On the eve of yet another public hearing designed to halt the Austin Street project even before a developer is selected, Newton’s League of Women Voters sent this letter to the Board of Aldermen…
May 14,2014
Dear President Lennon and members of the Board of Aldermen:
The League of Women Voters of Newton strongly urges you to reject the petition # 47-14(2) to rezone the Austin Street parking lot. We feel that the current Mixed Use 4 district is the most appropriate for the site, and for the City.
The Austin Street parking lot, an under-utilized City-owned property, was identified during Newton’s Comprehensive Plan process as a site that could add vitality to Newtonville’s center through a mix of commercial and residential uses, as well as contribute to the City’s financial base through tax revenue.
The League of Women Voters has strong and longstanding positions supporting the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, creating affordable housing in mixed income developments and in-fill developments in Newton, making city-owned sites available for such housing, and creating open and recreational space, which this project includes. Our positions also support mixed-use development near transit, which minimizes adverse environmental impacts.
The League is a multi-issue organization that considers a wide range of topics. Forward-thinking solutions such as sustainable, transit oriented, mixed-use developments that include retail, commercial, residential, parking and access to public transportation are ways to meet often conflicting and complex needs. There are always trade-offs that must be weighed in balance to determine what is in the long-range best interest of the City.
Community input is an important component for a successful outcome. Public meetings have been held over the years, soliciting comments and questions from citizens and businesses on this project. This process is far from over; once the Mayor selects a developer from the short-listed, qualified finalists, the program and design will be subject to further detailed review.
Via the Special Permit process, controlled by your Board, additional engineering, traffic and financial feasibility studies will be commissioned to inform the design and ’right size‘ the project. That phase will involve open public hearings and in-depth review and analysis in full public view. The next design phase must include well-functioning vehicle circulation, sufficient parking, context-sensitive building massing and design, engaging and well-landscaped outdoor spaces. All this should be explored further with professionals, City staff, and the public.
Once the Mayor selects a developer, we can work together to help shape this project into something that will benefit Newtonville and the entire City. The League of Women Voters urges you not to undermine the process by rezoning this parcel.
Sincerely,
Susan Flicop
President
Inverse relationship: the farther one lives from development, the more one favors it
Just to clarify, every special permit project gets shaped mostly during the design review phase, which involves meetings with city staff that are not open to the public. With Riverside, I insisted on a public hearing on the conceptual plan before the developer was permitted to file a special permit application to get public input that would help shape the project, which was very well attended. The feedback the developer and planning department received resulted in a number of changes to the project that were incorporated into the special permit application.
I am hoping that the rest of my colleagues will again insist on a conceptual review and public hearing before the special permit application for Austin Street is finalized and filed with the Board of Aldermen. The Land Use committee also approved peer reviews prior to filing of the Riverside special permit, another salutary measure that I hope will occur with Austin Street as well.
@Ted: By your comment, it appears you are opposed to this request to reject the petition and rezone the Austin Street lot. Yes?
I question the claim “under-utilized”. Every time I visit Newtonville to dine, go to the drycleaner, banking, and other shopping, the lot is 80-90% full.
Bob – I completely agree with your assessment. Ms Flicop lives in the Chestnut Hill historic district, a neighborhood in which I could never see such a development being approved let alone even considered. A wild thought here, but should the residents of Newtonville not have the ultimate say on what is and is not appropriate for their own neighborhood? Rather NIMBY don’t you think?
@Peter: Very unfair. Chestnut Hill has been the site of far more development than Austin Street could ever represent. And unlike Austin Street, it doesn’t have the smart growth/public transit benefits that Newtonville enjoys.
But as long as we’re drawing comparisons, let’s consider how off-the-mark those predictions that Chestnut Hill Square and the Street were going to cause traffic armageddon for residents in that area proved to be.
It hasn’t. Driving up and down Route 9 has only improved.
@Peter – which Chestnut Hill are you talking about? Is it this one or this one or this one?
@Greg, we have not even had the public hearing yet, so it would be inappropriate and unfair for me to prejudge the petition until we have heard from both supporters and opponents. But I (and 21 of my colleagues) previously did vote in favor of repurposing the property and did vote to rezone the Austin Street lot so that it could be redeveloped as a mixed use transit oriented development. Assuming that the project is allowed to move ahead, I want to ensure that the process is as open and transparent as possible.
Ted Hess-Mahan — Great answer! I agree w what the letter says, but I naively thought the NLWV was for process above substance. In this case, the letter isn’t respecting process. Not good as a precedent.
Current proposals are not really “mixed use”: by sq footage, New Atlantic is 4% commercial, Newtonville Sq is 5% commercial, Austin St partners is 10% commercial. They are really huge housing complexes with small amounts of commercial.
@Joshua, everyone seems to forget that pursuant to the zoning, the project must also provide a minimum number of public parking spaces (the actual number will be determined by a formal parking study). That is a public use, added to the residential and commercial uses. There is also an open space requirement. Reasonable people can disagree about what is the appropriate density development at this site, but it is very definitely mixed use. If it were a 40B, for example, there would be no commercial use at all except as amenities for the residents (e.g., a laundromat or child care center for residents).
@Hoss – I don’t see how the NLWV is not respecting process. Someone filed a petition before the board. The LVW has taken a position on the issue and is communicating their preference on which way they’d like to see the board vote. It all seems like pretty normal process with no advocating for procedural shortcuts.
Jerry Reilly — I guess I felt that the NLWV charter above all else is to uphold citizens right to be heard, not the subject of the concern at hand. Here they seem to be interjecting their voice and asking the citizen petition be rejected. They also use an awkward “we” in the last paragraph suggesting NLWV is a party to the matter. It just feels like it’s way too early for this kind of positioning.
But if this kind of letter is common place for the League, then members are in fact asking for this kind of thing and so be it
Jerry,
Your examples are hardly close to fair examples, yet indeed do show the sort of urban scale development that does not bode well for Newtonville.
Peter is correct re NIMBYism,.. lets try and set a housing project down in the old Deer Park / Webster estate at the end of Suffolk Road. Large site, close to the green line, you could probably get a couple hundred units in there. Sort of like Court Street, just squeeze them in. The Chestnut Hill Historic District Commission could do NOTHING to stop 40b.
Or maybe on top of the newly acquired reservoir site just north of Comm Ave.
You don’t think there would not be an uproar !
@Bill: And you’re hardly being fair to suggest that any Austin Street project would be of the scale of one of the three malls along Route 9. No one is proposing that.
Jerry – point taken. However, Rt 9 is a major commercial district on a very different scale to Austin St. Much of what is built along Rt 9 has existed there for some time or replaced other commercial buildings. Newtonville on the south side of I-90 is much smaller in scale and has a village feel to it. Many people quote the Comprehensive Plan saying why these developments are appropriate for village centers being transit oriented. What they often fail to mention is that there is also a section in the Comprehensive Plan on preserving the character of our village centers and neighborhoods. So in that sense this also needs to be accounted for in any plans for Austin St or anywhere else in the City for that matter. Picking and choosing which sections of the Comprehensive Plan one wants to reference to support a given project isn’t objective at all. Also, as Hoss points out, one might expect the NLWV to have a neutral position offering the pros and cons of a given proposal rather than taking a stand so strongly for or against something. The NLWV from what I’ve seen appears to be mostly pro dense development as are the aldermen who are former members of the organization. Many people still think the NLWV is about voter participation and clean elections, but they have changed their mission and are now advocates for high-density developments. These high-density housing developments under the guise of “mixed use” cost more in services than they generate in tax revenue and are a fiscal losing proposition that drives Newton deeper into debt.
@Peter – I haven’t been involved in the Austin St debate – just watching it from afar via the blogs and the Tab. I can definitely appreciate a number of questions being asked – “how big is too big”,”how much parking is enough?”, etc.
Here’s what surprises me so far in the discussion. The one thing you’ll get nearly unanimous agreement about from nearly everyone in Newton, is that we value our villages and want them to thrive. The core of what makes a healthy village is a nice mix of small thriving retail businesses.
If we build X units of housing on Austin St then you’ll have Y number of new customers who will be the most frequent customers of those businesses – since they’re just around the corner. In any discussion, especially one about preserving our villages, I’d expect that to be clearly acknowledged as a good thing. Yes, there may be all sorts of negative aspects of a particular development that might outweigh that benefit – I get that.
I guess I’m just surprised at how little discussion there has been about possible benefits this could bring to village businesses, especially when everyone on both side of this particular issue agree that we all care about having healthy, thriving village centers.
Jerry:
Great question. Great point. Merchants and restaurant owners would be thrilled to have the added foot traffic and customers that this development would bring. Yes, they have legitimate concerns about parking, but (as I just reminded Colleen) we have a process to address those needs long before anything gets the green light.
But you bet they’d like more foot traffic.
I would likely not visit the businesses in Newtonville as I would find the lack of parking most troublesome. The Shaw’s lot would be full all the time with less public parking also.
A large residential development is a poor solution to revive a village that presently is already thriving.
@Colleen:
Why should the Shaws lot be any fuller than it is these days if its only limited to customer use?
And why do you — and others — continue to ignore the fact that the number of parking spaces in the new development has yet to be determined and would not be determined until after the usual thorough process of a traffic study, public hearings and approval by the Board of Aldermen?
This is not just something I’m making up. This is how it’s done.
Greg, I’ll also note that many of the folks coming out AGAINST the project are also outside of Newtonville. I’m fine with their opposition, but for some (Bob/Peter)to state that the league is based out of Chestnut Hill and therefore can’t comment is just silly.
Ann, I visit that area of Newtonville many times during a typical week. Mornings/weekends/nights. Even middays sometimes. The parking lot has not been more than 80% full any of those times. The daytime parking is somewhat deceptive since the students park there for Newton North, but that is not the highest or best use for the village center in my opinion. Taking those cars away, it is never more than 70% full in my various countings over the past 2 months. I’m happy to post a daily visit/open spaces report if folks would like.
That is not to say that it doesn’t occasionally get full. It does. But if there is a parking problem in Newton, I think we can add at least 15 spaces just by rezoning certain side streets, adding meters, and moving the post office trucks a block down near Lowell. And I’d encourage more of the spaces across Washington street to be changed from commuter spaces to short term spaces, with signage to indicate that they are available. Those spaces are actually closer to CVS than the back of the parking lot…
Look, taking away a “known” for any development area can be scary. There will be a period of adjustment for the village as folks get used to less parking. But I routinely need to walk half a block in Newton Centre and I do it. There will be plenty of parking in Newtonville. I’d gladly trade a bit more difficulty in finding that “easy” space for a more completed village with additional shops, and a re-done walnut street.
As for the idea of having more residents in the village, I think that is a HUGE benefit. More residents within walking distance means more folks in coffee shops, buying bread, etc. One of the ways downtowns in older communities have been revitalized is to put housing on floors 2 through 5 in older buildings. Here, we are effectively creating just that type of development to fill in a gap in our village retail space. Residents who live near the village centers/downtowns end up using the services at a much higher rate than residents who drive into those areas. I can attest to that from personal experience.
I’m looking forward to a proposal being picked and moving the process forward.
Figgy..all I said was that folks tend to like density that doesn’t really affect them.
Also, I am very curious what makes you think Newtonville needs to be revitalized.
Bob:
I love Newtonville. The village is one of the main reasons I decided to move to the area (along with finding a house I could afford in Newton…). I love the transportation options (Express bus access (553) and the commuter rail, and the easy access to the Pike. But I think the village center needs some work, and can really be made into something great. More sitting areas, more outdoor seating, better lighting, and more people later in the day. Right now it feels like a place to run errands rather than a community focus point. I view Austin Street as an opportunity. We take the funds the city gets from developing Austin Street, combine that with the promised Walnut Street redo, and within 3 years we’ve got new sidewalks, new lighting, more seating areas, more outdoor dining, more rental space, some more outdoor space, and more people. I’d love to do even more. I’d love to develop the area around the old church near the Pike, and open that up to the public for outdoor dining. I’ve love to make the bridge a focal point, with better landscaping in the center, better cleaning during the winter, with signs that highlight the village and the parking availability on Washington Street.
“…the parking availability on Washington Street.”
I live one block off of Washington. In the evening, I see few parking spaces on Washington between Walnut and Beach. And there is a good chance that the proposed development on Court Street will force Chrysler employees to park on Washington during the day.
This is the big problem: no total plan for our neighborhood. A piece here, a piece there but no thought on how they all blend together.
Regarding CHS, Greg says:
Greg, repeating that does not make it true. Yeah, driving a few thousand feet in from Langley to Hammond Pond Parkway, roughly the location of the new development where they added a lane, traffic moves just fine. Try driving past that and you sit in traffic. The queues at Hammond and Woodward Streets are longer than ever. They just moved the problem. Unfortunately for business development, that’s how regional traffic is supposed to reach these businesses.
Ann says:
And it’s a requirement to retain public parking under the proposal. The land is under-utilized because now it’s only providing parking. It’s not raising tax revenue for the city. It’s not a destination. It doesn’t house people or businesses. It’s not adding to the village street scape. Fully-utilized, it could do all of these things.
To add to what Adam said about traffic, we also don’t yet have the additional traffic that will be generated once the old Atrium Mall re-opens as offices.
Route 9 is a disgusting road that has poisoned all of the communities it touches, and it has no place in this century. It should be turned into a tramway with bike paths and sidewalks on either side.
Woodward and Route 9 have been a problem forever. It’s really no different now than before – it’s definitely an intersection to be avoided if at all possible.
My take is that if we keep the commercial enterprises in the village centers, we have a shot at keeping them out of the residential neighborhoods (S1, S2). A few years ago, N’ville had a full fledged business open in an S2 area and it took two years to shut it down. It’s become too easy to push the zoning envelope in the city, and an unintended consequence of shutting down commercial development in the village centers could be that it creeps into the S1/S2, areas, one business at a time.
I like Fig’s ideas, and think that the Court St. project should be a greater concern for N’ville than Austin St.
I’ve been commuting on Rte. 9 for 8 years now, and approaching Woodward heading west on 9 in the evening rush hour has definitely gotten worse. My guess is that a change in traffic light timing might help, since things improve greatly immediately west of that intersection.
@mgwa, they did tune the traffic light timing several times, as part of the Chestnut Hill Square mitigation, along with a few other tweaks. There’s only so much they can squeeze out of that intersection. Unless they do something radical like tunnel under Woodward Street, traffic there is always going to be bad. A state report many years ago said as much. So building more roadway capacity in Chestnut Hill seems like it’s only going to make problems worse in Newton Highlands, and that has ripple effects on the rest of the city which we also see daily.
Anyone at the meeting last night? I couldn’t go. I’m guessing the usual suspects came from the NIMBY side, it was, after all, their proposal. Can someone enlighten me as to next steps?
Just to be clear, the LWVN encompasses residents of all Newton’s villages. Its program is available on its website.
Founded shortly after women got the vote, the LWV rightly focuses on retaining voting rights and fairness for all citizens, but the second pillar was voter education–and advocacy on issues.
Greg writes “…the smart growth/public transit benefits that Newtonville enjoys.”
How often do you take this vaunted public transit? Try to take it to Fenway for a 1:10PM start time. Express buses don’t run on weekends. In fact, only one of the much ballyhooed public transit buses runs 7 days a week.
Has the last person spoken yet?
@Bob – you said it! Public transit in the entirety of Newton is a complete joke.
Last week, my wife and I decided to walk from our house to Newton Centre, a distance of three miles, much of it without sidewalks. On the return, my wife decided to take the 52 bus back, which of course is South Newton’s only game in town. I walked back in 45 minutes, but my wife ended up waiting 75 minutes for a bus to come! And then of course the 52 doesn’t even run after 7pm, or on weekends. Our conclusion, of course, was that the 52 bus is actually worse than nothing.
I wish that the mayor would pay attention to things like this, but as I understand it, he’s off on a junket in Israel sponsored by AIPAC. I love AIPAC because it’s so progressive, it promotes human rights, and it encourages a reasoned debate about US foreign policy that seeks to promote best interests of the whole global community. Just kidding! Anyway, the mayor has more important things to worry about than the 52 bus, I’m sure.
PS My mistake, the mayor’s previous trip to Israel was funded by AIPAC. Does anyone know who’s paying for this trip?
I look forward to joining the conversation here about Route 9 traffic but that will have to wait until I can find some time later today or tomorrow.
In the meanwhile, two different people who attended last night’s hearing tell me that 15 speakers spoke in support of the petition (re zone back to public use or BU1) while 35 speakers — including numerous Newtonville residents — spoke in favor of moving forward.
Also, Andreae’s comment noting that League members live across the city is correct and relevant. However for those who sense a conspiracy of outsiders here, I’d like to note that the last night the League’s letter was presented by Brooke Lipsitt, a Newtonville resident.
I watched the public hearing on Newtv. It ended by 11pm. Many people spoke from both sides of the issue. The most significant voice last night was from people over 50 years old who want more affordable housing in Newton when and if they downsize.
I’m not sure that a small development in the N. Village would ever come close to fulfilling the strong need for apartment dwellers in a community like Newton.
@Colleen:
So now your objection is that it’s not large enough?
I should also note that Brooke Lipsitt was the co-chair of Eve Tapper’s Ward 2 Ward Aldermanic run last year. I guess its a good thing that Eve Tapper blurted out how she wanted to urbanize Newtonville, otherwise she might have pulled out 50 more votes and beaten Emily.
http://village14.com/newton-ma/2013/10/video-heres-the-debate-between-norton-and-tapper/#axzz31u4aToYM
So Josh, once again, we’re resorting to who people endorsed to decide if they’re entitled to have an opinion?
If that’s the game you want to play, I should also note that Joshua Norman thinks Mark Fisher should be our governor!
And besides, Emily Norton won that election because she’s had years of history as a community activist, is a person with a lot of integrity and ran a terrific grass route campaign.
Greg, the speakers last night were equal in numbers on both sides of the issue. Many elders from other parts of Newton spoke up about the need for affordable apartment dwellings.
The Austin St. site will never be able to fulfill the future needs of aging boomers. People sounded the alarm for more housing not only in N’ville but elsewhere in the city.
I still believe that the Aquinas property would be better suited to a large scale complex. Cabot village in N’ville is always a perfect alternative for elder downsizers.
Colleen: Once again, your logic has me scratching my head. You seem to be saying that since Austin Street can’t fulfill the needs of all our aging boomers then we shouldn’t build something that would serve the needs of a portion of our aging boomers? Are you opposed to seat belts too since they don’t save lives in every car crash?
Jim Morrison’s report from last night is now on Wicked Local Newton.
Too bad he didn’t include this quote from last night. The vitriol directed at our city employees is unwarranted.
Colleen, I wonder if you could explain why Austin Street “will never be able to fulfill the future needs of aging boomers.” By your comment that Cabot Village is a good alternative makes me realize that you are assuming all seniors need some sort of assisted facility. That is untrue. There is quite a large step between wanting to downsize from a two story 8 room colonial where you raised your children to a one floor apartment or condo where you no longer have to worry about mowing and shoveling, to living in a facility where there is assisted living and skilled nursing care!! Today’s younger seniors want ease of living, connectivity with their community…vitality! A village center is the perfect place for them.
I watched a lot of the hearing on NEWTV last evening and am going to call the station and thank them for producing timely programs like this. I have just one question that maybe others can address.
While I was watching 4 merchants testified in favor of halting the project. How many merchants testified against the project and did any testify in favor?
Wait a minute…my wife and I live in a 2 family home which started out as a modest home and is still modest. We raised 3 children here. We did not buy such a large house that we couldn’t stay here as long as physically able. Why do people who bought large homes that no longer meet their needs now get to request that our neighborhood have large apartment/condo structures placed in them so that they can stay in Newton. The developer of the Court Street condo project has proudly claimed that his project will raise property values. Guess what? That means that those of us who are retired on fixed incomes will have higher property taxes so these folks can stay in Newton after selling their oversized homes. This may result in forcing us out of our own neighborhood. BTW, we can’t afford one of the market condos being built on Court Street.
Greg, I couldn’t help but laugh at your weak, whack response.
I pointed out that former Alderman Brooke Lipsitt supported Eve Tapper for Alderman. I wonder if Lipsitt knew that Eve Tapper wanted to urbanize Newtonville with 40B housing projects? I know that Brooke Lipsitt has a long and proud record of supporting overrides and higher spending.
As for you pointing out that I support Mark Fisher for Governor, I’M PROUD TO SUPPORT Mark Fisher for Governor and so does Bill Heck. Who do you think persuaded Bill Heck to support Mark Fisher? Deval Patrick has raised $1.3 Billion annually in New Taxes and Mark Fisher is the only candidate to sign the No New Taxes pledge. How could I call myself a consistent advocate for fiscal stewardship if I was to support Charlie “Left of Obama and Frustrated People Don’t Appreciate It” Baker instead of Mark Fisher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=931Bsku4wqU
Most of the seniors who spoke last night want affordable apartments. The need for future elder housing for people across Newton demands growth on a very large scale. Austin St. wouldn’t be affordable housing, the majority of suites would be marketed to an upscale, young population.
Thus seniors would be locked out of easy access to new units. The proposed development also won’t be large due to the inappropriate site location. This Austin St. proposal is a very poor choice for dense urban housing. I hope the B of A realizes just how ill conceived this housing will be for N’ville residents and business owners.
@Joshua and @Greg, thank you for the kind words. I just wanted to comment that I was at the hearing last night and did not hear vitriol directed at city employees. Rather, a question was raised about whether the public was invited to all the early meetings related to planning for potential development of the Austin St parking lot. I also think Andreae Downs was deploying hyperbole to make her point when she made the quote above, as no one had literally suggested that anyone was out to secretly, or openly for that matter, destroy our villages.
I was unable to attend the last meeting at city hall regarding Austin street, but if I was present, probably would have been labeled as ‘against’ the development. (which would be untrue)
Being a resident and business owner in Newtonville, I’ve been trying keep up with the issue and attend as many meetings as possible. (it can be a full-time job – there is lot of information and misinformation out there) From where I’m sitting, this is a very complicated issue, with many hands involved, many opinions and many open and not-so-open agendas.
Yes, of course I want a more vibrant village center, with more ‘more sitting areas, more outdoor seating, better lighting, and more people later in the day.’ with more open spaces for community and neighborly engagement. It sounds wonderful all- around! But will the Austin Street development provide all this? The initial proposals did not address any of these improvements. Will the 1-2 years of construction hell (it will be hell, especially for the businesses that will lose the parking spaces during the construction, the dust created that will blow into everything, and the construction equipment that will line the streets) ultimately be balanced out by the future greater good? The residential apartments, type and size, not being clearly outlined, how will they impact our already crowded schools? Will the new retail mix in the development negate what we deem as ‘surplus’ parking once they’ve reach their operating threshold? How much is not enough or too much parking? As much as we pontificate and champion transit oriented development as part of this Austin Street package, today, we have a bus stop and a commuter rail with minimal amount of stops and a platform that is dangerous and unappealing. Should we not get some commitments from MBTA before going forward? And the residents of this 40 – 100(?) unit development with parking spaces and cars – will they not impact the already dangerous situation of Walnut and Austin street at peak hours? Are there sound, well-thought out answers to all these questions?
I moved to Newton because of its great mix of green spaces, independent mom & pop stores and the residents that seem to embrace the small-town character of this city and it’s village centers. Is Newtonville village center ‘broken’? I don’t think so. Does it need a spit-shine? Of course. A good percentage of the residents and the business owners obviously have questions and concerns because they are personally/financially/emotionally vested in this city AND unknown IS scary. Engaged, vocal, active and questioning citizens of a city (and country) is good for any city and the public officials that serve those residents should take time to ‘measure twice, cut once’. There is wisdom and character in listening, planning, patience and waiting.
I am not in opposition to a village revitalization. I am not in opposition to economic development. I am in opposition to urban development. Village revitalization and economic development is part art, part science and a big dose of good common sense planning and compromises. Urban development only takes a permit, money and land to build a big building, and right now, that’s all we have guaranteed on paper. If I wanted urban development, I would live and work in Boston or Brookline.
So this is not the time to challenge and rush the ‘opposed’ segment to set aside all their valid concerns and ‘cross the ocean by having courage to lose sight of the shore’. Maybe, we just want to see a clear, detailed, layman-friendly plan of the boat that you’re asking us to get on first.
(if some of the Austin lot is indeed surplus, my humble request would be a green space with picnic tables, lights, a gazebo, a jungle gym and a water park – an old-fashioned town green)
@Eunice: Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I agree that we need a careful process. And we should demand that our aldermen do just that once we have an actual developer and design to review.
Where is the funding to create and maintain green space in the Austin St lot going to come from? Newton struggles to maintain the green space and trees it already has.
Eunice:
First of all, thank you for an excellent post. I hope you post more often.
I think you make some excellent posts. But I also think the goal of many of the opponents isn’t to measure twice, cut once, but just to eliminate the change altogether. Change is hard. Change in communities like Newton is especially hard. I think the city has done a pretty good (not great, but pretty good) job of informing the community of what is going on. In Boston, this process would have taken 12 months to 2 years (the permit process). In Newton it has taken…six or seven, I’ve lost count. At some point, we have had so many community meetings I’ve lost count, so many hearings and polls and special committees (the committee that evaluated the 6 proposals was filled with some terrific people and did great work in my opinion). We’ve measured multiple times. And we get to keep measuring, in permit meetings and other ways that Ted has informed us of. And I think there are a number of supporters, myself included, who have no intention of letting this project just be “good”, we’d like to fight for it to be great, and won’t be giving up just when a developer gets FINALLY picked. We’ll be in those same meetings trying to get the most out of that developer. We folks get everything they want? No. I can guarantee that. But I also don’t think a parking lot is the best use for that space, and if we can preserve enough spaces for the village AND make it more vibrant AND get some additional funds for that spit shine you are talking about, well, I think that is well worth the pain.
I also fully acknowledge that the last statement (that the end result is worth the pain of loss of parking and the pain of construction) is made from my point of view as a resident a few blocks away, NOT as a business owner. I don’t rely on the parking for my business, and I don’t have to suffer through the loss of profit and cash flow if the lack of parking during construction scares my customers away. I believe the city can and will help mitigate that, through more signage and temporary parking on side streets. But it won’t be the same, and your business and others will suffer more than I will. I’m hopeful that the end result will be worth it, even for the business owners.
I will say that the construction process, if handled correctly, will be less disruptive than you anticipate. Dust is usually not a problem for instance without a teardown, and construction companies are very good these days at working with communities to try and lessen disruption. This isn’t building Newton North, this is actually smaller project with a clear footprint, and apartment buildings with first floor commercial are pretty standard.
As for the transit oriented development, as someone who uses it everyday, it is actually excellent if you are trying to get to Boston. The commuter rail is running far more often these days. The 553 buses are frequent in the morning and the evening hours. I agree that the north/south bus line needs work, which is key since I’d like a way to get to the green line more efficiently.
Again, thank you for posting.
“As for the transit oriented development, as someone who uses it everyday, it is actually excellent if you are trying to get to Boston. The commuter rail is running far more often these days. The 553 buses are frequent in the morning and the evening hours. I agree that the north/south bus line needs work, which is key since I’d like a way to get to the green line more efficiently.”
This is the crux of the problem. If you are going anywhere other than South Station, you have a problem. And you ignore my comment about simply getting to Fenway. What about weekend buses? The ‘new’ Newtonville trains are useless if you look at their times
Saying that since the transit here isn’t helpful to everyone seems to rely on the same logic Colleen is using when she says we shouldn’t build housing that might serve the needs of aging baby boomers at Austin Street because it won’t serve 100 percent of those who would love to live there.
Considering that the largest growth of jobs in Greater Boston has been in the Innovation District and Kendall Square, South Station (where you can connect with the Silver and Red Lines) is pretty darn convenient. And let’s not forget that same line stops at Kenmore and Back Bay, also places where many people work. (It’s unfortunate if the schedules don’t work for baseball games, I guess David Ortiz will never want a condo at Austin Street, but more room for one of Colleen’s boomers, I suppose.)
Isn’t it odd that while a parking lot in Newtonville is not considered valuable, Newton Center is crying out for the construction of a new. Parking garage. A sort of governmental schizophrenia one could say!
@Blue: Au contraire. The Newtonville parking lot is very valuable. That’s why people on all sides are so passionate about it.
@blueprintbill–Not to get off topic here, but:
Newton Centre is not “crying out for a parking garage.” Parking in Newton Centre is at 85% which is considered optimal. I know the merchants don’t like to have to walk so they park in front of their business and then complain that customers have nowhere to park. Crying wolf can get you in trouble. I don’t think NC needs a garage–oh, and the correct spelling is Centre not Center — it certainly is not the center of Newton. The PO has some spelling issues though and couldn’t handle the confusion.
Every property is different, but Newton Centre also has surplus property (the old library) underutilized space (the firehouse triangle and triangle parking lot) and a vast, unsightly paved areas. Some proposals, based on the same comprehensive plan, sought to do better with managed parking and integrated parking structures. Others prefer the status quo of strip malls, asphalt, and ample parking. Yes, Greg, people certainly are passionate about parking lots.
Magz,
Excuuueezze me ! ‘Centre’ of course, having lived there for 29 years myself how could I have made such an egregious blunder. Chalk it up to old age perhaps. Or senility. And in that regard , crying out my be a bit hyperbolic, but just to keep my fellow Newton CENTRE citizens aware, at least one member of the Board of Alderman from that Ward is strongly championing a multi level parking structure over the MBTA , at Newton CENTRE. This is the same BoA that is about to cut down parking capacity at Austin Street. Greg. ? Schizophrenia?
More like paranoia. Shouldn’t the proposal to build parking over the MBTA be paired with the proposal to develop the adjacent Cypress Street lot and old library building?
@fignewtonville – thank you. I absolutely love the idea of going for ‘great’ – but is a soft plan for one building on Austin Street the right catalyst to propel our metamorphosis? “Great’ takes vision and vision is big picture.
What is the best Newtonville? I was at a lovely bbq with a number of Newtonville families over the weekend, and we did brainstorm about a ‘best’ Newtonville. We dreamed about a tree lined Walnut Street with old-fashioned lamps and benches, enough waste containers and recycle bins clearly marked, wide sidewalks that gets cleared of snow and snow banks, a promenade flanked by 2-storied buildings with office and residential units above them that connects the north and south retail pockets divided by the pike & Washington, a gazebo, some green space, a MBTA station with handicap access and a shelter for rain, wind and cold, a Senior Center lawn that is not the smoking lounge for the high-school, 100-year land lease on our ‘surplus’, and yes, enough convenient parking to make everyone happy. Sound great? – maybe. Feasible? – maybe not. But I would back a version of this plan, knowing it would take an excruciating length of time, in a heartbeat because it does ‘feel’ great; current plans for Austin Street does not.
And I don’t know anything about developing land, but I do understand roi. If a developer pays $5M for our parcel of land, his objective would be to get the best roi. It makes me wary when we’re told the public will have our voice heard and all our concerns addressed after the developer has been selected on the final design. I can’t imagine any developer signing onto this project knowing they would be at the constant mercy of public whim on size, scale and design. Yet our questions are being answered with ‘we’re hoping for the best’, ‘trust us’, ‘we’ll figure it out later’, ‘we hope it doesn’t hurt too much’. This is our tax dollars at work. We deserve better answers. This is the crux of my hesitation in supporting Austin Street project today.
Getting great takes clear vision and a visionary. And whatever the final scale of this vision may be, it needs a champion and a leader(s) to show us and sell us that vision. Who is our (yes, our) champion? Are we to settle for a building on Austin Street with a very soft plan if what we really want is ‘great”? And maybe that is why we have been ‘measuring twice’ for so long. We’re waiting to be moved and inspired.
Eunice your comments are most inspiring for many of us in N’ville. The emphasis now in Newton is to build fabulous state of the art schools. The villages have been neglected to the point they are quite a forgotten item.
Eunice,
Nice posts.
Don’t hold your breath, I’ve been waiting for 3 years for a leader. Unfortunately our leaders are politicians and they wont step on each others toes.
If the city had any visionaries, the NNHS debacle wouldnt have happened, Newton Centre would have been built out, OPEB wouldn’t be hanging over our heads, streets wouldn’t be in such disrepair, etc. Visionaries??? Dont hold your breath.
Colleen Minaker — You’re faulting City leadership over something where capitalism was in charge. If we want the city to take charge like they are doing here — there’s a certain cost. In this case we could have gotten much more for the land in an open, unrestricted market. What’s next — buying ugly private property and building out villages in committees? Before we go there, let’s get this done and hope it works.