Permitting for the “Manchester” — a proposed 40B project on Wells Avenue — has cleared the state and moved into the city. The proposal is for 334 units of rental housing, Wicked Local Newton reports.
“The 135 Wells Avenue project is deliberately designed to appeal to young, technology-oriented professionals and innovation-related workers,” the developers said in a written statement released to the TAB Friday afternoon.
I hope that the developer is including a heliport as well as a water taxi dock at the Charles River next door so people can get out of their new apartments to get to work to pay the $4K rents for their new digs. If not that then maybe they could put in some fly over ramps or tunnels? The city might want to consider turning Angino Farm into a school as it will be needed to educate all the new students that these new developments are going to be bringing to Newton.
So, does the commercial restriction trump 40B in this case?
Why would young, tech workers want to live in the proverbial middle of nowhere?
Elmo – That’s a perfectly reasonable question and one I wondered about. I have no idea what the answer is.
But the same company built a very similar sized residential development a few years ago, in the middle of the 2nd Ave industrial park, just over the line in Needham. It’s called Charles River Landing and as far as I know they did well with it and its fairly filled up with tenants.
Go figure
Thanks Jerry. Seems like an interesting proposal then.
@Elmo and Jerry: You might be surprised to learn how many tech, biotech and other young innovation economy businesses are presently located at Wells Ave. Meanwhile, there’s the new TripAdvisor HQ going up a bike ride away in the Needham Crossing office park (Trip plans to hires hundreds of new employees), and other companies moving there as well. Plus, don’t forget that Mayor Warren specifically went to Israel last week with the goal of attracting new businesses here.
If you’re working for one of these young companies chances are you’re working long hours and don’t want to add a long commute on top of that. Plus, you’d love to be able to ride your bike or even walk to work, a significant trend these days. And living in a building with a pool, Workbar and common spaces (similar to the amenities that make Charles River Landing appealing) to interact with your neighbors can be appealing too.
And while Wells Ave doesn’t have the cool cache of Kendall Square, it is surrounded by conservation land and other recreational amenities that may not appeal to everyone but certainly will be attractive to many.
If I lived on Wiswall Road in Oak Hill, I would be getting nervous about the city, the developer and Mt Ida College working a deal to connect Wells Ave to Wiswall Road. If that happens, maybe someone can explain to me how that will not negatively impact the quality of living in the Oak Hill village.
@Patrick: My understanding is that Wells Ave is surrounded by protected wetlands and that it is not possible to construct an additional road connecting to Wells Ave.
Greg, glad to hear there’s a healthy demand for commercial space and that the BOA gets the final say on this 40B. Better to develop commercial space on Wells Ave and let employees rent at Charles River Landing.
FY2014 Residential Tax Rate $12.12 per thousand of assessed value
FY2014 Commercial Tax Rate $23.18 per thousand of assessed value
@Greg, I hope you are correct. Yet, that is why I included Mt Ida, who benefits from PILOT with Newton, in the possible discussion. The back side of the schools’ campus looks like it could provide access to Wiswall Road if the three parties wanted to make it happen.
The city failed in any negotiations with the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston to gain use of the school buildings at Our Lady Help of Christians on Washington Street. A positive result there could have gone a long way in addressing our school overcrowding issue. Somehow an international school organization, the CATS Academy, has more influence with the Catholic Church, which has several PILOT eligible properties in Newton, than our own local administration. For the benefit of the village residents of Oak Hill, I hope the city has a similar non-successful result with Mt Ida.
@Patrick: I’ve walked behind Mount Ida and that part of Cutler Park. There’s dormitories on that part of campus and then a steep drop. And it’s protected. Not an option.
@Adam: Kinda surprised by your comment. Charles River Landing can’t satisfy all the demand we have for workforce housing now, let alone as the corridor grows. I suspect you know that.
Greg, I’ve got a long list of reasons to oppose this. As much as I love the idea of people walking to work, I’m quite skeptical that the proposed development, placed near a highway exit, is going to attract people who happen to work at nearby offices. Is there any evidence that this is happening at Charles River Landing or similar developments in the ‘burbs? I don’t think the city should sacrifice its limited commercial tax base to provide housing, especially in an area that is not conducive to forming residential neighborhood. I’m equally skeptical of the developer’s promise of an instant neighborhood in an office park with a built-in coffee house. As for affordable housing, I’m all for it, but not in this location for all the same reasons, and more. It goes against pretty much every planning guideline that’s been established.
@Adam: Your concern about loss of our scarce commercial space is the most valid argument against this. But the reality is, Wells Ave. has been struggling for years and has lost close to a third of its commercial space to schools, gyms and medical facilities through the aldermen’s lifting of the very same deed restrictions that Cabt Cabot + Forbes is now seeking.
Companies won’t come here if their employees and future hires can’t find a place to live. (Also, you’re underselling Workbar by dismissing it as simply a coffee shop.) This project can jump start this office park now and in the process take advantage of a business cycle that’s not going to last forever. It’s worth the loss of this one parcel to reinvigorate the rest.
I think Adam’s posts about the 40B project on Wells Avenue crystallize everything I would like to say about this project at this moment in time.
Greg, In certain cases a company leadership team will elect a location based on what’s convenient for them personally (hopefully there are no shareholders involved), but it’s a little far fetched to say any company relocated based on housing for employees. Built it (anywhere) and employees will come
@Hoss: And that’s based on your interviews with job recruiters? Brokers? And in what year? Which industries?
Sure companies move to locations for many reasons. Inexpensive labor is one reason companies move off shore or down south. In high tech, bio science and other innovation sector fields that are hot in Massachusetts, New York and on the west coast now (and where engineers, coders, designers are in demand), you can bet that recruiters and commercial real estate brokers would love to be able to say “And there’s an awesome luxury apartment complex right within an easy bike ride where you/your employees can live for a couple of years before deciding where to settle.”
Not that this is scientific in any way, but I know 4 couples who live at Charles River Landing, and they are all over 60. They say there are a lot of downsizers there.
@Hoss – I’ve worked for a number of smaller tech companies that have moved. In every case, the locations of where their existing employees lived was a big factor in drawing the circle around acceptable new locations.
More to the point though, from my experience, smaller tech companies tend to be acutely aware of the amenities near their location because many of their employees, especially young tech employees, care a great deal about it.
The effort to push Newton/Needham as a prime location for young, high growth companies is a bit of an uphill battle when it comes to the youngest just-out-of-school employees. Even though Needham St will never be Kendall Square, having nearby walkable housing has to be a good thing. One of the problems I see with Weld Ave housing though is that even if you’re lucky enough to work in the near vicinity, your job may be walkable but just about nothing else will be.
All in all, I think that Weld Ave location for 300 units of housing is a bad idea. I just happened to drive past Nahanton/Weld a few days ago in late afternoon. Even before the new 128 exit opens, and before 300+ units of housing are built, and before the new big Trip Advisor headquarters opens, and before the surrounding businesses expand and before the empty premises fill up – that’s one serious bottleneck of traffic with no easy remedy in site.
Greg, The company decision makers will be more impressed if you told them Newton is a great location because there is a concentration of companies in the same field close-by. Your employee base only has a 5 year life these days so pick a location where you can mine off existing talent.
I just interviewed myself. Gawd, I’m bright
What @Jerry and @Adam said. And @Joshua, for that matter.
I see the argument for getting a new approach to Wells Ave, but it needs to be more holistic and also needs to preserve the opportunities for commercial development.
I’ve done many, many corporate site selection projects. Workforce housing is a driver of course, but such housing needs to be proximate to amenities, not just to work. It’s got to be a full work/live/shop/play situation, and it needs to have good regional transportation access. Doesn’t exist here – yet. Might in the future. Housing might be part of the overall redevelopment of the park, but I’m very concerned about starting with majority residential for all of the reasons put forth already.
@Chris: Put me in the column of agreeing with an asterisk.
I too would prefer a more holistic approach but that would also require deep thinking, and ultimately rezoning the park. And as we know all too well, snails move faster than zoning reform in Newton. Meanwhile we’re in the middle of a growth spurt in Massachusetts that, like any business cycle, likely won’t last more than a handful of years, at best. And as you know very well, many municipalities are courting these same businesses now. I don’t believe we can afford to wait.
Greg – I guess I just dont see that a big 40B development at Wells Ave is key to wooing businesses to Newton. Even if it was a big factor, as you say the business cycle is likely to be a handful of years and it will probably be a few years before Wells Ave apartments would be ready to live in.
Jerry: “Key” May be too strong. It’s one piece of a puzzle.
A 40B developer does not have the city’s best interests at heart. It would be serendipitous if this were the best use of the lot. I remain skeptical. Like Chris said, it might be different if this were part of a deliberate plan, lowering targets for commercial development or at least incorporating mixed-use. I don’t recall anything about housing in the N2 corridor or planning materials I read.
@Greg, I apologize for a slow response. Thank you for the added info regarding the topography of the land in question. I admit I have not completed a similar walk so I accept your assessment.
That said, I would add my name to the list of people expressing concern about the project’s viability. The housing would be too “buried” in the Wells Ave complex if the only entrance/exit is the current one.
I thought it was a pretty straight shot (and pretty short) on the trail from the SSDS parking lot to Saw Mill Brook, but definitely conservation land…
Here’s the disconnect: the development is designed to attract local young professionals who want to live close enough to bike to work … but will have to drive to absolutely everything else.
Housing in the Wells Avenue office park is a mistake. If Wells Office Park is in trouble, then maybe the COMMUNITY should get together and talk about how to improve it, instead of having a developer TELL us how it can be better (and to benefit the developer).
The Boston Globe ran an article today about how young professionals not only want to live near where they work, but they want the CITY life. Life in an old office park is NOT hip. There are no hip coffee shops to hang out in and meet people. There are no bars where cool music will be playing.
And once the young people don’t come. . . . that will leave people who have cars and kids . . . and want to live in Newton. And where are those kids going to get schooled???? Countryside, which is the LARGEST elementary school in Newton!!! With no room for expansion. Every apartment will have TWO cars, and we will increase our carbon footprint and our congestion.
If we want development, make it SMART development. Lets discuss where Newton is and where it should be going, as a residents. . . . not with a developers eye for our future.
@NewtonMom: It’s true, the Globe did point out that start-ups and workers just out of MIT and Northeastern do want to be situated in the city. But you neglected to mention this part of the article…
Or this quote from the same article from Duncan Lennox, chief executive at Qstream Inc., “a Burlington mobile software company that is hiring.”
In other words, while the inner suburbs will only occasionally be the first choice for start-ups they are attractive to companies that may be in Kendal Square or the Innovation District, as they grow from 5-10 employees to 25 or more. (Here’s one example). And that’s where Newton needs to find ways to be competitive with other communities along I-95.
As I said earlier, workforce housing is one part of the puzzle.
And for those who might agree but argue “just not here” please suggest alternative locations.
@NewtonMom –
It’s not the largest but certainly one of the largest. I think Bowen might be the largest at the moment.
Newton Mom,
Sounds like urban professionals might really like to live in condominiums or apartments in Newtonville.
Newtonville is attractive because there is a COMMUTER RAIL. There is NOTHING out at Wells Office Park, except the JCC (to work out) but there is nothing there for a young professional.
The Globe also stated that business like the 128 belt because the OLDER/Executives workers that have families don’t want to drive to Kendall Square. My husband was once a young software guy, lived in Somerville and worked in Somerville, and we hung out all over Boston. However, once we knew we were going to have a family, we LEFT the city life, and went to Newton. I would NOT want to live in Wells Office Park, even as a young couple. . . . I moved to a neighborhood where I would eventually have kids, and my neighbors are my friends. We have BBQs and get togethers.
But building housing in Wells Office Park doesn’t seem like the best use of the space! Dare I say a new elementary school, but again, everyone would need to DRIVE there. What kid is going to walk there?????
Maybe build a community center (spaces for classes (art, ESL, etc), pool and make it a community center. . . but again you have to drive there.
Funny, but that area already has a community center (that offers art, ESL, etc and has two pool), a gym, as well as a school, a day car center, a college, a grad school and an acres of outdoor recreation . All of which would give anyone who would lives here far more to do than Sean or you are giving it credit for.
I mean Newton Community Center funded by the City. There is NO way that I can afford a JCC monthly payment and outside pool membership. I meant more community space for the greater Newton people. The gath pool is sooo far away from us on Rt 9 (Highlands), that a second one would be great. I can dream BIG can’t I?
@NewtonMom, 135 Wells Avenue is in the Memorial-Spaulding/Oak Hill/NSHS school district.
Thanks for the update for schools. Any guesses how many kids would be introduced to NPS through this construction?
Greg,
There is an intriguing idea embedded in your comment: multi-family, suburban family housing. But, that’s not what the Manchester promises. The unit mix is intended to draw young, not-yet-blessed-by-children professionals. And, they want (and I’m going by memory here): coffee shops, street life, access to public transportation, quick access to Boston and Cambridge, &c.
Would the younger Greg prefer to live in Newtonville and drive a couple of miles every so often to go to Cutler Park? Or vice versa?
@Sean – What do you mean the younger Greg? Have you seen this guy? He’s just a kid
Well, since you asked, one of the reasons the younger Greg moved to Newton to be closer to the Charles River so he and the younger Mrs. Greg could go canoeing on weekends (I am not making this up), so actually a project that abuts this beautiful stretch of the Charles would have been very tempting. So would the pool, the common areas and, although it didn’t exits at the time, WorkBar.
Living in Newtonville would have been — and still is — tempting too.
But why does it have to be an either/or? This should not be a competition between two parts of Newton, it’s between Newton and not-Newton.
Build them both.