This report was done in Maryland but Nathan Phillips suggests that perhaps it should be applied to the way we think about Austin Street..
“Millennials are different from their parents, and those differences aren’t going away,” Maryland PIRG Director Emily Scarr said in a statement. “After five years of economic growth with stagnant driving, it’s time for federal and Maryland government to wake up to growing evidence that millennials don’t want to drive as much as their parents did. This change has big implications and policy makers shouldn’t be asleep at the wheel.”
Yes, they are different from Baby Boomers – according to the article they want to live in urban centers and be able to walk/bike to work, and they use more public transportation. It does not say they want to live in apartments in the suburbs next to the commuter rail (yes, I know – Newton is a technically a “city”, but it is hardly an “urban center”.) Disclaimer: I am not opposed to Austin Street. I just don’t see it as a draw for millennials or car-free living. I know many, many people – from millennials to baby boomers – who live happy, car-free (or mostly car-free) lives in Boston and NYC, who have almost limitless options for dining, nightlife, culture, shopping, etc. How does that happen in Newtonville?
@Trish. I hear you. But I suggest that as a community we should either…
a.) Figure out a way to make Newton attractive to future generations.
b.) Start building a bigger Senior Center, because we’re going to need it.
As the mother of 3 millennials, I agree with the report and Nathan. My sons wouldn’t consider living in a community that wasn’t on a public transit line. However, at this point in time, the rents in the attractive urban centers (Boston, Davis Square, Brooklyn) are completely out of their reach, so they’ve chosen to live in outlying communities on the commuter rail or the MBTA line. While they still need their cars, with accessible public transit options, they continue to enjoy the amenities of the nearby city.
As younger millennials, they were content to live in really awful (and unsafe) apartments with multiple roommates and divide the impossibly high rents in order to be in Boston or Davis Square, but now they want a decent living space with their wives or SO, and that’s just not happening in the urban centers. An apartment in a community on a public transportation line has been an attractive option for them.
Greg – I don’t know what the answer is, but I know it isn’t a place where the majority of housing options, whether ownership or rental, are moving toward the oversized and/or luxury end of the spectrum. We say we want to allow increased density near “village centers” and public transit to appeal to a “diverse population”, then we allow dense developments of 4+ bedroom, $1M attached single family houses, high-end condos, and expensive luxury apartments. Many of these developments replace older multi-families that had the kind of rental units that millenials could actually afford. Jane – I agree that any city/town on a public transit line that makes access to the city relatively easy will attract younger people – I lived in apartments in Watertown, Belmont, and Newton for that very reason. I just don’t see these types of places attracting people who want a true car-free way of life. And my point about not attracting millenials was more about the rising cost to rent in Newton as opposed to the location. It’s a double-edged sword though – we need more moderate rental housing to attract younger people and keep older people, but in a place like Newton, families will flock to these developments – even 2-bedroom units – and bring more kids into the school. Which would be great if we had any space for them.
There is a critical flaw in the analysis of both the Maryland report and New York Times article that Greg cites. Both pieces show a shift in behavior based on a demographic cohort. For Maryland, its the declining vehicle trips per capita between ages 16 and 35. For NYT, its the declining number of residents aged 24 to 35.
What neither study does correctly is adjust for the increasing delay in having kids among this age cohort in urban centers. Said differently, the shift in transportation use and flight from suburbs is very likely a secondary effect of having kids later. When a study shows that more parents are choosing to raise kids without cars while living in a city, THAT’S behavior that will be worth assessing.
Newton’s core value proposition has been close proximity to Boston, great schools and a nurturing environment for raising children. For a number of decades. Its far from clear that we should be expending energy changing our city’s character because of secondary artifacts from people choosing to having kids 5-10 years later. When they do, they’ll move to Newton.
Much to our surprise, when my kids were on the apartment hunt, Newton was more affordable than the satellite towns attractive to young people. In fact, they and many of their friends have moved a concentric circle out from Boston/Newton/Watertown to find more affordable apartments and have had to compromise on a lot of what they would have liked (forget a car free life when you need one to get to work).
To add to the problem, the increase in the price of housing in the entire metro area has reduced the number of rental units. When a unit on a public transportation line comes on the market, you learn to pounce or it’s gone in a day because the landlord may have 5 other offers. Young families with kids, millennials who are just settling into a career – they need housing with good public transportation and it’s hard to find anywhere in the metro-Boston area. It’s definitely a growing problem with no solution in sight and it’s not just a Newton issue.
I work with a lot of millenials, and a sizable number of them end up renting in Newton along the D line, for precisely the reasons cited. And while they might not have chosen to stay in Boston once they had kids if they were renting there, the ones who rent in places like Newton and Brookline often do stay there, and would be very happy to buy there if they could afford to and are very happy as parents to be able to take public transit or bike to work.
The Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce and the N² Innovation Corridor Task Force co-sponsored a terrific program this morning on how businesses choose a community and what communities can go to “get in the game” to attract the best businesses. Newton’s chairman of the Economic Development Commission, Chris Steele, organized the event, which was geared towards municipal officials, legislators, property owners, developers and anyone else who has a stake bringing new businesses to a community while making sure existing business have what they need to stay. Marty Jones, the CEO and President of Mass Development, was among the panelists.
There is no doubt in my mind that a major key to attracting desirable businesses to locate in Newton is to be able to provide housing that the millenial generation workforce wants and to provide businesses with a predictable, streamlined permitting process that allows them to set up shop. Newton has neither.
The other reality is that as boomers reach retirement age, they are going to need places to live where they can downsize and still be close to all the amenities that make Newton so attractive. Denser housing with smaller units in village centers, which is close to public transit, shopping, pharmacies, health care, etc., are also something Newton lacks. And the plain truth is that if it is not available, senior baby boomers will look elsewhere, and guess who is going to buy their houses? Families with children, who will be paying a premium to live in Newton so they can benefit from the school system, proximity to Boston, etc.
Without a supply of housing attractive to both baby boomers and millennials, Newton is going to be that much less accessible and affordable either to the people who both keep the economy moving, or who will by 2030 comprise one third of Newton’s population.
“And the plain truth is that if it is not available, senior baby boomers will look elsewhere, and guess who is going to buy their houses?”
Slow down, Ted. Whether they move within Newton, or somewhere else, they’ll be selling their current house. Newton having housing for seniors doesn’t impact this reality.
Yes, Paul. But without millennials and boomers, and without new growth, guess who gets left holding the property tax bag?
Fair point Ted. You’re making the argument that if the demographics of Newton change, with more parents with young kids, then we’ll have fewer non-users of the schools subsidizing the schools via property taxes. Its a good point, hypothetically.
I guess the key question is– what’s changed? You point out that seniors need to downsize from their current homes– that’s been true in the past as well. So what’s different now in 2014?
Is there any actual data supporting demographic shifts in Newton?
The demographics are changing rapidly. Population growth is occurring at both ends of the age spectrum and declining in the middle. Check out this report commissioned by the Senior Citizens Fund of Newton.
This report is very eye-opening and valuable. Thank you to Jayne Colino, Director of Senior Services for the City of Newton, the Council on Aging and the Senior Fund for directing and funding this body of research.
What is happening in Newton is but a reflection of what’s happening nationally. The rich are getting richer, executive salaries are skyrocketing, the poor and elderly are getting poorer and poorer and the middle class is diminishing and being squeezed out. Politically, here in Newton, this is being accepted. We have zoning laws feeding the frenzy for larger more expensive homes, and we feel badly that the poor and elderly are being pushed out and we want very badly to build 40b housing to assuage our guilt about it. So Newton becomes a city for the wealthy,.. so long as it can convince them its a wonderful place to live,.. which I fear it will become harder and harder to do as it becomes more urbanized and traffic bound.
One factor to note about seniors is that, even where downsizing makes sense, or is necessary, they hugely resist doing that.
I can vouch for that, having worked with them for the past 3 1/2 years, grappling with financial problems that would warrant downsizing or selling or going into senior housing as options.
Paul – What changed things is the Boomer generation. For better or worse, we’ve transformed how and where people live and move. Then we had the nerve to have kids who are now having quite a time finding housing.
As Boomers age, we’ll need a different kind of housing that takes care of our basic needs. That lovely old Victorian where we raised our kids seems overwhelming at this point in my life and looking into my future, I’m able to envision a time when I’ll need housing with amenities close by and hope to remain close to family and friends.
For information and humor
http://www.city-data.com/forum/boston/177161-best-villages-live-newton.html Thread
From Fall, 2007 thru 2009
OP home search, Boston, ideally, Newton, villages, best school districts, ease of commute, safest/ nicest to live?
Covers a lot of the subjects being discussed. From condo living, kids, good but over crowded, poorly maintained schools, walkable, bike friendly, need a car? (Insurance, car payments), zip car, villages best for public transportation, MBTA slow but more times, commuter rail faster but few times, where to find shopping for “normal folks”, “very upscale shopping,” North Newton vs. South Newton is “upscale, status,” but not generally a place of conspicuous consumption. (“More likely to drive a Subaru Outback than a Mercedes, and more likely to wear LL Bean than Prada.”) with ” … well-educated Baby Boomers still “fighting the man,”) and “an atmosphere of intelligence (nearly all of my neighbors professionals- lawyers, doctors and a massive number of college professors).” And
“Mayor David Cohen is an idiot for spending 90% yearly school budget on one of the most expensive high school.”
From the report: “aging in place is a common goal in Newton, as indicated by the
88% of Senior respondents who stated it is important to them to stay in Newton as long as possible.”
People want to stay in their own homes. So why don’t we make it easier for them to do so? A logical first step, ease the restrictions on creating accessory apartments within the home. It provides income and another body living in the house. And it also creates more affordable housing without the massive density – no one is going to charge $3K/month for a basement apartment.
Good report from Ted.
2 comments:
1. As Emily noted, 88% of seniors said that they want to stay in their current homes. Why would we then support new senior housing when they don’t want it?
2. The reports projects that more than 30% of Newton residents will be aged 60 or older in the near future, growing from 22% in 2010. Do we really have a risk of losing too many seniors (non-school users are Ted noted) from our tax base? Doesn’t seem so.
There’s a difference between wanting to stay in their homes and wanting to stay in Newton. Many of us realize that our houses will soon no longer be feasible for us (for instance, many of us have trouble with stairs), but don’t want to leave Newton or even leave our villages. I’d be very happy if I knew I could stay within a mile of my current house but live someplace where I don’t have to deal with going up and down stairs multiple times each day. Similarly, there are people living in big Victorians whose kids have grown and don’t want to sell because they don’t want to leave their neighborhoods, but might be happy to move to a multi-unit building where they didn’t need to cope with stairs, shoveling snow, mowing, etc.
As Emily says, “88% of senior respondents who stated it is important to them to stay in Newton as long as possible.”
As mgwa says, this is not the same as staying in their home. 90% said they were in good or excellent health, were pleased with their life and still drive.
But if health changed (and with 90% healthy, it will) in the “next 5 years, condominiums were the most common preference for Boomers (48%) and Seniors age 60 to 79 (41%).” These (we) are the seniors who want this new housing and will look forward to giving up yard work , etc. but not their (our) cars.
I know many young teachers, nurses, lab techs, social workers and lawyers who live in Newton. Some have to drive to work, but almost always use the T or the commuter rail to go into Boston. Others take public transportation to work, but use bikes and cars to do other things. Almost all of them walk to shop with their cloth bags and ride their bikes along the Charles to Cambridge and the Esplanade or even to various kayak rentals for a 2 hour trip and bike home. They walk from village to village to catch the D line or the commuter rail, but still want their cars for frequent day trips. Some own and some rent, but they all love Newton and are convincing their friends to give it a try.
“Aging in place” does not necessarily mean staying in the same house. For many reasons, seniors are and will be looking to downsize as empty nesters, both for financial and lifestyle reasons. If there are no options, then yes they will move someplace else. Right now, the options are limited in Newton. Read the Greater Boston Housing Report Card for 2013. It discusses housing generally and the aging population in particular. There is a regional need for more multi-family homes and for housing that is affordable to both the workforce and seniors. Regionally, and here in Newton, we could well have a surfeit of single family homes that no longer suit seniors’ needs and are beyond the means of middle class families.
When my parents downsized, they had plenty of funds on the sale of the old home to enjoy lots of things that didn’t enjoy with decades pent up equity. They didn’t live in Newton and didn’t sell for a million dollars. Why do Newton seniors need low rent housing? It seems to be a market ready and able to downsize without great financial issue. We just need more opportunity
By the way, I have been advocating for making it easier to create accessory apartments since before I joined the board to allow people to remain in Newton who otherwise might not be able to make ends meet. The Senior Fund report talks about the challenges faced by seniors living on modest fixed incomes who want to age in place. Those challenges, however, are not limited to seniors. In addition to creating accessory apartments, some homeowners supplement their income by renting to lodgers (homeowners can rent to up to 3 lodgers) or renting their homes through AirBnB or on craig’s list. And there are, of course, an undetermined number of existing accessory apartments and lodging houses operating “under the radar,” so to speak.
@Ted: To paraphrase Mark Twain, accessory apartments seem to be like the weather. Everybody talks about but nobody does anything about it. Can you explain where the resistance to this issue comes from?
So what are the downsides to accessory apartments?
“Low rent housing” is a phrase used as a tactic to make “affordable housing” sound unpleasant, to say the least. It’s a necessary evil to generalize a certain cohort’s needs to see trends, but in more specific terms those planning retirement have to be looked at as a diverse community, even in Newton. Seniors and empty nesters who have that “pent up” equity and can sell their home at a large profit, probably have many years ahead of them and many different goals. Some have planned to use that equity to support them during these years and want a nice place to live but also want to travel and live active lives, so they are not looking for a luxury condo, particularly if they have sold an older, modest house that soared in value but didn’t change their lifestyle. Others have second mortgages and home equity loans on their homes. Some don’t want to be “condo poor” and some want a nice condo here and another one on a beach. I know one couple who bought a condo in a “no income tax” state, but actually travel most if the time.
I will let the opponents of accessory apartments speak for themselves. The gist of the opposition is added density and detracting from the character of the neighborhood. The downside of making it so difficult to create legal accessory apartments is that we have a number of them that are not up to code. Indeed, the way the only way the city finds out about most of the illegal units is when the fire department is called in or inspectional services gets a complaint from a disgruntled tenant about health and safety code violations.
Or when they get a complaint from a disgruntled neighbor about a single family house that suddenly has cars parked all over the front lawn.
@Greg et.al. Before you dispose of the boomers, you’re going to have to deal with those of us from what’s loosely called “the Forgotten Generation”:, so named for people born after the Greatest Generation and before the Boomers. Oh, yes, there are still quite a few of us left here and many of us are in no hurry to skedaddle to a retirement home in Florida or Arizona. You simply can’t pigeon hole everyone by when they were born. We have 3 Forgotten Generation” families on Dickerman Road; all of us still shovel our walks and sidewalks, but have given over some outdoor things (like leaves and driveway snow) over to others. Sometimes I think we have to be nuts to stay in this house, but most times the two of us are very glad we did. Life’s a crap shoot. We can’t predict what’s going to happen tomorrow, let alone next year. I’ve found it is simply impossible to cover every possible contingency for health problems down the road. We go up and down three flights of stairs many times a day. Does this strengthen our legs and balance, or make a crushing fall more likely? Who knows. We have a contingency plan for getting out of here if necessary. You simply can’t second guess everything. Hopefully, we are here for some more years.
@Bob: I hope you realize I’m not trying to “dispose” of boomers, you or anyone else.
I am saying that we as a community ought to be committed to finding ways to make Newton attractive and available to millennials and future generations….either that or build a Newton North-size Senior Center.
And as we think about what that would take we ought to pay attention to the data which tells us that millennials at least are a lot less interested in or inclined to drive.
@Hoss – you wrote:
When my parents downsized, they had plenty of funds on the sale of the old home to enjoy lots of things that didn’t enjoy with decades pent up equity. They didn’t live in Newton and didn’t sell for a million dollars. Why do Newton seniors need low rent housing?”
If I sell my 2 bedroom (1/2 a 2-family house) in Newton, a 1 bedroom condo in Brookline will cost me about the same amount – no savings there. Any rental in Newton (assuming I could find one without stairs) or Brookline will cost me twice what my current mortgage costs. Not all houses in Newton will sell for a million dollars, and not all of us need major downsizing but rather need to move someplace similar sized but without stairs, shoveling, etc.
mgwa — Just asking that we in Newton put things in perspective… I don’t think we need “affordable” options for seniors in Newton as much as you need basic options. This is different in most of the state where housing downturns last 20 years on average and many are still suffering equity loss and have dire need of affordable options. You’ll here many seniors that have millions in investments complain they live on a fixed social security. Yea, it’s fixed, but the leverage you got on the millions on the balance sheet doesn’t get you into affordable housing.
@Hoss. Am I missing something. They have millions and they are are concerned because they can’t get into affordable housing.
BOB BURKE — I’ll close out by clarifying that I very much agree Newton needs more senior friendly housing choices. Lots more. But any housing choice is not going to be cheap. The rental rate will be about the same as a typical SSI amount. The condo alternative doesn’t change the monthly payment much. We can’t be thinking low rent/cheap/affordable or anything like that — it is what it is. Expensive and desirable.
@Ted: I believe that in terms of the results of this study, “aging in place” indeed means staying in their own homes:
“Results from the resident survey suggest that a large proportion of older residents have lived in Newton for many years. The majority (63%) of respondents age 50 and older reported living in Newton for 25 years or longer, and nearly half (49%) have lived in their current residences for that long. Thus, much of the growth in the older population has occurred as a result of Newton residents aging in place.”
Reading the report and thinking about the growth in our 60+ population that is coming, I wonder about our spending priorities — in particular how much we are spending on the school age population versus this growing segment. Most of the last override was about school costs for example. Our ~80% of residents who do not have kids in the public K-12 system have been very generous in supporting school costs in the past, but they may start to grumble as they consider our ancient Senior Center for example.
Emily, I hate to differ with a valued colleague (oh, who am I kidding). It depends on whom you ask. The CDC defines aging in place as “the ability to live in one’s own home and community safely, independently, and comfortably, regardless of age, income, or ability level.” HUD defines it as being able to remain in one’s home or community. It may also refer to being able to remain in the residence of one’s choice, for as long as one is able, as one ages. That could be the home one has lived in for many years, or a different home that allows one to age in place within the same community, or in a community like Lasell Village.
Aging in place is more than just staying in the same house, it is about being able to live independently as possible within a community where one has ties to family, friends, physicians, services, etc. By way of example, for someone who has become disabled due to age, such as a mobility impairment, a 2-1/2 story Victorian with staircases between floors and no lift is not going to allow that person to age in place. On the other hand, a fully accessible one-story house or a flat in a building with an elevator in the same community would.
Emily, as I and others have pointed out, it doesn’t say that at all. Having lived in homes a long time, it would be nice to be able to stay in Newton, preferably the same village.
“As Emily says, “88% of senior respondents who stated it is important to them to stay in Newton as long as possible.”
As mgwa says, this is not the same as staying in their home. 90% said they were in good or excellent health, were pleased with their life and still drive.
But if health changed (and with 90% healthy, it will) in the “next 5 years, condominiums were the most common preference for Boomers (48%) and Seniors age 60 to 79 (41%).” These (we) are the seniors who want this new housing and will look forward to giving up yard work , etc. but not their (our) cars.”
Hoss, we know different people. I don’t know anyone with millions who would even entertain the thought of wanting to try to qualify for “affordable housing.” Many boomers, etc., as mgwa points out, will need to rent condos that are comparable to their mortgage payments, not luxury, expensive ones (those are already here) if they want to stay in Newton.
Ted, yes.
Emily – Many years ago my Republican mother, a senior citizen at the time, taught me that support for the schools and children services was part of the social contract. I really hope this isn’t turned into a generational battle, and I doubt it will be because that means my generation would be asking for more for ourselves at the expense of our grandkids. No thanks. We’re all in this together and somehow we’ll have to figure out how to take care of a wide spectrum of needs without pitting people against one another.
At some point, we’ll not be able to maintain our house and I really hope there’ll be options in Newton for one or both of us – an apartment/condo with no stairs, shoveled walks, an easy to care for place close to friends, etc. It’s simply not realistic for Newton (and the larger society) to ignore the changing housing needs of a growing senior population. Even if those approaching senior citizenship want to deny it right now, their needs will change as they age. Surveys don’t mean much when faced with the realities of life.
C hair lifts between floors and acessible bathing facilities, both added at reasonable prices and with subsidies, would make it possible for a lot more people to age in place. Can our CDBG and other grants do something about this.? Could scholarship membership in Newton at Home be provided?
Accessory apartments are not the panacea that some see. The safety need for a second means of access is a very substantial barrier to secondary apartments in many homes.U
@Greg. I was writing with just a bit of tongue in cheek and I know from your work on the area council that you are very sensitive to keeping me and other seniors in Newton. I was only trying to say that you can’t always predict generational changes in Newton housing by looking at the age of people living in Newton houses today. If Newton at Home and some other initiatives really start getting successful, you might find that more seniors like me can actually find ways to stay in their houses longer and this could throw a lot of projections to the wind. Brian Yates hits on some critical additions that might help us and other seniors actually finish out our days here
I’ve had a dark but fanciful thought in my head for sometime that is either grossly morbid or the best kind of West of Ireland humor. There’s a picture of my mom holding me on our front porch the day she and my dad brought me home from the hospital in 1937. We are still in that house. I’m thinking that if by some miracle I could stay here until I pass to my heavenly reward in my late 80’s or early 90’s, that we could hold an old fashioned Irish wake in our living room, the way a few Irish families that lived on Harrison Street did when I was a kid. Of course, they would have to carry the casket out the very same door where my baby picture was taken and someone from the Tab could be there to snap one right at that minute. The Tab headline under the two photos might say “HE CAME AND NOW HE’S FINALLY GOING.”
Jane also hits on other things that go through the head of every senior and those approaching the “Golden Years”.
@Marti writes “Many boomers, etc., as mgwa points out, will need to rent condos that are comparable to their mortgage payments, not luxury, expensive ones (those are already here) if they want to stay in Newton.”
According to the survey, Newton households headed by individuals age 65+ have a median income of $61,621, and over 25% of residents 65+ have an income under $25K/yr. The majority (63%) of respondents age 50 and older reported living in Newton 25 years or longer, and nearly half (49%) have lived in their current residences for that long.
In short, a lot of seniors don’t earn much (by Newton standards), and many have probably paid off their mortgages. This means many seniors are currently paying property tax + insurance: $800/month plus or minus. Proposed rents in the Austin St development were $2500-$3300/month.
That reality, in addition to their expressed preference, is another reason I think we should be trying to help people stay in their homes.
As a millennial, and a quick scan of the commenters makes it likely I am the only one actually in that generation commenting (besides the parents highlighting their child’s experience), I agree with this. While many in my generation have access to a private auto vehicle, they find that other modes may suite them on a daily or trip basis. I am personally car free and Newtonville is a reasonably easy village to be car-free in. I would say Newton Corner and West Newton are as well and then Newton Highlands and Newton Centre. While the greenline is great it really only brings you into Boston. Living in Newtonville allows you to get to Waltham, Watertown, Needham, everywhere on the Worcester line, and Boston with a one seat ride, add a second seat and you are pretty much everywhere in Metro Boston. Having access to Zipcar is important as well, it has expanded to most transit accessible villages over the past year and I often see zipcars being used both on the roads and when I want to reserve one.
My fiance and I choose Newtonville, and specifically along the 59 route for one key reason, her job in Needham. It also allows us to get to pretty much everywhere we want to go within a reasonable time. The community is great, I know and talk with my neighbors, and am engaged in city government and community events (Newton Serves etc.).
We love Cambridge and somewhat Somerville, but we can’t get the same amount of space there for what we pay monthly to rent here. The demand is here, give us more housing options with more and different sizes and you will see it fill up in a flash. We have pretty good transit considering our density is kinda low, if we can add more folks into our village centers we provide more of a base for that transit and can potentially leverage expansion of that transit. That transit expansion can then enable seniors to give up their vehicles. Many continue driving into their 80’s, stats show that is very dangerous for them and for everybody else, but many feel they have few other choices.
We cannot expect the community to stay exactly the same as it is now, it is always changing and evolving, based on the market, and based on what developers think the market wants, it has always done that too.
We are very different than previous generations, and continuing to think that we will do the same thing our parents or grandparents did is very dangerous, I guarantee you we won’t (obviously some will but not likely the majority).
@John_on_Central – thank you for sharing your observations.
Emily – What survey are you quoting from?
No one is living in a house in Newton for $800 a month. Without a mortgage, the expenses of living in a house in Newton are double or triple when you add in necessary maintenance needs. If you do just one major repair a year (not an upgrade – just basic repairs like a new roof, replacing a boiler, exterior painting), the monthly payment doubles. Sometimes the cost of maintenance makes it difficult to stay in one’s home.
But the real issue is how aging in place is defined. From your perspective, it means staying in one home. However, as the concept becomes a reality, people who want to age in place focus more on what type of housing will allow them to remain in the community as their needs change. In addition to the living space, the community becomes the “place”.
Wouldn’t it be great if transportation options in a housing development attracted both young professionals AND seniors in an intergenerational living community with shared transportation priorities? Car share/ride share/bike share/parking share/transit. There are now apps for every one of these and they are scaling rapidly.
@Jane – the survey by the Senior Citizens Fund of Newton that Ted linked to above.
Thanks, Emily. It’s referenced as a report in Ted’s comment. Just a quick skim indicates that the resident survey may be a weak point in the report. It went to “randomly selected” residents over 50 and so far, I don’t see an indication of the rate of return of the survey. We weren’t randomly selected unfortunately.
Given its demographics, Newton can and should aspire to be an .age friendly, livable community. Such communities make life better for everyone, at every stage of life, regardless of age or ability. We do not have to go very far to find a shining example.
Seriously, as Jane stated, tt really takes some sacrifice to stay in Newton and in this house. I’ve just been through a bout of two operations and it brings home just how vulnerable and fragile we can become with one serious accident or illness.
It just so happens that I received the latest email newsletter from the naval bomber squadron I served with during the early and mid-60’s. 42 living veterans on this list and I’ m the only one that doesn’t live in Georgia, Florida, South Carolina or some other state way south of the Mason Dixon Line. From time to time I get snarky emails about living up here with the snow, taxes, rude people and “liberals.” I give as good as I receive telling them that living through winters up here “builds character” and that there’s more to life up here than “early bird specials and flea market sales; but when Ted posts the webpage from Brookline, it does make you think that we have a lot of catching up to do here.
Incidentally “John-on-Central” is absolutely correct about the preference of younger people to live on the north side of Newton or in places like Belmont, Arlington Watertown or in parts of Somerville and the South End if they don’t have kids. I’m a part time relocation consultant for professionals who come from other countries to work for 2 to 3 years in corporations or universities. A lot of the “transferees” I help are in their early to mid 20’s and they are far more interested in good public transit, biking opportunities and occasional rentals through Zip Cars etc. than in purchasing or leasing a car. So the trend that John sees with younger people here may be reflective of new priorities and values among younger folks that are taking place globally.
Another reason financially constrained seniors and millenials may want to go car-free is that it’s a major housing expense (not to mention the cost of fuel, license, registration, insurance, maintenance). Just consider this cost alone to the price of a condo: “…surface spaces cost…around $20,000; garages and structures cost $50,000 per space; underground spaces can cost $80,000 per space.”
http://la.streetsblog.org/2014/10/17/new-ca-database-shows-how-much-parking-costs-and-how-little-its-used/
Brookline is indeed a wonderful model that Newton’s Council on Aging has been looking at for several years. But we are not Brookline. We are a series of villages, each with distinct personalities. Brookline is more urban than we are. My grandparents lived their last years at 100 Centre Street in Coolidge Corner, housing for the elderly where everything was in walking distance. My grandfather walked up and down Harvard Street every day greeting the merchants up until he passed away suddenly — at age 97! There is no village like there here in Newton and it doesn’t look likely that Austin Street will fill that need in my lifetime!! People want Newton to remain exactly as it is, I get that…but there is the potential for it to be so much more. The NIMBY-ism is what will keep us from ever being what Brookline is to its seniors.
I should also mention that even the current level of services to our seniors is being threatened. There is no longer a dedicated social worker for them. There are no longer medical screenings at the senior center. The senior cneter is being tapped for so many other uses that it is no longer even called The Senior Center by those in City Hall…it is now merely known as “345 Walnut”, so as not to make the other groups that are encroaching on it feel uncomfortable. But the senior who use it daily DO feel uncomfortable, and feel scared and nervous that our mayor has forgotten them. Yes, Ted, Brookline’s care of its seniors is a fine model, but we here in Newton move further and further from it on a daily basis…..
Maybe this baby boomer was ahead of her time, but when my husband and I moved to Newton Centre from Cambridge nearly forty years ago, I was determined to continue leading as car-free an existence as possible, something that was actually feasible then, before the butcher, the baker, and any number of other good, practical shops faded away from the village center. Having even a few of them back would make our present plan to age in place, staircases and all, a lot easier, while also making the neighborhood more attractive to millennials who would prefer village living to car dependency, if that village were capable of providing at least some of their daily needs within easy reach. But those magnets are gone, and it would require active planning to replace them. Panera may be some people’s idea of a neighborhood necessity, but I still think of it as a massively disappointing waste of space in a block that once held a grocery store, and could have done again if someone in city government had seen that kind of decision making and deal brokering as a proper public function.
Native Newtonian, like you I sometimes despair that Newton is moving away from the kind of livable community we ought to be. I was born in 1959, at the end of the Baby Boom, but I feel some urgency about planning for an age friendly community in which my wife and I can grow old together. When we moved from Brookline to Newton, we chose West Newton because of Cinema, the restaurants, communities of faith, grocery stores, shops, pharmacy, post office, banks and all the other amenities we could easily walk to with our children in strollers. The same walkability we enjoyed then in our village should serve us well into our later years. But as Amanda makes clear, as a city we need to deliberately and intentionally plan for a community that will attract and retain all of the things that make Newton’s villages so great or we are going to lose it.
I also share your concern about what is happening with the Senior Center. Like the Newtonville Library that it used to be, it is a treasure, and I refuse to call it by its street address. It would be a tragedy for its mission to go unfulfilled because of a misguided policy decision by the current administration.
The former Newtonville Library/now Senior Center is a treasure and can be used as a resource for the entire community. Just as we use the schools for various community events, we need to think about how to expand the use of other public spaces to engage the entire community in city life. Using schools for other community events hasn’t undermined their basic mission. In fact, a well-used space lends a sense of liveliness to it. Nothing is more deadening than a “lights out” look to any building – public or private.
@John_on_Central:
As I wrote above– you’re car-free existence makes sense and is admirable today. Get back to us with your living situation once you’ve had a few kids, they’ve reached school age, full of post-school activities and playdates. Very different situation than the one you have today.
@Emily re: costs.
If you consider an average home net return to sellers of $700,000, with a 3% return per year– both pretty conservative figures– that’s $21K per year to spend on housing, which is $1750 per month, which is pretty much the difference in cost between the property taxes/insurance and rent differences you provided above. (Also should factor in some home maintenance costs as well).
Altogether, financially it’ll probably be a wash for most seniors.
Paul, even if your business as usual scenario is correct, a permanent delay in the start of car ownership means a smaller proportion of the overall population at any time owns cars.
Recent data from travel mode choice at our high schools show that many more high school students are being driven to school than are driving themselves to school. I remember the opposite when I went to high school in the 80s. I wonder if millenials are being groomed to not want to own cars because they are increasingly accustomed to being chauffeured.
jane, some of what you say may be true. But a decision-making process about the future of the Senior Center that excludes the Council on Aging seems fatally flawed from the get go. Newton has one of the first and best senior centers anywhere. Messing with something that is working without a deliberate and comprehensive plan that includes all of the stakeholders seems doomed to failure.
It really seems in direct opposition to addressing the needs of the growing over 60 population to extol the validity of using our Senior Center for the benefit of the entire community. I agree that it’s mission will need to expand and not calling it the Senior Center and not involving the Concil on Aging weakens it’s impact. The volunteers who help seniors with their income taxes and with the complexity of choosing Meducare options along with other necessary functions are invaluable. I’m surprised to learn it no longer holds health screenings.
@Marti, obviously I agree.
Jane, it would be different if public schools were no longer identified as such, and were instead merely referred to by their street address and designated as a “community center,” rather than as a school, which remains at the core of their mission. My concern is that the Senior Center will no longer be able to fulfill its core mission if it is morphed into a community center. As recent Coming of Age newsletter recalls, the Senior Center was created over twenty years ago through an unprecedented collaboration of “older residents, the Board of Aldermen, City Boards and Commissions, other city departments, businesses, supporters, and others who had concerns about centralizing the senior center. Mayor Ted Mann’s administration, the Newton Council on Aging, the Senior Center Steering Committee City funds, Community Development Block Grant funds, and donations raised by the Senior Citizens Fund of Newton, Inc. provided funding and support the Senior Center. With such a variety of support and input, we worked together to plan, listen, and reflect the needs and interests of the community in the facility and the programs it offered.” If the primary mission of the senior center is to be changed, the same stakeholders should all be involved.
If I may clarify, I’m not advocating morphing the Senior Center into anything other than what it is. But I’ve been to many meetings in that building when it was not being used for its primary mission, and that contact has allowed me to see the work and activities that go on in the Senior Center, so I’m a more informed citizen who’s more likely to advocate for senior services at budget time. Not to mention, anything that encourages intergenerational contact is a positive for the city. The outside groups that meet in a school have a different kind of connection to it (and vice versa) and to the system as a whole than those whose only contact is just driving by. It’s a model that can work to the benefit of everyone.
Jane, the Senior Center is well used in its “off hours” and that is wonderful. In fact, a dream of the Council on Aging would be for the Center to be a part of a larger community center wherein our seniors could benefit from interaction with a vibrant community, and the community could benefit from our seniors. But what is missing, as ted has said, is the interaction with the Council on Aging, and the Department of Senior Services when discussions are taking place regarding the buildings use and future. Also, the building is woefully inadequate for what the mayor seems to be pushing. It is dire need of capital improvements reflecting not only modernization but also public safety.
Ted always complains about everything the mayor does. This not my area of expertise, but we’re hearing from one complainer and two anonymous posters whom I don’t know and, frankly, that’s not much to go on. I just wanted to express the opinion that it’s in the best interest of everyone for all public spaces to be used by as many residents as possible.
We have many woefully inadequate buildings in the city that are in dire need of capital improvements to address public safety concerns. Not to mention, this thread was about a totally different topic. I love a blog that wanders, but we’re way off track here.
@Jane, that’s unfair. I am merely reiterating the concerns relayed to me by some people who are directly involved with the Senior Center. Perhaps you should talk to someone with some actual knowledge of the facts before you go passing judgment and engaging in name calling.
What Ted said. I have had constituents raise concerns to me about changes at the Senior Center as well – including reduced services as Native Newtonian describes.
If I could return to the question of millennials who’d like to live here if only there were suitable accommodations . . . Why is the Newton Housing Authority maintaining Pelham House as affordable congregate living for a demographic (55+) that clearly isn’t interested? The place appears to be half-empty at best. What isn’t attractive to older people–an efficiency apartment plus access to communal living space–might be quite appealing to an age group not far removed from dorm living. It seems absurd to give developers free rein in hope of scoring an occasional affordable unit when the city isn’t filling the affordable housing it already owns.
What is Pelham House? The links on the Newton website lead nowhere. There is a photo from 2009 but that’s it.
Pelham House is a former nursing home with a very dodgy history in this neighborhood (the edge of Newton Centre village). About 10-12 years ago a group that subsequently went bust developed it as affordable housing on a congregate living system (as I mentioned, small private apartments plus access to communal space) for people over 55. But in recent years it was taken over by the city, and the place is barely inhabited. I believe when it went through lengthy hearings before Land Use, a promise was made that it would remain affordable housing no matter what, but I don’t think that either the age of residents or the communal living aspect is etched in stone, not should it be if that’s what’s keeping people from moving in. If the city is quietly emptying the place out in the hope of selling it, they’ve certainly kept the news to themselves.
As someone who walks by the Senior Center every day twice a day, at night it is dark and not used more often that it is used. I’m with Jane, I want our buildings to be used as much as possible. Senior Center uses get first priority, but they shouldn’t be able to prevent logical community uses. And Ted, let’s not forget that it used to be the Newtonville Library branch. I understand why that isn’t needed, but this is a Newtonville building as well as the Senior Center. At the very least, Newtonville should be able to host events in it.
Other communities (Weston for instance) have a “sign out” process for different public spaces. Why can’t we?
Finally, I completely agree that the Senior Center needs work. The outside alone could use some umbrellas for the furniture and some new light bulbs (is it really so hard for the city to change the light bulbs now and again in the outer lights?) as well as a new fence section. The inside needs a fair amount of work.
Great resource overall, needs some updating, and I just would like it to be used.
As for Pelham House, there might now be deed restrictions or affordable housing restrictions for the property. Maybe Ted or another Aldercritter can respond.
@fignewtonville, I have no problem with using the Senior Center to host events, or other legitimate municipal purposes, when it is not being used by Senior Services. But some residents and seniors I have heard from are concerned about a possible change in purpose of the Senior Center. I am suggesting that the stakeholders should at the very least be involved in that decisionmaking process. In addition, I believe that any transfer of the building to another department would also require approval of two-thirds of the Board of Aldermen.
Oh my goodness, fignewtonville….who ever said that the Senior Center should not be used for other groups, especially Newtonville based groups??!! We love having it used, and welcome groups coming in after 4:00. Or even before 4:00 if there is space. What is not welcome, and should not be welcome by yu or Jane, are rumors swirling about name changes and usage changes. What is not welcome are staff people from other departments taking over offices when there are not enough suitable offices for senior center staff. What is not welcome are offices that flood with any amount of rainfall, causing mold to grow in such volume that staff quits due to the health hazard. What is not welcome are senior services being CUT.
Fig, none of the improvements that you mention have anything at all to do with budget items that the city would be involved in. All of that sort of improvement is funded by the Senior Fund of Newton, not, I repeat, not the City. The Senior Fund installed the fence that you say needs repair, paid for by donations. Most of what you mention are cosmetics….what the city needs to do before expanding the use is to fix the flooding, fix the mold, fix the crumbling stairs that make the emergency exits unusable. Way more important than umbrellas and such (though they would be nice, I agree!)!!
Please do not ever think that the Council on Aging or the Department of Senior Services does not want to be part of the greater Newton community! That is so not the issue here…..!
I agree with my colleagues above. The Senior Center still has a substantial book collection left over from its days as the Newtonville Library and recently reorganized by Senior Center volunteers. The examples of the Auburndale Community Library and the Waban Library Center show that a vibrant focal point of community life can be developed with such a core collection. Perhaps the Council on Aging and the Newtonville Neighborhood Area Council could work together on this.
Alderman Yates, is that one of the ideas being proposed for the new Community Center that you all are preparing to replace the Senior Center with? Turning it back into a library?
I agree completely with Native Newtonian on the urgency of repairs needed, the use of the facility by the community and the danger of the Senior Center losing sight of its mission.
Ald Yates, the Auburndale and Waban libraries serve a great purpose. Newtonville, however, has a multi purpose, well stocked library, already a “vibrant focal point of community life,” just a couple of blocks from the Senior Center. There are better uses of our valued Senior Center.
Do people not know the many community uses of the Senior Center. In addition to the two I named above, are yoga and writing classes and a place to vote.
@Marti. What is that other place in Newtonville In addition to the senior center) that serves as a focal point for the village? I’ve been trying to make a list of what every village has for something I’m putting together. And I don’t believe that either the Mayor or Alderman Yates have any plan or desire to compromise Senior programs at the Senior Center. I don’t use the Senior Center, but know folks that do. All of them have told me that they only want to go there during daylight hours and they also feel that very few seniors, if any, would want to venture there in the dark. I’m a member of the Mayor’s Veterans Outreach Committee that uses the Senior Center one evening a month for meetings. It’s actually Gulf War, Iraq/Afghanistan veterans and other younger guys that do most of the heavy lifting, but it’s pretty apparent that what we do there in no way compromises the activities or programs of the Senior Center itself.