contractor would stand to make a bundle on the development and a chunk of that should go right back into the improvements that would be required, particularly when it comes to the local schools.
I am still somewhat surprised the city did not make an offer on Aquinas since is is in fairly good shape and could accommodate several elementary schools as swing locations while the city restores and improves some of our elementary schools. It could also serve as a swing location for Bigelow and Day when the time comes to do the long overdo renovations in those schools.
Aquinas has great potential I just hope the city sees it as such.
There’s been a lot of concern voiced about various parking issues in the Austin St proposal. Through it all, no one’s yet considered the parking implications of socialism.
My brother just sent me this transcript from last night’s town meeting in his town.
“The parking lot for this building doesn’t take into account socialism.”
“Socialism”?
“These apartments are going to have young people who like to socialize with their friends in their apartments. Where are the friend going to park?”
not socialism!! That is something for Cambridge!! Anyway I happened to get a chance to speak to some Zipcar folks at work on Monday in another community (they were in for some project or another, not part of the stuff I do) and they have a keen interest in providing additional Zipcar spots between Watertown Square and Newton Center. Both of these sites are well used and they are focusing on an expansion model into the first tier communities outside Boston/Cambridge. They have not yet been approached by anybody, developer or city (I mentioned nothing had been decided yet so I was not surprised they had not been approached) but would be very interested. Carshare is a critical component of this and has proven to help reduce parking demand and private vehicle ownership.
Socialism Zip cars, parking Bla bla bla .
Austin Street is no place for a housing project, flawed Comprehensive Plan, Smart Growth or not. Get every one embroiled in great smokescreen discussions about parking, numbers of cars, transportation nodes, etc etc.
The Mayor is intent on building affordable housing in Newton. He is on a National Council of Mayors in Washington, and he is the National Chairman of its Housing Development and Block Grant Sub Committee. Success in building housing ( and his personal resume ) will carry him into a future national spotlight. And we all know he has national ambitions. The strategy here at Austin Street is to propose building an 80 unit lump and when the community gets all up in arms the powers that be will ‘relent’ and allow 40 units and every body will sigh a sigh of relief thinking they have won some kind of victory, and the the Mayor and his Planning Department will smile at their wonderful negotiating success and the city will be left with a monument to this administration that will go nowhere in the revitalization of Newtonville Village Center. The north – south split in the village by the turnpike will not have been addressed. No new air rights connection will get built and village vitality and life will not have been improved upon.
The Executive Summary, by the Newton Area Council, of the Austin Street Survey is biased in favor of keeping alive this monstrous project. In it’s summary comment re Density it reads,.. “The overwhelming majority ( of respondents ), 80 percent, want 40 or fewer residential units. THAT INCLUDES 40% WHO WANT NO UNITS AT ALL. It should have read ( if presented honestly ! ), ” 60% WANT 40 UNITS OR LESS. ANOTHER 20% WANT NO RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT ALL.”
Why publish such a misleading result unless the Newtonville Area Council is trying to keep this project alive, and to to keep tammany hall happy !
Definitely in favor of having Zipcars available. Many 2-car families could happily downsize to 1 car if Zipcar were available. It’s not just for people who want to completely get rid of their cars. People I know who use Zipcar are very happy with it.
Zipcar for sure. One of my kids is 21 and uses Zipcar out of Woodland T Station fequently because Zipcar rents to 21 year olds and it is much cheaper than buying a beater.
I have no idea what the ratio of newtonville to non-newtonville patrons looks like for the businesses in newtonville. but as a “non-newtonville resident”, i can tell you that if the parking becomes a hassle, I will definitely not do as many spontaneous trips to newtonville. as simple as that. the fact that there is nearly always a spot there makes it very appealing – perhaps that is defined as over-capacity by the development wonks, but it’s a big reason why i patronize the newtonville shops. the thought of going underground into a mixed use parking garage on a weekend or late afternoon/evening is pretty unappealing. i expect existing businesses will suffer considerably if the proposed developments proceed.
I think that Mike Striar has frequently mentioned using the air rights over the pike. That seems like a great place for a parking deck, no?!?
What are we talking about Zip Car here for? Let zip car go rent a garage down Washington Street. Do we envision them as a prime tenant here ? Will they have skin in the game ? Which developer is backed by Zip Car ?
Dennis,
Indeed deck over the turnpike, provide parking there, maybe even a new Post Office with it. Add all you can dream up, and knit the two halves of Newtonville back together with a new Village Center !
An Austin Street apartment block as the genesis for a Village Center ? Hardly !
Well capacity should be utilized to about 85% of what is available. This makes sure folks like yourself can almost always find a spot without driving around or going somewhere else. One typically makes sure this is achieved by dynamic pricing. SF is currently doing this with in-road sensors, and while parking cost per hour have gone up in a couple key locations at prime hours, many places have seen the cost go down. Lots of empty spots do no good for anybody.
Unfortunately without a better system for changing the price and evaluating usage in real time we won’t get the most efficient system, perhaps we should evaluate on-street costs vs lot costs with the goal of making sure there is space in front of the businesses for the quick trip.
Also from my understanding/viewing of the proposals is that all of the projects, even ones that have underground parking, have all of their public spots at ground level with easy/improved access to the businesses on Walnut. Underground is reserved for tenants or perhaps long term parkers (eg employees or employers) and/or potentially commuters. so parking underground to go to a business is very unlikely to happen.
Regarding something over the pike, I seem to remember some math being done on here about that. Basically the costs are astronomical and to put a low ROI like parking in the airspace will not happen. It might not even happen if they were to put lots of luxury condos in a development, the costs are very very high unfortunately…
To some that do not want anything on this site. a parking lot is a low return for the city, while tax income is not everything, it makes more financial sense for all of our taxes to facilitate and encourage multi-level mixed use developments in our village core rather than parking. There is still a need for parking but moving larger parking areas to the outside of the district or internal behind commercial properties is the best choice when working to get the most efficient use of the space. That said a 5 story building is a bit much, maybe even a 4 story. But if the current Masonic building were not there and that were proposed in this day and age would many be against that? I bet they would, heck even I would have reservations about it, yet now it is seen as an icon and a landmark for Newtonville. What we have now will not always be there, yes we can be reasonable about new development, but expecting things to stay the way they are is not realistic.
A majority in Newtonville would like or at least are ok with some type of reasonable development at Austin street. That makes sense. This provides opportunity to bring more housing to a walkable business district (which increases the likelihood that those residents will bike/walk/transit instead of drive everywhere creating more auto traffic) and it also means that there is a higher likelihood those residents will shop local and support our local businesses here in Newtonville. A balance should be struck between older more established residents and newer/younger folks like myself that have come to Newtonville for a variety of reasons. A good development can provide more opportunities for those looking to downsize to stay in the community and can provide more options for younger workers to live in a safe and accessible community; it can provide that balance by making sure there are ample public parking but also carshare options, opportunities to improve transit access, and better bike parking. It can do that by providing a variety of housing options and sizes at different price points. It can do that by providing additional good commercial space that complements what is currently available in the village.
Of course not to be forgotten is the required affordable housing. We are deficient, I may think a mandate at the state level is perhaps not the best way to deal with the issue but that is what it is, providing more housing in a good development can reduce the likelihood that monstrosities like what is proposed for Court will happen (I don’t mind a development at Court but whoa the developer is going a bit crazy, of course they will do the max to get the max profit and making it 40b is not helping…). If we get to our goal that will be a very good thing for all of the city, I think Austin is a critical part of this and a good way to make progress toward the state set goal.
i’m no urban planner and i’m not all that concerned with the return for the city. to me, this smells like newton corner. is there parking in newton corner? yes. do i ever go there? no.
so will the influx of new newtonville residents offset the loss of non-newtonville patrons if it less convenient?
given the issues we have trying to design and manage traffic flow at existing intersections, color me skeptical that the end state of this project improves newtonville.
The original Grover Cronin’s in Waltham was sold and a huge residential complex built along the river. This type of site was somewhat appropriate for housing. It has been successful but does not attract low income people. The rents there are very high. I do not believe the Austin St. site has the correct ingredients for dense housing. If we had an area like some of those developed in neighboring cities, then large projects close to villages would make sense. So far I haven’t seen anything that makes sense.
The Waltham Location has a HUGE public Parking Lot across the street. And it doesn’t have the density of shopping that Newtonville does. Plus there is other parking lots available – there is one behind the dollar store also.
Newtonville is very different in that Austin Street has a parking lot that is PRIVATE across the street. I will bet money that the supermarket will be hiring a Parking Attendant to make sure their parking lot is not abused. And does the Mayor think that Seniors going to the senior center are going to walk or take Public Transportation? Or what about the Parking that is used for NNHS? I wonder what is the real motivating factor about this for Warren?
Folks, let’s talk facts. Facts are our friends.
Fact: It is easy to figure out that building over the Mass Pike is a red herring and a really impossible idea. John has it COMPLETELY right. Even with high return leases like luxury housing, they can’t make it work in Boston. Columbus Center died a horrible slow death. Even if the State gives the air rights away, it doesn’t work in a lower rental market like Newton. The ROI is just way way off. If Boston can’t do it except in very limited circumstances in the back bay or the south end with gigantic towers, we can’t do it here. I encourage anyone pushing for this to actually look at the underwriting of any potential project and see that the costs of building the deck over the pike basically eliminate this as a possibility. Maybe in the distant future.. Not now.
Fact: Folks hate change. Keeping the parking lot is easy. We have it pretty good right now with parking, and folks don’t want to give that up.
Fact: Parking will be harder with any development, big or small. But let’s not pretend that all the parking is eliminated.
Fact: I have never been to Newtonville with Austin Street filled. Remember that it goes all the way to the donation truck and the church in the back. Can anyone confirms if the lots is ever filled?
Fact: Dynamic pricing would solve the parking issue. We still have lots of capacity even if Austin Street completely goes away. There are lots behind each building, there is parking along washington street that is under utilized. This parking is less desirable and less easy.
Fact: Certain tenants are using more of the parking than others. The restaurants and especially the yoga studio use far more than the typical tenant. Those large users can help educate their patrons regarding the various options for parking.
Fact: If done correctly, a development can preserve 85 units of parking or more, bring more residents to the village, and give the village a pot of money to use on village improvements.
As for folks from other villages complaining that this development will make it harder to run errands in Newtonville, I think I’m far less concerned for you than anything else. We live here, we walk here, we commute here. I think the new residents and a revitalized village is more important than you being able to run into CVS. Do I still want adequate parking? Do I care if you don’t have a parking space 100% of the time, but only 85% of the time? No.
There is the old joke, it became so popular no one goes there anymore…. I think the folks worried about the parking, especially from other villages are somewhat crying wolf.
fig newtonville,
Which developer are you working for ? What’s your skin in the game?
What do you foresee happening in the distant future that might allow an air rights project to happen then, that prohibits it from happening today ?
Have you cleared your opinions with those existing commercial ventures you want to eliminate capacity or park behind? The whole parking discussion is nothing but a smokescreen to distract folks from the idea of not building anything here now.
PS,
The “Red Herring” here in the Newtonville Village Center is the Austin Street Housing Block ! That is the real distraction from the possibility of the reunification of North and South Newtonville now !
blue:
As you are rather new here….
I’ve been posting on this site since its inception, and I LIVE in Newtonville. That’s a pretty long term play for representing a developer or having an agenda. My handle has been Fignewtonville since Greg was at the Tab. Others can attest to that. I don’t work for the city and I have no ax to grind here. All I care about is my local village. And Fig Newton’s apparently.
As for the air rights, frankly, I DON’T see anything in the future that will make it cheaper or more likely to happen. Perhaps the price of steel will suddenly drop with the discovery of a new material for building. Perhaps Boston rents will get so expensive that the entire pike will open up and deals will make financial sense. Perhaps I’ll lose 50 pounds and wake up looking like Brad Pitt tomorrow. All these events are equally unlikely Blue.
I’d love north and south newtonville to be unified. It would take millions of dollars of city money and the involvement of the Commonwealth, as well as such huge buildings that everyone in the village would object. I’m sorry, but that is just the facts. If you do a google search for Columbus Center or the Rosenthal project near Fenway you’ll start to understand the difficulties.
My ideal Austin Street project is NONE of the 5. But I’m a big believer in not letting the hypothetical perfect be the enemy of the practical good. A redeveloped Austin Street can be combined with a renovated Walnut Street to change the village center for the better. The parking can be worked out. It won’t be perfect or the same as before, but I believe the overall look and feel of the village will improve, it will be more walkable, with more outdoor dining in the warmer months and more activity at night. The trade-offs are parking issues and traffic. Nothing is perfect, and we can each make our own decisions as to what we want to support. And I’ll be attending the various meetings like always to try and improve the end result as much as possible. Hopefully you will too Blue, like Dan F. and John and Greg and others already have.
Just a quick note to confirm that fignewtonville is as genuine as the cookie itself. Not as old but hardly a new arrival.
And I share, fig’s basic perspective.
Considering some the hysteria surrounding this issue you’d think we we’re talking about draining and building over Bullough’s Pond, not on the site of an eyesore parking lot.
Fig – I’m a former N’ville resident from the days when there were a many interesting shops in the village. By the time we moved, it had become a place to run errands, even for village residents. Unless of course, you were obsessed with your nails – then it’s heavenly place to live and visit.
We then moved to another village that’s supposed to be “mine”, but I rarely go there because frankly, it’s kind of boring. In my mind, a revitalized N’ville would draw people from the entire city to it – a place to walk, stop into a cafe, do some errands, sit with friends outside in good weather, go to some drop-in shops.
Newton Highlands should be a model for a revitalized village. It’s my favorite village because it’s walkable, has some interesting drop-in shops and places to get a bite to eat or dine. The parking is limited but it certainly doesn’t stop people from going there. Think Bread and Chocolate, Marcie and Bea’s, Rox Cafe, a gently used clothing store, a high quality craft shop, O’Hara’s and two other restaurants that I can’t name off the top of my head, the Hyde Community Center, a beautiful garden with benches, a sakting rink in the winter – and one nail salon and one bank. A huge shout out to John Rice and the Highlands Area Council who haven’t allowed obstacles from turning the Highlands around. The same can happen to N’ville.
Since most Newtonville residents prefer something 3 stories or less, and some prefer no building, there is defintely a disconnect between what the city wants, what developers have proposed, and what the people want. It’s not even fair to ask developers to shrink their proposals at this point. (Although it’s questionable if the city intends to do that once they receive community input after a developer is chosen.) If the city wants to appear to have any integrity on this issue, the current RFP should be cancelled.
Jane – I believe there’s more than one nail salon in the Highlands and I know there are way too many hair salons. Still, I agree it’s a wonderful village.
mgwa – When the salons and banks don’t dominate a village, as they do in N’ville, you tend to focus on the more interesting aspects, so I haven’t actually counted salons or banks in the Highlands. It isn’t my “home” village, but I do know I go there a lot because it’s has a variety of shops, and some nice sitting around spaces. It’s definitely worth walking a few blocks to get there.
I focus on them because it’s my home village and has lost a lot of the shops I liked over the past couple of decades, often replaced by yet another salon or expensive clothing store.
Greg, I understand you are enthusiastic about an Austin St. project. Perhaps the city should sell the site in Newton Highlands where the original elementary school stands to a developer. The adjacent parkland is only used sporadically and would be potentially a great site for housing with its proximity to public transportation.
How would the community react to that plan?
If better use of land for housing is the issue for Newton then every village should propose a plan not just Newtonville.
Colleen: You’re comparing replacing green space that is used by Little League, offers ice skating all winter, hosts free movies and concerts all summer, has one of the city’s nicest flower gardens, has a heavily used playground, hosts the annual Taiwan Day and other festivals and is already adjacent to public housing with replacing a parking lot?
mgwa – I don’t live in the Highlands, but tend to go there a lot because there’s a more going on. The other village I tend to frequent is Nonantum – for the same reason. If a village depends on only the residents who live in it to use it, then it severely limits its economic vitality. For every dollar I spend in “my” village, I probably spend $25 in the Highlands, Nonatum, and N’ville.
Greg, I know how valuable the open space is to your community. The Austin St. site could be developed for the same purpose in Newtonville. Set aside some parking then plant trees, flower beds and build areas for benches and public gatherings. This would draw pedestrians to the area and would have a calming influence on life in the village.
A dense housing project is not what our village needs. I’m in favor of more housing but not in the village center. Newtonville has the old Claflin school and the original Christian Science church both have been converted to housing. That is our contribution to increased housing. We need open space for people to relax.
Few other Newton villages would welcome a huge new residential/commercial building in the heart of their town.
Jane, Newtonville recently has seen a real revival. Cook is awesome. Brewer’s Coalition is a good sports bar and is open late. We had Rox and Bread and Chocolate before Newton Highlands. We’ve got a cupcake and frozen yogurt, Ahi for Sushi, and the typical subway/dunkin/starbucks. We also have PaintBar, the new burritos place (which is very good), and a great bread bakery. We also have some unique shops along washington street, a great camera store, etc.
Seriously, Newtonville is the bee’s knees. I think it can be better with more open spaces as well. But I think we can figure out a better use for the parking lot. And Shaws, but that is another story…
Actually, both the old and the new Hyde Schools were redeveloped as housing. According to the Assessor’s Database, the Old Hyde School (72 Lincoln Street) is 24 condominiums and the new Hyde School (82 Lincoln Street) is owned by the Newton Housing Authority, and has 14 affordable housing units. The Newton Highlands Community Center owns the former school gymnasium (90 Lincoln Street). I wasn’t around, but I am sure one of the longtime Newton residents on Village 14 can fill us all in on how Newton Highlands reacted. But, apparently, the Highlands is a happening place.
I’ve only lived in the Highlands for 5 years or so but my neighbor tells me that she was on the Save Our Hyde committee back in the 80s and there was a significant amount of uproar in the community. Keep Bowen Goin’ was more successful.
By the way I believe there are only 19 condos in the Old Hyde. The city should buy those buildings back and reconfigure as classrooms. The assessed value of the condos is $7.7 million. There are a lot of kids that would be able to walk to school, including my own. But that’s a whole other thread.
This feels like a historic moment… fignewtonville coined Newtonville as the “Bees Knees”. I’m seeing merchandizing — mugs at Starbucks, shirts at Rox — branding opportunities — a “Newtonville Bees Knees” honey and candle shop! (with valet parking…)
I’d like to claim for Upper Falls any use of Hoss sounds, including Whinny, Nay and/or snort. And of course –Upper Falls, the Hoss’s Thunder!
Two other housing developments in Newtonville are Cabot Village and the Claflin School built in the 1950s which was redeveloped in the 1980s. So many schools in Newton were closed and converted to housing. What were the school authorities thinking? At least Carr school was never sold but rather leased during its underuse. The community around Carr was able to successfully lobby for a lease rather than a sale process.
To further Jane’s point, newtonville folks should be darn sure that the bulk of the clientele is local folks before they impact parking and ease of access. Otherwise, it’s a train wreck the minute construction starts.