A plan’s been percolating for quite a while to convert the unused Philip Neri church on Beacon St in Waban into a new development of housing.
The currently proposed design will have 48 units with a big 3 1/2 story building (pictured) facing Beacon St and three smaller “clusters” in the back facing Karen Rd.
This coming Wednesday, May 6, at 6:45 the developer will be holding a public meeting at the Windsor Club in Waban to present the plan. Here are the details of the proposal.
It seems to me that most new developments (and even houses) in Newton are quite large, which concerns me both in terms of density and aesthetics. I realize cost of land is high, but do wonder if smaller scale developments can still be profitable for developers and can’t the city set stricter limits?
There are lots of competing factors but underground/covered parking is very very very expensive and in often cases dictates the size because the city has set minimum parking requirements instead of a maximum and letting the developer choose. If less parking is built then the project becomes cheaper and could fit in better with the surrounding buildings. Will it cause street/neighborhood parking issues if there is no parking on site? Maybe? It is hard to really say, there is a perception that it will but without a comprehensive street parking permit plan it is hard to know the true impacts. This is near the T but not many other things are nearby so the developer would likely put in more parking here than they would for something in Newton Center, they want to sell the building after all. Of course it will also increase traffic because easy car parking is being provided! Everybody wants to reduce traffic, if so lets stop requiring new developments have easy parking on site! If folks have more than one car they would see it as a pain to park and likely wouldn’t buy/rent, if they have one maybe they would but might not end up using it as much if it is a pain to find a space. There is enough housing demand in Newton, anything built will sell.
This looks a bit bigger than the church but I think the actual height seems similar, the developers reduced the roof slope which is why a height requirement can be deceiving and perhaps a more nuanced approach is needed…
guys, 3 plus stories isn’t that big for a development right near transit. Lots of 3 stories homes in Newton, and the Church is 3 stories that is being replaced, correct?
This could easily be twice as large for the site. I think Austin Street IS almost twice as large. Very interested in hearing the Waban folks view of this.
@Rena Loring – you & me both!
Four parking spaces per townhouse really seems excessive for a development so close to the T, and close to a very good, if small, grocery store (I know Waban Market has won in price comparisons in the past), and bank.
If we were serious about ‘transit oriented development’ how about asking for some units that are deed-restricted to be car-free, where it would be a condition of the lease or rental agreement to not own a car, and/or units reserved for people who don’t even drive (elderly, vision-impaired or other medical reasons).
Was intrigued by those real-looking people that look like photographs, cloned into the Karen Road artist rendering. (Are they models who gave permission, or random people shot on the street?) They’re mostly attractive women in sundresses, or guys with cell phones and briefcases. Where are the downsizing seniors this is supposed to be attractive to, or the families with kids that we know will actually move in? 😉
And where is the open space? Not much except for parking.
It looks like they are counting the driveway as parking spaces, 2 garage parking spaces and 2 driveway. 2 garage spaces doesn’t seem unreasonable, bikes, visitors cars, etc. could go in 1 slot (though they probably won’t need space for a snowblower!).
I’ve seen and heard a lot of bad development ideas in Newton over the past few years. This is NOT one of them. This seems like a reasonable proposal, and I hope it moves forward.
Does anyone recall how much the developer paid for this property? I’m guessing it was a lot more than the developer of Austin Street is paying the city for a much larger project.
This seems like a reasonable development to me as well. As part of the “reasonable”, I assume the developer will focus on the abutters’s concerns/issues and provide accommodations to address them. I live 2 blocks from the site (one short and one long) so I live in the neighborhood but am not an abutter.
@fignewtonville: This property is NOT “right near transit”. It is .4 mile from the T. It is surrounded by single residences on all sides. To get to the heart of Waban (one block long), you would walk past seven houses with generous yards and many trees.
What Jerry shows is the front of the building: the back is in fact one floor higher because of the slope of the site, at 4 1/2 floors high. Each townhouse is 3 1/2 floors high, dominating the neighborhood houses that are all 2 1/2 floors high or lower.
This project would fit in Brookline or in Somerville, not in Waban. Never mind the traffic issues or the added schoolchildren.
Looks good to me. It’s nice to see a developer design housing that looks and feels right for the community. It has it’s own character that adds to the eclectic mix in Newton. 48 units in a 3 1/2 floor building plus mixing in townhouses isn’t overwhelming and isn’t much taller than the church. It is close to the T at less than 1/2 mile so it’s in a transit oriented area, much more so than any other proposed development. All the units in the building are less than 1000 sq ft and 2 bedrooms keeping the number of residents smaller.
You can click the link to see the other views. The townhouses look nice. All of this is better than putting 80 units of housing in over 4 stories in a square plain building a long ways from the T.
It will be interesting to see how Engine 6 respond to this, after all this proposed development is in there homeland.
For Engine 6 supporters this could well be a reality check. They are about to discover how 40B projects are not great neighbors. Maybe Engine 6 will put a brave show on, whilst secretly hoping their nemesis, the Newton Villages Alliance come to their rescue!
Life-long Waban guy here (several blocks down Chestnut St), and as I said in a thread a couple weeks ago I support this project as it stands so far. It looks like a great design, including aesthetically. It’s a very pleasant, brief walk from there to the T — seriously, Isabelle? when did a whole 0.4 miles become the Oregon Trail? — as well as Angier, and we could use some more housing in Waban, especially with a solid mix of price levels like this project has. I think too that a number of the other small houses around it have also been torn down and replaced with much larger (dare I say “monster” houses), so this will just be trailing an existing trend (and possibly doing so in a more sustainable way).
I’m tired of people not wanting any new people (except I guess the richest of the rich who can buy their way in to the limited existing housing stock) to live in Newton. Brookline and Somerville are not evil. And you can’t actually expect to be able to live this close to one of America’s major cities and never see any increase in density and development over time.
As I said in my Tab op-ed in 2014, my family could by rights complain about literally almost every (i.e. newer) house or building within sight of our 1890 house being “too tall” or “blocking the view” or blocking our hay fields or whatever, but I don’t live in 1907 and we sold the land so other people could live here too. That eventually included another part of my family, and it’s part of how we’re still here.
I’d much rather imagine how a future resident of this development might meet the love of his or her life at a nearby Waban business in a crossed-paths scenario that would never otherwise have come to be than to imagine dire scenarios of how this development means a Somervillian (Somervillain?) apocalypse.
@Simon – I believe the Engine 6 group is firmly in support of this proposal. If any of the Engine 6 folks are reading, let us know. I’m curious why you would think they would be against it given that Engine 6 was also in Waban.
@Bill- I hate when they block my hay field.
@Jerry,
I curious because its their own back yard.
I’m curious because as with all the other 40Bs in Newton local residents get very upset with these projects.
I’m curious because local residents will soon discover their valid objections can not be taken into account at ZBA hearings.
One of the things ZBA can take into account is traffic. I’m pretty sure any considerations around that will be ruled out considering the properties previous usage!
If you are a 40B Proponent then this property is in a great location for a 40B project. I am intrigued to see what the neighborhood has to say!
Several neighbors have already weighed in and Engine 6 people support it as well though I’m pretty sure none of them post comments here. Not all local residents get upset with developments in their village, but residents who are upset are far more vocal than those who either don’t object or don’t have an opinion.
@Simon – I think we had crossed wires. There’s an organized group with Engine 6 in it’s title. It was started by some Waban folks in the midst of the Engine 6 fight year or two back. They were Waban folks (and others) strongly advocating FOR the Engine 6 project and have since been advocating for other 40B developments around the city. They almost certainly will be supporting this proposal.
There was another vocal group of Waban folks back then advocating against the Engine 6 proposal. I’m guessing that I was talking about the first group and you were talking about the second.
I’d guess, just like every big project in every village, some Waban folks will be for, and some agin.
Oh sure a public meeting about another 40b housing project in Newton. As if a public meeting would make any difference in what the money is proposing. It’s death by a thousand cuts to the character of the so called Garden City. What’s a few more cars introduced to a neighborhood. That’s just inevitable progress,.. If you don’t happen to live next door.
Ain’t it wonderful having all these architectural critics on V14 telling the world how wonderful this monster is going to be. It’s a joke that’s causing the real estate to laugh all the way to the bank,.. Where they will make a charitable withdrawal to donate to certain political campaign funds .
I mean come on, it’s only a block long 5 story beauty that we can all admire at great length while we wait for the traffic light at Chestnut and Beacon to cycle red to green to red to green to red to green.
The politicians won’t mind, but their constituents might. But they are just taxpayers.
@blueprintbill – your post is very troubling for several reasons. Do you honestly believe that 40B housing projects are somehow “what the money is proposing”? Can you please explain exactly what you mean by that? You seem to be implying that 40B is some gimmick that slick scam artists and carpetbaggers use to defraud innocent communities with garish high-profit projects that rape the countryside and crush the helpless communities where they are built. If we were talking about casinos I could probably agree with you, but that’s not what 40B projects are about. Are you just unfamiliar with 40B and the kinds of developments that it produces, or are you being willfully ignorant because it suits your particular style of blog rant? You then go on to state that “It’s a joke that’s causing the real estate to laugh all the way to the bank,.. Where they will make a charitable withdrawal to donate to certain political campaign funds .” I find that truly offensive. Are you stating that someone is making illegal payments? Are you saying that you have knowledge of illegal campaign contributions? If so, payments made by whom, and to whom? Be specific if you have actual facts. You can look up the full records of all the campaing contributions made and received in the state of Massachusetts on the OCPF web site, http://www.ocpf.us so if you know the name of a contributor or a recipient, it is very easy to view complete reports of whatever money has changed hands. If you know something, please tell us about it so we can look it up and see the facts. If you are simply ‘huffing and puffing’ as the old nursery rhyme puts it, we can all go watch SNL for some entertainment rather than paying further attention to your bluster.
H. L. ,
In answer to your ‘ troubled’ , questions let me provide you with a little education.
Yes.
No. You have the answer by your own follow up.
No and No. I would like to correct a lapse in my statement and add the words,.. “causing the real estate ‘development community ‘ to laugh all the way to the bank.u
No.
No. Illegal contributions would hardly get published.
I would like to thank youfor providing the OCPF link. It’s immediately helpful in determining just who, for example, contributed to the mayors campaign war chest. ( any number of real estate interests, a few well known Architects – one of whom sits on our current Zoning Board of Appeals – and curiously, a number of our own aldermen.
Indeed one can, and should, ” huff and puff” as ” the old nursery rhyme puts it “, because current construction is not of the quality providing brick work, and it just might get some of this 40b merde, blown down, or out of the water as a sailor might put it.
I don’t understand why making a living building homes (ie developer) is a reputation of ill-repute. I can understand disliking builders who do a shoddy job (mold, leaking roofs, etc.). But why is making a living developing land into housing, which all reports say is desperately needed in the Boston area, implicitly bad?
Smart growth – near transportation and energy efficient – is good for the environment we live in. Development near transit reduces traffic (less need for people to drive long distances to work, shops, etc.).
Lucia – It’s not the concept that’s troublesome, but a few bad apples who break laws and zoning regulations have cast the developers in a bad light.
Again, I like the St. Philip Neri project. It appears to be a reasonable plan. But a lot more people should be raising questions about the Austin Street project, where the City is selling a piece of property for $1M which is worth many times more than that.
The city is leasing the Austin St. property.
First I just want to say that people are allowed to view their neighborhood anyway they want…it’s their right. It’s also their right to voice or communicate the way they see their neighborhood verbally or on this blog or an any other way. It does not make them bad people or people who “don’t understand” it makes them people with a differing viewpoint. Namecalling doesn’t help, calling someone anti- this or pro-that. allow people to have their own opinion.
That being said, I like this proposal. I hope we move it along.
@Jane
“residents who are upset are far more vocal than those who either don’t object or don’t have an opinion.”
Do you have any evidence to back that statement?
No more evidence than anyone has to back up his/her opinion. I didn’t attend meetings related to Austin St. or fill in surveys because I supported it and thought it wasn’t necessary. That was a mistake.
@Paul – response bias is well known in survey work, which is part of why things like online polls are so unreliable. People with strong opinions are much more likely to respond to a questionnaire or show up at a meeting than people who don’t care or only care a little.
Help me out – I’m confused. Once upon a time I thought I understood the status of the Austin St project, which was that a developer had been selected by the Mayor, and that developer would create a project plan and bring it forward for comment and community involvement and all those good things, and at the end of that process a project would be submitted for approval to the Board of Aldermen. Number of units, purchase or lease, price, all those variables have not yet been set. So why do folks (example, Mike Striar above in this thread, “the City is selling a piece of property for $1M which is worth many times more than that.”) keep repeating things that are simply not true? Or, am I totally out to lunch and he is right, the city is selling Austin St for $1 million and that’s way too small a price. Personally, I think it is way past time to expand the scope of the project, find innovative ways to create a really breakthrough project, and maybe get Newton inching into the 21st century. The little bank building adjoining the Austin St lot, for example, is hardly the highest and best use of that piece of property. Buy it out and add it to the parcel under discussion. Merge in the Star Market parcel across the street – that building dates from the original Mass Pike debacle back in the 60’s. Oops, sorry, never mind, we don’t do that kind of thing here in the smartest and most progressive community on the planet.
Jerry –
I still believe the Engine 6 Project by Pine Street (my employers) was misconceived. There are many locations throughout Newton that it would “fit” so much better. I can’t help but get the impression that my bosses were fascinated and hypnotized with the possibility of planting said site in Waban*, rather than locating it in a more appropriate place.
*There is ample past evidence that this has occurred before with Pine Street, that of locating sites into toney and residential neighborhoods, merely because, well, “the greater good” and we’re the great Pine Street, doncha know? Predictably, those already established in those kind of locations have a “convoluted” history with the neighbors.
H L, I’m afraid you’ve missed the boat because that ship has sailed. The mayor did say he had only selected the developer and not their project, that there was a blank slate and there would be many chances for the community to help define the development that was right for Newtonville. Didn’t happen that way.
Fast forward, the project is the same as it was when the proposals were submitted, except for new car stackers and maybe something else. The last I read the lot was to be leased for 99 years and the proposal was headed to the special permit process. Once there it will eventually be up to the board of alders, but since the new zone MU 4 was created and the parameters of this development fit there’s not much to keep it from passing.
While it’s true that a 99 year lease is not technically a sale, for all practical purposes they are the same thing. So the Austin Street developer is paying $1M, or $10,101 per year. Use whichever number makes you feel better. Either way it’s absurd. And I’m basing my opinion far more on common sense, than my experience in the commercial real estate business. I oppose the Austin Street project because it’s a bad business deal, and a luxury apartment building being presented as “affordable housing.”
@marti – I don’t understand what ship you think has sailed. No project has yet been submitted to the BoA for approval, the process is still ongoing. And if you think anything that goes before the erstwhile 24 members of the Newton Board of Alderman is a done deal going in, I would like to know what planet you are living on. For better or worse, they can take a simple task and spend endless amounts of time on it. let alone something substantial or complicated. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, since it gives everyone a chance to weigh in and try to make their point of view known, and not once, but over, and over, and over.
@ Mike Strair,
You are absolutely right in your assesment of the price paid for the Austin Street property. $10,000 a year is a giveaway !
And what happens to those apartments that folks, or their heirs, have invested in at the end of 99 years? Or if its rental units and its a teardown, ( a stack of mobile homes by that time certainly will be), where would those tenants go ?
I will take issue with yourbranding of this ‘project’ as “a luxury apartment building” however. There will be nothing luxurious about living here, with a supermarket roof top and parking lot to be looking at, much less the humm of the turnpike at all hours!
Back to the St.Philip Neri site-
As much as I’m not a fan of increasing density; it’s a good site for development, the plans look fine and it’s a project that will inevitably happen.
I do have empathy with the direct neighbors on Karen rd, they’ve got a very quiet spot there now, but it’s out of their hands.
Is the meeting only about soothing feelings or is there a practical aspect to it? Isn’t the project under the 40B umbrella?
Rather than watch residents once again get angry at another developer and frustrated at the heavy handedness of 40B, I’m going to the Red Sox game.
Mike,
Let’s take your numbers a step further. If it is a rental (and I am sure it is) then the numbers are 10,000 per year or approximately 850 per month. Who can get a studio at that price these days? Let’s come at another angle. A million dollars will probably be worth 150, 000 dollars in 100 years, 10,000 per year will probably be 1,500 per year and 850 per month would be equivalent to 170/month. AND we lose out in that we don’t make commercial taxes on the property (since we still own the property) I’d say overall we end up losing on the deal. :).
If I kept going we’d probably would end up owing them :).
@HL Dewey
If nothing about the project has been set as you suggest, on what basis did the Mayor choose this developer over others?
@Paul: The selection of Austin Street Partners was covered here and here.
Looks beautiful, but I don’t’ have to live through the construction!
From the Tab;
Dorothy Roberts lives with her husband and family just down the street from the proposed development, in the two-story Victorian home she grew up in before the Saint Philip Neri church was built. Dorothy said a development like the one Argiros currently proposes would change the character of the neighborhood.
“We’re not opposed to someone building four or five McMansions on that site,” Roberts said. “But he’s changing the character of Waban. What’s really disappointing is, if he gets his way, the [new Angier School] will be obsolete before it has a year under its belt. We come from a different point of view. It shouldn’t be weighted to heavily toward the developer and his need for profit.”
I hope the meeting produced some ideas that are different from this one.