There’s a public hearing at Newton City Hall at 7 p.m. tonight that’s the result of a citizen petition to halt the proposed sale of the Austin Street parking lot to a developer who has yet to be selected. Feel free to share your comments, before, during or after here.
Austin Street open thread
by Greg Reibman | Mar 25, 2014 | Newton | 93 comments
I listened to some of the first speakers opposed to the poorly conceived development. These speakers made very logical points against this dense housing in a busy village center. Ruth Anne Fuller asked several times just why/how a dense structure would revitalize a village center.
I thought it was a bit repetitive. At some point, it just came down to parking, opposing any development, and starting the process over. I was disappointed in the arguments.
I hope the city sees the bigger picture, especially after this meeting, and continues the development process. It needs to maximize the use of the property and put the money back into the village.
I was the last scheduled, though unprepared speaker (made a 45 second statement in support of the project). During the first part of the hearing, the opponents of any project spoke, and the supporters spoke during the latter part. While I’d say it was a well attended public hearing, the attendance wasn’t overwhelming. It certainly wasn’t hard to find a seat, and I arrived just as the hearing was about to begin. By 9:00, about half the people had left and the hearing went on for another hour. If you really feel strongly about your position on an issue, then you stay to the bitter end. It may be a pain in the neck, but if it’s important to you, then you stay.
I was most struck by two things:
-Many people didn’t know the format of a public hearing – that you get 3 minutes to speak, that the Aldermen don’t answer questions or respond to comments, and that it’s inappropriate to respond positively or negatively to a speaker. The Chair of the committee was VERY clear about the format at the beginning of the hearing and had to repeat the guidelines at a number of points during the hearing, yet a number of people insisted upon speaking beyond the 3 minute limit.
-People on both sides of the issue spoke well and were measured in their tone.
Fignewtonville,
The cities big picture is their (the planning department and it’s affiliated planners and real estate interests ) investment in this project. They are all invested in one form or another. The Mayors people, planning department etc. have spent a great deal of misguided time and effort here,.. and they have been, and are being paid for their efforts. No designer likes having their projects shot down, but it happens all the time and for any number of reasons. The developers and affiliated planners, political appointees etc are speculators with a great deal to gain should they prevail. Those supporters from the citizenry who have no skin in the game but for their well intentioned support of affordable housing etc. are like football fans who want to see their team win. The same can be said for those aldermen who are in support of Austin Street. They presumably have no dog in the fight either except that they are out on the field playing the game. They want to win no matter what their constituents say or feel. They are enjoying the power and are reluctant to give it up to the democratic process. ” if you don’t like what I am doing / saying / voting, don’t vote for me in the next election.”
And thats a direct quote from a recent public meeting. I guess that’s one way to look at the democratic process.
The facts of the matter are that this project is flawed in any number of ways and they were offered in great detail at this evenings hearing. From the ownership of the property, to parking studies, to architectural design ( and I would love to get into that with you ), to urban design issues and considerations, etc etc etc .
The entire Newtonville Village planning effort needs fresh ideas, imagination, and rethinking and it should not start with a project on Austin Street. That should be the end.
Start with a big idea, a holistic attitude,.. what was Newtonville ? What does Newtonville want to be ? Imagine !
This project was brought forward by the three Alderman that were on the Board last year. They run unopposed each year and that is why it dosen’t matter what residents want. Residents of Newtonville start now and pick a person or persons to run for Alderman as that is the only way yoou are going to be heard.
It sounds like Newtonville wants to be a parking lot. So does Newton Centre. Imagine, indeed!
@Adam: As someone said to me last night: “In the South people cling to their bibles and their guns. In Newton we cling to our parking lots.”
It was unfortunate that last night most of the speakers opposed to the project either didn’t know — or declined to acknowledge — that any project on the site would be required to provide more than 80 parking spots on the site.
Attendees also didn’t seem to realize that once a developer is selected, the real negotiations and deliberations over how many spots above that minimum there would be (as well as many other details) begin.
Finally, it was unfortunate that one of the leaders of those opposed to this project felt it was necessary to suggest that supporters were all in the pocket of the developers, connected to big business, lobbyists or somehow stood to gain financially from this project. Good people can and should be able to disagree over a project and how our community benefits or is harmed.
West Newton has insufficient parking and the businesses there barely make ends meet. If this Austin St. project were to proceed, the village would have no parking lot for 12 to 24 months. That would be a terrible situation for shoppers particularly at peak shopping times and bad weather. It could mean the end of some of the businesses, i.e. Starbucks right next door.
@Colleen: I don’t think we can conclusively say that the challenge in West Newton is the lack of parking. For example, perhaps it’s a lack of the right mix of businesses. Perhaps it’s the long walk from one end of the business district to the other, separated by a very busy Washington Street. Perhaps it’s competition from Waltham, etc. Most likely, it’s some combination.
I live close to W.N.S. and seldom go there because parking is very difficult. The post office parking was always a problem. The theatre struggled for lack of parking. I travel daily to N’ville because the parking is far superior to other villages and shopping is more convenient.
@Colleen: I live on the other side of the city and often go to W.N.S. because it’s home to a wonderful movie theater, Blue Ribbon BBQ and lots more. I’ve never not gone there out of fear of not finding a parking space but maybe that’s because the spot I find is the one you aren’t using!
@Colleen, there is a parking problem in West Newton, but that is in part because some of the businesses, particularly the restaurants, are doing very well. The main parking problems in West Newton, as in Auburndale and elsewhere, were exacerbated by the MBTA’s decision a couple of years ago to dramatically raise the parking fees for the commuter parking lots located across from Keltic Krust and inside the Exit 16 off ramp loop, which have a combined total of well over 200 spaces. As a result, commuters often take up all of the free spaces in and around the village center. Some of the private owners of parking lots have taken to towing cars parked in spaces reserved for their customers. Consequently, many commuters now park on the narrow residential side streets in and around West Newton, which leads to public safety issues when emergency vehicles cannot fit between cars parked on both sides of the street. The transportation director has been working on a parking management plan, as well as negotiating with the MBTA to allow the city to manage their commuter parking lots. But it takes time.
Thanks for patronizing West Newton, Greg. I live a little over a half mile away from the village center, so I usually walk to there to go to a movie, buy postage stamps, grab some coffee, go to the grocery store, go to church, get on the MBTA commuter rail or bus, go to the pharmacy, meet with constituents at one of the cafes or restaurants, dine with family and friends, or do take out. It really is a great place to visit and a very walkable village. In fact, one of the only things I bring my car to West Newton for is to get gas at the filling station. Happily, the Board of Aldermen recently approved special permits for two transit-oriented, mixed use residential/retail buildings that will add vitality to the village center while providing housing–including affordable housing–for people who want to live near a village center and public transportation.
@Greg: And so, we’re stuck in a cycle where planners study a variety of issues including parking, the city makes proposals for underutilized properties to meet Newton’s stated long-range plans, citizens cry foul and charge conspiracies despite years of public process, newspaper reports and blog articles, and properties are left to “think” for themselves.
Sounds like status quo to me, especially as long as citizens think that an endless supply of free parking is a vision for our village centers.
It’s all about density ! The more people we have living in Newton, the more crowded things will get, the harder it will be to get parking. You build apartments, larger houses, you get more people, and you get more cars. Cars mean traffic, parking issues, pedestrian / automobile conflicts, bicycle dangers. You get over crowded schools, you get a loss of trees, green space diminishes with asphalt paving and in general there is a derogation of the original character of the city. Why is this so hard for some to see? Why did we move here ? You could live in Boston, pay less taxes, and send your kids to private schools. The one big difference is the environment.
Ted,
What is the size and location of the 2 new residential/retail buildings? Was city land sold first to enable the development?
Imagine yourself living at Austin Street in a little apartment at $4000 a month and you go to the 5th floor window of your unit and look out at your neighborhood. You have a wonderful view of the turnpike with cars and trucks whizzing by. Looking down you see a parking lot stuffed with cars of people shopping at Shaws. And Shaws in all its glory, it’s broad flat white rubber membrane roof festooned with all of its fascinating air conditioning condensers, vent pipes all stretched out before you. Look up the street to the traffic jamb at the corner of Walnut street. Car horns blaring, pedestrians jumping away from irate drivers trying to get home. Watch those pedestrians walking into Starbucks oh yes pretty Starbucks with its own roof top mechanical systems at work.
Then you need to make a trip to Costco so you go to your elevator, wait for forever, why didn’t they put in more than just one. And you descend into a dark basement parking garage, find your car which you can barely squeeze into because the developer had to pack them all in. You find your way up the ramp, past the retail stores service areas, around all those 85 public parking spots, all jammed by the way, cause its saturday and everybody is out shopping, and finally you get out to the street to join the traffic tangle you had hoped to avoid while watching from your perch high above it all. And you ask yourself,.. ” How good is this ?” “Ain’t Newton wonderful ? “
blueprint –
Alternatively, imagine yourself living in a three or four bedroom colonial in Newtonville; your children are grown; you’re starting to think about retirement; your house is getting to be too much to maintain; you’d really like to simplify your lifestyle — maybe get rid of a car, definitely get rid of a lot of the stuff you’ve accumulated over the years. You love Newton. Maybe you grew up here, maybe you moved here when you bought your first house. Your kids went through the schools, you feel very rooted in the community. This is your home. So, where do you go? A smaller house costs the same as your house. Don’t want to do that. You need an apartment or condo near a village center, near public transportation. But that is in very short supply in Newton. So, you sell your house to a family with kids who will enter the schools, and you leave Newton.
But there are plenty of places to park if you want to come back and visit.
@Colleen: Respectively, the building on Cherry Street will be 3 stories, with 13 residential units (including 3 affordable units) and one retail unit on 13,600 s.f., and the building on the corner of Border and Elm will be 3 stories, with 4 residential units, and 3 retail units on a little over 10,000 s.f. The Cherry Street building will be mostly 1-2 bedroom apartments with around 1000 s.f. each. The Elm and Border units will be larger. On site parking will be limited to more or less one parking space per unit.
By comparison, the Austin Street parking lot is 74,500 s.f.
@Colleen, I forgot to mention that both lots in West Newton are privately owned. The Cherry Street lot is located on the former NCSC Teen Center property and the Elm and Border lot used to be a car repair shop. Both are close to public transportation and many amenities in West Newton.
blueprintbill — If you’re not liking the view, you really should be supporting a new development. The area in terms of retail looks like time stopped circa 1959. It will look worse if Shaws pulls out because the liquor commission handed Wegman’s a liquor license at the cost of Shaw’s corp. Built it and they shall come (and improve)
It’s all about density, in our village centers, near public transit. Building something on a parking lot means a net loss of zero trees, perhaps a slight gain with the right streetscape. The right type of housing, such as units targeting retirees, need not burden the schools, but mixed with commercial development could bring in much needed revenue to fund our schools. Imagine living at Austin street and being able to walk across the street for your groceries instead of driving to Costco. Imagine reducing car trips, owning only a single vehicle or using zipcars under your building, or even living car free with rapid transit only a few hundred feet away. Public transportation is also about density.
Or, imagine an underutilized, unsightly parking lot, an ugly streetscape, and a lost opportunity. Not too hard to imagine that.
My biggest problem with the city sponsored/advocated density development is the lack of data behind these positions. Where are the studies showing seniors and young professionals want these apartments?
When I wrote to one prominent Newton developer, SEB LLC, about data to support his contention about the need for living spaces for seniors looking to downsize and young professionals wanting to live in Newton, he wrote the following back to me “we do not have any formal studies and cannot make any guarantees”.
So much for data-driven decision making by developers.
I also wrote to Nancy Hyde, Newton’s Economic Development Director, to inquire about the studies being used by the city to develop plans for the creation of housing designed for downsizing seniors. Ms Hyde replied to me that “Certainly not all seniors are downsizing, but the City is hearing from people who desire alternatives to staying in their large family homes.”
So again, no formal studies. Simply statements from an unknown number of seniors who happen to own large family homes they no longer want. BTW, I would like to point out that not all of we Newton seniors have large family homes. Many of us have quite modest homes that we had planned to ‘age in place’ in’ as the oft-quoted Newton Comprehensive Plan calls for. As an aside, I would point out that there are many parts of the NCP that the density proponents avoid mentioning.
It is hard to believe that major changes to village centers and local neighborhoods are the result of anecdotal stories but that appears to be all that there is at this time.
We can all provide anecdotes that support our goals. I personally haven’t heard from any young professionals who are desperate to move to Newton so they can take the MBTA to work. The ones that I know can’t take the MBTA to where they work even if they wanted to. They work in Cambridge or out on Route 128 and then, after hours, they socialize in Boston until after the T shuts down.
As for seniors, the ones that I know who have ‘downsized’ have moved to Cambridge and Boston, the Cape or Florida or where their grandchildren live. None have mentioned Newtonville Square.
Most retired people would spend triple for a new apartment in N’ville than what it costs them to live now in their homes.
Lasell Village offers a better alternative.
Bob,
Working in the Longwood Medical Area, I know many young couples who want to live on the Green Line, many of whom have moved to Newton for precisely that reason. I know when I was house hunting, being on the T while also easily accessible to 128 were important factors.
And now you’re hearing from someone who’d like to age in Newton but will need to move to a 1-level place sometime in the near future due to arthritis. I’d love to be able to stay in my neighborhood, even if the cost for a condo turned out to be almost the same as what I could get for my small place.
Most retired people would spend triple for a new apartment in N’ville than what it costs them to live now in their homes.
Colleen – that’s just not correct. Few houses in Newton will sell for less than an apartment costs. I know, because I’ve checked out apartment costs in Newton and Brookline. If you sell a house and then use the proceeds to buy an apartment, at worst you may break even. In addition, the maintenance costs are much less – heating, repairs, mowing, etc.
mgwa
You make my point that all we have is anecdotal stories not formal studies.
mgwa
Charles River Landing (at the edge of the New England Industrial Park in Needham). 1 bedroom: from $2,412/mo; 2 bedrooms: from $3,946/mo.
Avalon at Newton Highlands: 1 bedroom: from $2,300/mo; 2 bedrooms: from $2,605/mo; 3 bedrooms from $3,450/mo.
Avalon at Chestnut Hill: 1 bedroom: from $2,200/mo; 2 bedrooms: from $2,540/mo; 3 bedrooms from $4,185/mo.
Avalon at Station 250 in Dedham: 1 bedroom: from $1,740/mo; 2 bedrooms: from $2,360/mo;
These are way more than our current mortgage. And we would want/need 2 bedrooms.
Bob – you said you didn’t know of any. I said I did. I wasn’t saying this was comprehensive data, just counter-examples.
I was also comparing costs of owning, not owning vs. renting.
mgwa
” I wasn’t saying this was comprehensive data, just counter-examples.”
My point exactly. I don’t see how you make policy in Newton (or anywhere) without data. Personal stories are too flimsy to support such far reaching decisions.
“In addition, the maintenance costs are much less – heating, repairs, mowing, etc.”
If I buy a condo, I have many of these expenses. If I rent, I don’t have them necessarily.
I completely agree that we need data. I make my living working with data and greatly value it. I thought you were saying those people didn’t exist – apologies if I was misunderstanding you.
And I wasn’t saying that condo owners don’t have those costs at all, just that they’re less (heating an apartment tends to be much less than heating a house) and are often taken care of with condo fees. Renters have those costs too, folded into their rent (i.e., the landlord includes the cost of heat, water, maintenance, etc. in calculating the rent).
If you oppose the project, now is the time to be writing letters and making phone calls. Here’s the letter I just sent off to the Aldermen and Mayor.
Dear Aldermen,
I write to support Board Item #47-14 filed by SARAH QUIGLEY et al., on
Feb. 3, 2014, re. the Austin Street public parking lot, in all it’s regards.
As a resident of Newton, living near the property (130 Austin Street),
I’ve watched this process unfold with increasing trepidation – watching
a development process spiral way out of control.
I specifically submit that:
1. The sale of City property, on general principles, should be
considered only as a last resort. The City has all too many times sold
properties only to regret doing so at a later date. I see no compelling
reason to declare the Austin Street parking lot as surplus, and many
reasons not to do so (not the least of which is its active use as a
parking lot).
2. The process by which the the property was declared surplus, rezoned,
put out for bid, and bids reviewed appears to suffer from multiple,
fundamental flaws.
– It appears that the entire process has been driven, from day one, by a
single agenda item, “affordable housing” and a single model, private
development. I see little evidence that alternate uses, including that
of retention as a parking lot, or development of public facilities were
ever seriously considered. Neither the case for declaring the property
surplus, nor that the current development process is the best use of the
property, have been made.
– The rezoning appears to be an instance of “spot zoning,” and as we
heard at last night’s hearing, the legality of such is in serious
question, and opens the City to legal liability.
– The timing of the process is absurd – notably the notion of making an
award to a developer in advance of completing a traffic study now underway.
– The process by which bids were reviewed, is itself, questionable.
Based on many years of involvement in various public procurements, the
notion that bids that do not meet “minimum qualifications” have been
allowed to remain in contention strikes me as highly questionable, if
not illegal.
– Many substantive issues – notably parking, traffic, costs imposed on
the City to provide services – have been left to be addressed at some
later stage of the process. History tells us to be extremely wary of
such promises.
– It is far from clear that any of the current proposals truly address
the avowed public benefit of the project – i.e., “affordable housing.”
(To my mind, the proponents of the project have a very odd definition of
what constitutes “affordable’).
3. Circumstances have significantly changed from the time the process
started. If anything, the City needs more parking, not less, and the
impacts of the proposed development will be far less positive, and far
more negative, than envisioned earlier in the process.
4. We have plenty of evidence from both Newton Corner and West Newton of
likely negative impacts – in the former case, empty property and the
“circle of death,” in the later, a commercial area where nobody can park.
5. There is strong resistance to the project, both from neighborhood
residents and businesses (as evidenced by recent surveys), and from
other parts of the City where ripple effects on traffic and ability to
access Newtonville businesses, will be felt. At last night’s public
hearing, the sentiment was overwhelmingly against continuation of the
project, as currently conceived. Those that spoke in favor of the
project appeared to do so from either a)personal involvement and
investment in the process, and/or b)a commitment to “affordable
housing,” however minimal, and without any attention to any other
aspects or impacts of the project.
For all of these reasons, I urge you to act affirmatively on the
petition. Moving forward with surplussing, rezoning, and development of
the Austin Street property, as currently constituted, would be a serious
mistake, with dire consequences for the village of Newtonville. I urge
to to derail this train before it leaves the station.
Sincerely,
Miles R. Fidelman
130 Austin Street, Newtonville MA
Why are people so against having a parking lot? I think it is better for business when people know they can park. I don’t go places where I know I’ll have to drive around looking for a parking spot. I shop in Newton Centre and Newtonville because both have convenient parking lots.
Bravo Miles Fidelman,
The place to start with Newtonville is with a holistic look at the village as a total entity. How can the village be put back together after being cleaved by the turnpike. What might that look like, what might that entail in terms of commercial activity, housing, MBTA access, green space, parking etc. Dust off the Sasaki Charette ( the Planning department even refers to it once in a while ) and get serious about an investment that will allow market forces to fill in the empty spaces. You do not start an improvement to a village with a rental apartment block on the only free space in the village and then hope you will get a positive result.
Does anybody actually know where to find a copy of the Sasaki Charette’s output? I’ve been googling and going through the City web site. All I can find are oblique references to it, and some of the startup slides – nothing about the detailed output. What little I did find focused on reconnecting the pieces of Newtonville split by the Mass Pike – by things like building more stuff on top of the air rights.
@Ted H-M – The two developments which you mention in West Newton are I believe two 2 adjoining vacant lots on the corner of Elm and Border previously discussed at
http://village14.com/newton-ma/2013/08/elm-border-streets-vacant-lot-in-a-great-location/
and 429 Cherry St. In BOTH these cases the proposed developments are 3 stories in height so appear to fit reasonably well with the surrounding buildings.
What is being proposed for Austin St is 5 stories which will completely dominate the village and cast massively long shadows on the abutting properties.
What also concerns me in many of these special permit cases is the waiver of parking. In the case of 429 Cherry St, I believe 11 parking bays were waived leaving the property with 18. That’s nearly a 40% reduction from what it aught to be. This might be okay for this location because of the existence of the public parking lot straddling these two roads, but I know that it’s already tough to find parking in that lot and the excess already flows onto the side streets – Webster for example. Adequate parking is critical for the rest of us people who are not in walking distance to easily visit and utilize the village centers.
@Lassy – exactly. Nobody wants to drive around for 10 minutes looking for parking just to run into a bakery to get one’s morning coffee and muffin. BTW, don’t get too used to the Newton Center parking lot either. I’ve heard plans to turn that into a huge development as well.
I guess people read this thing. Thanks to Sarah Quigley for pointing me to http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/planning/reports/charette.asp
I just went through it. An interesting read. Of particular note is that the charette’s recommendations were silent about Austin St. – focusing on the Mass Pike, Walnut St. and Washington St. The one slide I saw with the Austin St. lot on it, showed it as …… parking. Hmmm….
Just a dumb thought, but compared to ALL of the current proposals, wouldn’t we be better served by a simple, City-owned project, along the lines of:
– a 2-level parking structure on the back of the current lot (like the Waltham public lot behind the Landmark Cinema) – simple, open, easy access, high visibility for safety
– put a 2-level structure in front of it – a block of retail space (put some downward pressure on Walnut street rents), maybe some condo/rental units on the 2nd story (traditional village/city model of residences over businesses)
Now that’s just off the top of my head, but I can’t see that anyone has even thought along those lines, anywhere during the process.
Miles – Are you sure parking is an issue at the circle of fender benders? There is a big parking lot on the Southside behind the shops on Centre St that always seems half empty. Maybe the problem is parking lot location and poor walkability between parking and shops and homes and shops.
What is the difference between a mall and a village center? I’d say malls are designed for people from miles away, village centers for villagers. Malls need parking for every shopper. Does anyone know how many people drive versus walking, biking or using mass transit in our most vibrant village centers (like Newton Highlands)? Genuine question I don’t know.
Lucia – good points. And good questions. Sort of begs for more data. One thing about parking, though – it’s not just for shoppers, it’s for employees.
Lucia –
If it hasn’t been done already, that sounds like an excellent project for the Newtonville and/or Highlands Area Council to undertake – a survey of customers at a few distinct times during the week – i.e. weekday, weekend, evening
What drives me round the bend is that all this village development is being pushed in the name of “smart growth” (a meaningless p.r. buzzword if ever there was one). Well, those of us who live near the village centers are already leading the smart growth lifestyle, with access to the T or commuter rail if it’s going where we’re headed, and the ability to do at least some of our errands on foot and to walk to restaurants, parks, etc. But it’s that lifestyle and the survival of the businesses and amenities which make it possible that are being threatened with years of disruption leading to an outcome distinguished largely by the murkiness of its depiction. In all the pro-devlopment cheerleading I keep hearing that haunting refrain from the Vietnam era: destroying the village to save it.
For the most part this has been a good thread, but I do take issue with a few concepts expressed herein. Will the new buildings at 5 stories REALLY cast horrible shadows? Does the 5 story building on Walnut Street cast similar horrible shadows? The proposals were designed to fit into the overall streetscape, and the church behind the building and the brick Mason building on the corner are both relatively tall. I agree that some of the plans do not contain a large enough set-back for the site in my view, but we can work on that once a proposal is picked.
Can folks please acknowledge that ALL projects have AT LEAST 85 parking spaces. We aren’t wiping out the full parking lot.
For those who are proposing theatres, community centers, public uses and public parking garages, let’s get down to brass tacks. How do you propose to pay for these things? One of the reasons the projects go “big” is that it allows you to do more with the site, or pay more back to the city.
It is extremely rare for that parking lot to be anywhere close to full. Yes, with any new project it will get more difficult to find parking in Newtonville. But Newtonville does have a lot of parking, some of it underused. I think working with the smaller lots to make them metered, putting meters on the side streets, or encouraging employees to park away from the commercial areas (by encouraging business owners to push their employees to do so) will also help the parking issue. And the businesses will benefit from many new residents living close to enough to run downstairs to CVS/coffee/bakery.
I do think that loss of parking during construction is a problem. But again, let’s be exact. I would bet that parking loss can be minimized to a short time from of 8 months or less.
No one said this process was going to be easy. But in the long run I truly believe it helps the village to have that parking lot put to a better use. And while there are certainly vocal oppoents, there are equally strong supporters as well.
Miles ,
Glad you were able to locate the Sasaki Charette. You could take your concept for Austin Street ( 2 levels of parking behind 2 levels of retail / housing and set that down on a deck over the turnpike and connect north and south Newtonville back together, which is basically what Sasaki was suggesting. And behind that place the Post Office and its attendant parking. And accross Walnut Street, on the deck, build a proper MBTA entrance with an elevator for handicapped access, a little more 2 – 3 story retail / housing, and a village green in front of the converted ‘Church’,.. just for starters.
blueprintbill – yup, something that would be a start on a serious upgrade to our village center, a la some of the Charette concepts, would be great – unfortunately, NOTE of the current proposals are even a step in that direction
fignewtonville – so explain to me how selling off a scarce piece of needed land helps improve Newtonville – it seems to provide a one-time infusion of cash to the City, benefit whichever developer wins, and then lead to long term costs to the City (i.e., taxpayers) to provide services — you ask where the funds will come from to pay for public users; I ask, ‘where do the funds come to pay for the services to support a large development on the lot?’
Fignewtonville,
Re shadows from a 5 story bldg. 5 stories is 5 stories and shadows are going to be long, dark and cold from November to March and given the building footprint a lot more extensive than the much smaller masonic Lodge building. New York City tried for years to contain and deal with the shadow problem from highrise buildings with their infamous upper floor setback trick to no avail,.. and weren’t those buildings jems ?
And parking,…the planners are calling for a minimum of 85 replacement spots down from +/- 150 on an open obstacle free surface. Try and put 85 public spaces under a housing block of 80 to 100 units, behind Austin Street- side retail commercial spaces, between columns, elevator shafts, stairwells and attendant lobbys, next to commercial service areas, behind dumpsters, and potential basement parking ramps ( because all this parking wont be at surface level ) and you will have a mess at best and a disaster at worst for the public trying to get to commerce in the village center.
Density is the problem ! Too many cars, too many housing units in too tight a volume, too ambitious a city planning department, and too much do – goodism in the city in general.
blueprintbill says:
and which way is north?
Miles asks:
Um, property tax?
Fignewtonville, your idea of encouraging employees to park away from the commercial areas (by encouraging business owners to push their employees to do so) will make it harder to attract employees to the businesses you may wish to attract. Where would you suggest they park?
Village14 had a previous discussion on the economics of air-rights and development over the turnpike. It’s hard to see how 2 floors is going to cut it. Though this sort of multi-level development with mixed parking/housing/commercial was discussed by the Newton Centre Task Force as an ideal to replace what are essentially strip malls. Perhaps the same might apply to Walnut Street and Bram Way.
and how often are the 150 spaces in Austin Street full?
I do weekly counts of the cars in the Austin Street lot. There are 120+ cars parked there every weekend, and another couple dozen at least on the right side of the Shaws lot, meaning they are not going to Shaws (and if/when Shaws starts enforcing their lot, those cars will have to park elsewhere… most likely the Austin St lot).
The City is currently undertaking a professional parking study of the Austin lot AND the Shaws lot so we should soon have some better data in which to inform this discussion.
Adam suggests property taxes will fund the City’s costs of supporting a major development. I suggest that we are not California, where the price of new houses includes the capital cost of facilities improvements (build a house, the cost includes the cost of new police, fire, library, water, etc.). And we’re not Boston or Cambridge that have special powers to impose conditions on developers (and do). No.. we’re Newton, where we have a long history of developments that cost more than they return in property tax. (Might be different if we were talking City-owned property that brought in rents and parking fees.)
Interestingly, I just received an email from the Newtonville Area Council (also at http://hosted.verticalresponse.com/1335151/58c20231f2/577394241/20f6e0b59c/) that states, in part:
• Complete a downtown Newtonville traffic and parking study before (a) selection of a developer for the Austin St. public parking lot, and (b) implementation of the revitalization of Walnut St.
• Before selecting a bidder for the proposed development of the Austin St. parking lot, decide on criteria for the project. Include factors such as architectural design, public parking capacity, building scale, residential density, integration with current businesses, and community space. Make these criteria the conditions that a developer must meet.
I guess we’ll see if the Area Council really has any say or teeth, or whether this train will just keep on going down the street despite a rather large amount of opposition to its current form.
Developers are known to not comply with building regulations, as we have just witnessed on a recent route 9 project. How can we trust this process here in N’ville.
If a new structure is built , we will definitely need all the existing parking spots.
When Mayor David Cohen was asked how the city would pay for the new NNHS, he said through “new monies” that would come into the city coffers as a result of increased development. He may have been less than transparent about many issues, but he was completely open and honest about that one. What land did people think was going to be developed? Development throughout the city was in reality a done deal years ago.
Funny you should bring up North. Talk about a process gone wrong. A lot of us sat through ALL the various public meetings, and came away with the impression that the “Large Hybrid” was a done deal. Pretty much overnight, the Large Hybrid went into a late night committee meeting, and out came a new school. And not, the new school that was presented in the various public meetings – the one that only cost a few dollars more – but the incredibly expensive building we ended up with.
Don’t get me wrong, I actually like the building we ended up with (but not the cost), and I’ve been impressed by the execution (as opposed to the problems we had with South).
But the process was completely broken and back room – at the time, I went looking very, very hard, and could not find any report, decision, tradeoff, or anything. Just, one day it was “large hybrid,” and the next it was “brand new school.”
Hmmm…….
I don’t live in N’ville, but can empathize with the residents. The process just seems ass-backward!
Selling off an empty city owned plot without a master plan just seems irresponsible. (someone said it earlier – look at what happened when we sold school buildings).
I get it that Mayor wants to build affordable housing, but instead of giving price range for say bottom 25% of property value, misleads us using the average.
I personally would support this development, following some sort of master plan. There was a master plan for Needham Street. How come none for N’ville?
What if a parking strip – a narrower version of a travel plaza – were appended onto eastbound i90 near the proposed development? It would promote newtonville commerce from pike travellers but since the parking strip would have no lane connections to local streets it would bar pike traffic from spilling over into the village, only allowing the pedestrians into the village. It could also move western suburb park and riders off local streets to access the newtonville commuter rail via this “pike & park”. Also newtonville shop employees traveling from afar could use the pike and park rather than local streets and take up precious local parking.
The small travel plazas on the hutchinson/merritt parkways give a sense
of this. I’ve just never seen a travel plaza that connected to the local economy rather than to be an island.
Actually, Miles, you were at a handful of the meetings for that project. No more than two or three members of the public attended the close to hundreds of hours of meetings related to it, and that’s part of the problem with the democratic process. No one pays attention to what’s going on around them until the 11th hour. When the development of the Austin St. lot was first mentioned on the Tab blog in 2007, I asked if the neighbors had been informed and indicated they might not be happy with it. Only two people responded saying they had no problem with the development of the lot.
Whether you like how the NN project turned out or not is beside the point. Sandy Pooler, then CFO, informed the public at least 5 public meetings that the building would be funded through new monies that would come from development throughout the city, and no one objected.
My advice (if it’s not already happening) is that each Area Council assign one person who will be in charge of keeping track of the Friday Packet and the City News section of the home page of the City of Newton website.
Guys, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop using the Pike as the reason to halt all development in Newtonville. Building over the Pike will NOT work. Or at least, won’t work without a 15 story tower. You folks are objecting to 5 stories? Try 3 to 4 times that much. And for what use? Hotel?
The decks over the Pike are insanely expensive. Air rights are NOT controlled by Newton. Saving the parking garage because of some master plan only works if there are multiple lots to work with. Otherwise, we are just planning for…the Austin Street Lot. And that is all that is available.
I do think that Shaw’s will one day redevelop its own lot. I expect a large housing project, 5 stories or more, with parking on the first floors to connect to the Supermarket. I would even support it if they put first floor retail.
I would love Newtonville to be a completely connected village. But Newton Corner got reconnected, and look how that worked out. And Steel prices have increased 5 fold since then.
As for the shadows, the Mason lodge is actually a LARGE building. Deceptively large in fact. Walk the site and be surprised…
As for the parking estimate, Emily, I have counted cars each time I’m in Newtonville. It is much more full on the weekends. But it is also FREE on the weekends. I often park there for Shaw’s as well on the weekends. And I park there on Saturdays when I take the train or bus. And not to be too blunt, but 120 cars would have to be some serious rush hour parking, since I rarely got above 100 cars. Typically it was more like 60 actually. Brunch seems to bring out Newtonville folks though. As does the Yoga Studio. I’ve seen 20 cars exit the lot after a class gets out.
Anyway, deep breath folks. This project in any of its forms still has the potential to be good for the village. And folks generally support some sort of project on the site. So lets work together to get the best proposal possible (and they were evaluated by a terrific group of folks), and then adapt that proposal to address as many concerns as possible. Let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Fignewtonville,
Since we are both speaking anecdotally here, until you show me the financial ‘insanity’ of building over the pike, I’ll argue strenuously that to do so would be the place to start to reunify the two halves of the village. I doubt very much that a new bridge over the turnpike would be “insanely expensive “. I would doubt also, that a broad bridge ( a deck ) over the turnpike would be “insanely expensive”. And if we could build a deck over the pike, why couldn’t we add a 2-3 story building on a deck, without breaking the bank ? Sure if you build a 15 story hotel on a ‘deck’, as at Newton Corner, I’d grant you costs would rise exponentially. But some shops, a couple of levels of parking, a new Post Office, a new handicapped accessible MBTA connection, on relatively inexpensive artificial new ‘land’, in the form of a bridge deck,
would go a long way in offsetting the visual, environmental and commercially disadvantageous costs of a Newtonville Village forever broken.
And why this compulsion to urbanize Newtonville ?
Density is the problem not the solution to a suburban village center !
Small scale development, landscape, and intimacy of image should be the objective of any change to these streets. To advocate for other is to derogate the character of the experience of visiting here.
Newtonville already has a connector between Washington and Austin St. It’s the overpass bridge and it’s only a short walk from one side to the other. Why would you build another one? I’ve never understood why that walk is looked upon as a terrible burden or dividing the village.
Once again, the decision to build up Newtonville was made a number of years ago (before 2005 I think) because it was seen as the village in the city with the most access to public transportation (bus and commuter rail). I remember an Alderman telling me it was a conscious decision to do so in response to my question about why we were seeing so many condos springing up in the village.
Note that the comments about building over the pike trace back to the Planning Department citing the Sasaski charette – which was ALL about building over the pike. It left the parking lot alone.
Re. walking over the existing bridges – anybody try that in the winter? Care of the sidewalks is pretty bad.
Re. “the village in the city with the most access to public transportation” – all well and good until the MBTA drastically reduced rail and bus service. Fix that, with firm commitments – then let’s talk about transit-centric development. (Also note that Newton used to have streetcar lines all over the place. Most of those rights-of-way have long since had houses built on them.)
And the access to rail is only for the able-bodied. Those of us who can’t handle stairs are out of luck.
Jane,
It’s curious you continue to refer to Newtonville as a Village when what you seem to be advocating is the urbanization of the place. The city fathers and our planning department are mistakenly invested in urbanization, in Newtonville as represented in the completely out of scale 4 and 5 story housing blocks, that dwarf by at least 3 times the largest very beautiful Masonic Hall. If one wants to live in the city there are plenty of opportunities in Cambridge, Boston etc. Let Newton be Newton and not try to model it on some fantastical image that is not historically or physically relevant. We moved here for the green space, and verdant landscape we are beginning to lose sight of through out the city, and it’s time to start to insist on the repair of our Village centers and the maintenance of our ‘Garden City’. Fix our schools, and public bldgs., plant trees, repair our aging infrastructure and work at maintaining our way of life, not changing it.
So the concept of building a park over the pike had no feasibility study and in fact seems totally unviable and would leave even more paths poorly plowed in the winter, yet it left the Austin parking lot alone? What exactly does this prove?
Miles Fidelman continues:
Name one.
Adam, methinks you are being purposefully dense. I was simply pointing out that the Planning Dept periodically refers back to the Sasaski Charrette as part of its justification for developing on the Austin St. Parking lot – when, in fact, the Sasaski Charrette was all about linking the two sides of the Mass Pike and said nothing about the parking lot other than leaving it alone. What it proves is that the planning process that’s cited as justifying the project is an utter sham.
As to streetcar lines in Newtonville – you might take a trip to our historical museum sometime – they had a wonderful exhibit a few years back about how Newton was developed as a commuter suburb – complete with maps of the 12 or so streetcar lines that ran all over town. Most of those are long gone, and most of the land has been developed.
Miles, I haven’t read it carefully, but I see scenarios with a housing structure on the Austin Street lot. Granted, it does appear to be about building over the pike, which has no relevance in today’s discussion unless someone can disprove the obvious, that it’s not viable. The Charette has lots of other interesting background information worth citing.
And I’m well aware of the trolley lines. The number 12 is a bit high, but it probably numbered 6 or more. I’m asking you to name one case where a house was built on a right-of-way (most of the trolleys were not on right of way but on main streets, converted to bus service still in service in some form today)
Actually I can certainly prove it blueprintbill. Just Google Columbus center, pike deck and price and you’ll see the insane prices required. There are dozens of news articles over the past decade. As for the hotel over the pike, I doubt it wod be built today. The return on investment would be way off without massive public subsidy. And height.
As for the Masonic building it is a very tall structure for its floors as I the next door church next to the pike.
Adam – I point you toward http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/30778 – the recommendations from the Charrette. Yes, there’s some development on the parking lot – shown in Phase III – fairly late in the game.
My main point here is that – contrary to claims that the current project, and the associated spot zoning, is the results of a long master planning process – the reality is that there’s been haphazard planning, at best; and the current project is barely in line with it, if at all. It sure looks to me like this is really a case of bending the story to fit somebody’s agenda.
Re. the trolleys: It was more than 6, maybe not 12 – but I remember being blown away by a series of maps at the historic museum. You might take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1899_Massachusetts_electric_railways.jpg – which shows a bunch, but I believe trolley’s peaked a bit later, around 1913. Re. identifying a specific development on a trolley right-of-way — you could be right, but I remember examining some of the maps, maybe 3 years ago, and some of the very deep lots off Nevada St. come to mind as being developed late – and crossing a right-of-way. I’d have to spend some time pouring over historic records to back that up, though.
By the way folks – I sure wish people wouldn’t hide your identities and where you live. I live at 130 Austin St., a block from the proposed development – who are all of you people – what skin do you have in this game?
Actually, one of the main reasons I moved to Newton was because it was a city and did have an urban feel as well as beautiful green spaces, so it’s important to remember we all moved here for for different reasons. If the city began rezoning the city so that businesses encroached into the residential neighborhoods and green spaces, that would be one thing, but there’s nothing verdant about a run down parking lot.
On the other hand, about 4 years ago years ago, someone tried to turn a beautiful old Victorian house in a residentially zoned area along Walnut St. into a business, and about 60 people attended a Zoning Board hearing on the issue. This was a single family home built in a single family zoned area that had been taken over and changed into a business – an issue that should have outraged the residents of Newtonville. Instead, I was one of two people who spoke up against the project at that hearing. The aldermanic chamber was just about full, and all but one other person spoke in favor or allowing a single family home in Newtonville to be changed into a business. That’s urbanization. That’s taking away green spaces and changing the character of a village, and yet the vast majority of the people at that hearing supported it. Fortunately, the Zoning Board viewed the issue on its merits, rather than taking a head count at a hearing and the business was shut down.
Thee street car routes through the city were mainly succeeded by the MBTA bus lines like Route 59 between Needham and Watertown. Residences don’t run over it. They were built along it. As were public uses. High School kids from the southern part of the city could take the
street car to Newton High School. . City Hall was built at the nexxus of street car lines. The Main Library like the Needham Main Library was built on the street car/bus line
Like Jane, I moved to Newton because of it’s blend of urban and suburban. I was especially attracted to Newton Highlands because it was on the T and easy access to 128 (commuting to Providence at the time), which also being walking distance to stores, post office, playground. If I’d wanted something less urban, I’d have chosen a different suburb.
Took a car census throughout the day. Never went higher than 70.
70 on a dreary Sunday in late March with no commuters.
Bob, as a commuter, I can tell you very few of us use that parking lot, as there is ALWAYS plenty of parking available on Washington Street in the morning. It gets busy again on Washington Street after 6 when the various new restaurants and bars (Cook, Paint Bar, Karoun, etc.), which is kinda perfect since that is when the commuters are all leaving the 12 hour spots.
As for the 70, I went back later and most of those cars were still there (several were quite distinctive). As the parking is free, I think some folks are parking there all day on Sunday.
I will keep sending parking counts if folks are interested. I have to pass it each day, twice a day.
Miles, regarding identity, I wish folks like you were engaged ALL the time (that is meant as encouragement, not a slight). If you were, you’d know I post on this blog and the old tab blog as Fignewtonville for over 5 years now and that I lived close enough to Newton North to worry not just as a member of the community but also someone concerned about it affecting my property values. And my recollection is that I got more engaged on the blogs and in the city once Newton North happened. But in the end most of what I was worried about ended up not being as bad as I thought, and now I’m pretty pleased with the facility and leaving near it. Still upset about the cost and the traffic though.
Another thing to note on height. I would encourage folks to go down to Newtonville and count the floors on the Mason building. I count 4 plus (the roof floor is a half floor above the 4th). The Church next door is close to the same height. Across the bridge, there is a 4 story building just past Washington Street on Walnut. There is a also a 3 story building on Washington just near the dance studio.
My point is that these buildings blend into the background and to me are some of what make the village special. Do I think this building will? Honestly, no. I would bet it to be a blander version of many buildings in Boston’s South End or Back Bay. But it also won’t be the end of the world. I’m hopeful that the first floor retail will allow the village to have more of a “village feel versus a parking lot, and I’m hopeful that the parking will be sufficient for our needs. I’ll be attending the various meetings to move the process in that direction. But those of you who feel that it will change the village until an “urban” village, or that the shadows will ruin the village, or that the lack of parking will kill the village, I think that seeing things in absolutes and making up horror stories is tempting, but not really effective as an argument.
I do think regardless of this project, we need to take a close look at parking. There are a dozen or so spaces that I think could be metered. For instance, why isn’t Austin Street metered all the way down to Lowell? And why is there a cab stand in front of Shaws (that NEVER gets used). I would also meter spots down some of the side streets.
fignewtonville:
You say that “there is ALWAYS plenty of parking available on Washington Street”
This you may not be aware of…
One of the groups involved in the Austin Street development (SEB LLC) is also involved in the Court Street project which will result in the Chrysler dealer employees needing to find a new place to park. This is 30-40 vehicles M-F.
They currently park behind 75 Court Street. You may or may not have noticed in late winter when many of these workers used the spots on Washington Street in front of the dealership when the city wasn’t ticketing due to the snow banks. There were very few long-term spots when they grabbed them.
My big concern with all of the development being proposed for MY neighborhood is that no one in the city is looking at the whole picture. They see Court Street as separate from Austin Street and the restaurants as also bing disconnected. I am also concerned that residents who seem to approve of the Austin Street development in it current form also do not know the whole picture.
fignewtonville – re “regarding identity, I wish folks like you were engaged ALL the time (that is meant as encouragement, not a slight). If you were, you’d know I post on this blog and the old tab blog as Fignewtonville for over 5 years now and that I lived close enough to Newton North” — well that’s great, it doesn’t mean that I (or anyone else) know who you are
for the record – I HAVE been engaged – at public meetings, letters to the editor, and on the newtonville email list (which one of my computers hosts, at Emily Norton’s request)
my personal feeling is that, while pseudonyms have their place in civic dialogue (revolutionary times come to mind) – they generally are counterproductive – as the old cartoon says “on the Internet, nobody knows that you’re a dog”
Just for some perspective… I tend to think of Walnut St., Newtonville as a miniature version of Moody St. in Waltham – though the Mass Pike is not quite as scenic as the Charles, and we don’t have a commons on the North side of the pike. As a commercial street, though, Walnut and Moody Streets have a similar “feel.”
In that context, this recent addition to Moody St. strikes me as very similar to at least on of the Austin Street proposals:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Moody+St/@42.372616,-71.236661,3a,75y,240.76h,93.72t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sOfzCg9YASpQs_G7XIxDImg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e382df30f21049:0x456862125a0cf169
Strikes me as just a bit massive and out of place.
And… let’s remember that Moody Street has MULTIPLE parking lots set back about 1 block – including this:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Moody+St/@42.3718531,-71.2347299,148m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e382df30f21049:0x456862125a0cf169
I wonder how many of the advocates for selling off the parking lot and saying “we’re a transit centered” community actually:
– use the T after 5 pm?
– use something other than a car to get around?
The 59 bus (which Alderman Yates mentioned) stops by 7:30 pm. So people like me, who go to school at night, are forced to try and find parking around Newton Highlands, Newton Center and other T stops to make use of the green line (which now runs until 3 am in a one month trial). The commuter rail runs odd hours so it means either sprinting from the Colleges of the Fenway area to the commuter rail in less than 5 minutes OR waiting for the 10:30 pm train at the new Yawkey station.
*shudder* Yeah, let me stand alone in the dark behind a commercial building for over an hour in all types of weather waiting for a train….
I also ride my bike a lot around Newton. The conditions of the roads are marginal (at best) and dangerous in many sections. I look at the Lowell Ave roadway over the Pike and it’s pot holes every winter into spring, the poor condition of Lowell (years after the NNHS construction and promised repairs/repaving) and pray every time I strap on my helmet and blinky lights hoping to make it to the library and back. I hesitate to think of what will happen (if the winter ever lets go) riding Walnut/Lowell at night from the Highlands if I choose that option for my spring and summer classes). If you see me on my bike, you may have heard some of my lovely invectives directed at drivers who – often on their cell phones – come close to clipping me in their hybrids and electric cars that proudly proclaim their environmental footprint is reduced by their choice of vehicle. (Usually I’m yelling about my carbon footprint being smaller with colorful language.)
When I’m out running in the morning, I can’t tell you how many distracted drivers are out there who take extra liberties behind the wheel because… you know, it’s early morning. I also walk a lot and can tell you that the sidewalks aren’t in great shape.
I encourage every Newton resident to take the walking route to the local schools in the winter. It always frightens me to see kids climbing over snow banks into traffic due to plowing (municipal and private) or trying to negotiate the City owned sidewalks that are rarely, if ever, cleared in high traffic areas.
Saying property taxes will offset the loss of land is like saying “I can give to this charity because it’s a tax deduction at the end of the year…” True, it will off set some of the loss, but it’s still not enough for a zero sum outcome once you figure in things like: wear and tear on the roads, students in the school system, water and sewage usage, etc.
An easier life style for folks in their golden years wanting to downsize in Newton, how about inviting someone like Erikson (Linden Ponds), Atria (Marina Place) or Benchmark (Cabot Park Village) to find a group of parcels to build in Newtonville. I’m not buying the argument that 3 units of affordable housing out of 13 is enough to justify selling off a parcel that is currently used on a daily basis.
Following up on Karla’s comment – I too spend a lot of time on the T – in my case, commuting to a long-term gig in NY (on the Island), via AMTRAK – typically going down on Sun. afternoon, back on Thurs. eve.
At the NY end, the connections are easy – LIRR trains, every 30 minutes, to/from everywhere on the island, all hours of the day and night. At our end, however:
– if I can’t get a ride, I have to waste an hour and a half Sunday afternoon, because there’s only one trip anywhere close to the train departure
– on the way home, there’s a bus from Back Bay, that’s close to arrival time – if the train is late coming in, next connection is a 10:30 train, an hour later (and it’s all so much fun carrying luggage up the rickety stairs at Newtonville station).
Transit-centric development has to START with adequate transit.
Miles, Great comment “Transit-centric development has to START with adequate transit.”
On a much simpler note, try getting to and from Fenway via MBTA. I wind up driving and taking a chance on a Brookline ticket.
A word of advice from Newton Center: If there’s a Newtonville parking survey under way, be sure to keep a close eye on it. When a city survey a few years back found the Newton Center municipal lots to be underutilized, I was skeptical and asked some questions. Sure enough, it turned out the survey was done on a Monday, a day when most of the area’s many beauty salons are closed, and some small businesses take advantage of the lighter traffic that causes to take the day off as well. I don’t know if the choice of a Monday was deliberate or happenstance, but the findings were atypical all the same.
Miles, I’m rather partial to Fignewtonville as my name. It is difficult for all of us to post under our real names, although I can understand your frustration. It is a blog however, with a tradition of such behavior, and I still maintain length of posting helps to create an identity, even if it is not one linked to our name. Most folks here can pretty much guess my comments before I make them, just like I sort of know what Greg, Jerry, Kim, Tom, Mike and others will say…
Bob, you are correct that I didn’t connect the Court Square project parking with the uptick in cars during the winter. But the uptick was not a big deal, and there was always plenty of parking for the commuter rail. I usually got there either at 8:20 or 9:10, and either way, lots of parking available. Because the commuter rail has entrances at Walnut and Harvard, it really allows for 4 blocks of potential parking. But I COMPLETELY agree that parking should be looked at as a whole and various projects should be taken into consideration if they are in the same parking orbit. That said, I think your estimate of 30-40 cars from the dealership is a bit off.
I’ll do another parking check this afternoon and post when I can. As I really just interested in what is best for the village, I don’t have a problem posting if the parking numbers come in higher than I anticipated.
Btw, one item I don’t have much sympathy for is the need for student parking. I don’t view Newton North parking as the highest and best use for this particular lot. Just my opinion on that one.
fignewtonville
I literally live next door to the lot currently used by the Chrysler employees. I have photos of the lot and I have personally counted the cars so I absolutely know the numbers. Heck, even the developer, Bob Engler uses the number 35-40 in his documentation.
Come by some day (M-F) and count for yourself.
Not all of the Chrysler employees used the street during the hiatus on tickets. This will be a problem that Engler and the city are ignoring as are a lot of advocates of the current Austin Street proposals
fignewtonville
You write that “it really allows for 4 blocks of potential parking.”
Have you ever counted how many of these spots are long-term and not just a few hours? I have. Here they are as reported by a parking study done for a zoning request by Village Cafe on Washington St:
There are 34 12-hr spots. Chrysler could easily fill those.
There are 16 2-hr spots
There are 11 1-hr spots
Here are the 12 hr spots as reported to the city by the parking study:
Washington Street eastbound from the Chrysler dealership driveway to Beach Street there are 9-12 hour metered spaces
Washington Street eastbound from Beach Street to Harvard Street there are 15-12 hrs. meter spaces
Washington Street eastbound from Harvard Street Court, Street there are 10-12 battered metered spaces
@fignewtonville – I believe that the Austin St should be subdivided with a Newton North High School annex going on one half and a municipal swimming pool on the other half.
I just want to make sure
isn’t always true. 😉
Jerry, that was funny. Considering how crowded the Newton North pool gets, I’d love a new pool at Austin Street….
Bob, to be honest I didn’t realize that many folks worked at the Chysler dealership. If they are being forced to used the metered spaces, that is a real shame (especially considering the parking fee increase to around $4.50 a day.
Have we considered the use of the Verizon lot? It is always empty. I also had thought that the Court Street project was going to supply some parking on site.
Bob, I will freely admit to being more in tune with Austin Street than Court St. I’ll take a drive by there and see what you mean.
I’d also propose moving the postage trucks one block down on Washington Street. That would free up 10 or so spaces, and have no real negative effect on the post office since it is between Lowell and walnut.
fignewtonville
you write: “to be honest I didn’t realize that many folks worked at the Chysler dealership. If they are being forced to used the metered spaces, that is a real shame (especially considering the parking fee increase to around $4.50 a day.
Have we considered the use of the Verizon lot? It is always empty. I also had thought that the Court Street project was going to supply some parking on site.”
This is part of the problem. Either deliberately or not, information is not easily available. The developer is supplying a single parking spot for each unit. You can then but additional spots for $25,000. Even if you are one of the lucky affordable purchasers, pony up another $25,000.
No provision is being made for the 35±cars that will be displaced due to the 36 unit condo. Neither the developer, the city nor the state seems to care. Nor do many Newton residents. Too many folks love development when its nowhere near them.
Verizon has been approached and has no interest. Why should they? They do have a few cars in there each day.
BTW, the city claims that they are looking at that lot as a park. PLEASE!
Well I’m breathing deeply and I have another “horror story” in the form of some statistics with which we love to “set the record straight “.
Comparisons of the most thorough of the Developer submissions re Austin Street with the Masonic Hall indicate radical differences and do not hold water. Some think they are the same scale. They are not ! According to the cities assessors data base the masonic hall is 3 stories tall not 4 ! I.E. a building of 31,521 gross SF resting on and completely filling, its site of 11,718 SF would suggest to me, a 3 story structure. OK,.. there is a tall attic, turret, etc but until the city starts taxing them for greater space, the “statistics don’t lie”. And, by the way, the building lot doesn’t count the parking lot behind, which gets taxed as a 8,318 SF property.
Further more, said developer submission above comes in at roughly 130,000 SF, using the graphic scale conveniently provided on the drawings. A simple look at the building sections show a building 4-1/2 stories tall. (lower 2 levels of parking start at 1/2 level below grade ). The Austin Street site is given by the assessors at 74,536, but that includes the Bramway all the way to Highland Street.
This would suggest to all of us,” horror mongers ” that this Austin Street building at perhaps roughly the same height as the Masonic Hall, at the roof ridge, is at least 4 x the size of the Masonic Hall ( 130,000 vs 31,521 ). This massive block, tricked up with lots of ins and outs, setbacks and plate glass windows will cast a very long shadow across Austin Street much of the year, and all of the pretty landscaping shown planted in front will not be long for this world if realized. Frank Lloyd Wright was quoted once, and currently is more poignant than ever,.. “Physicians will bury their mistakes,.. Architects can only plant ivy “. And all this ‘ivy’ isn’t going to make it !
Ain’t statistics wonderful !
These proposed Austin Street submittals are Urban buildings thru and thru and have no place in what should be an intimate, small scale, Suburban village. Build them in the South End, Fort Point Channel, or Cambridge, but not where they would seriously derogate the the character of Newtonville.
Blueprintbill: You crack me up. The Sun moves across the sky you know. And there is not current building on the Shaw’s lot directly across from the Austin Street lot. So shadows and plants dying isn’t that big a deal, just plant partial sun plants/trees. I have them all around my house because my house shades the plants for half the day….
As for the heights of the buildings, the Austin Street building would be a longer building and deeper building than the Masonic temple. So what? The point is that the Masonic temple is just as tall. That was why they made such a big deal about keeping the height at no more than 5 stories (i.e. the same basic height as the masonic temple, give or take a few feet.
Anyway, I’m done with this thread at this point. If the city decides to move forward with Austin Street (and I hope they do), I hope to meet many of you at the various hearings as we attempt to make the potential building better.
Density is the Problem ! And a mass of construction 210′ x 170′ x 4-1/2 stories tall is dense. It’s also out of scale for a Village like Newtonville and will contribute zero to the enhancement of its life and character. This is supposed to be the “Garden City”. This is what one could get ‘cracked up’ about!