Mayor Setti Warren and Austin Street Partners are scheduled to sign the ground lease Friday morning, allowing — at long last — the project at Austin Street to go forward.
This project will include 68 rental apartments — one third of which will be affordable — plus retail and restaurant space, a plaza and over 120 spaces for public parking.
Fridays’ signing ceremony at 8:15 a.m. at the Austin Street parking lot is open to the public.
This was a great event this morning. Lots of folks from both the public and private sector who worked to make this project happen were there and even at least one noteworthy opponent. In his remarks Mayor Warren reminded everyone that even when we disagree with someone over one contentious issue, it’s likely that we will be on the same side for another matter. A good message in these politically divisive times.
That said, it was disappointing that only one city councilor was in attendance (Councilor Albright) along with one former alderman who played a courageous role in this project. Perhaps our two other ward 2 councilors — Norton and Auchincloss — had other commitments but their absence was noticeable.
Whether one supported or opposed this project, everyone should be rooting for its success.
“Perhaps our two other ward 2 councilors — Norton and Auchincloss — had other commitments but their absence was noticeable.”
Maybe like their day jobs??
>This project will include 68 rental apartments — one third of which will be affordable
the pessimist in me reads this as two-thirds unaffordable housing!
What I don’t like about these types of developments is it’s not really “affordable housing for all” but rather rich and poor housing. You have to be under 50% of the median income in Newton ($50k annual income for a family of four) to qualify for the restricted “affordable” rate and the other two-thirds are targeted at those making 140% of the median income.
At least that’s what they claim but the literature contains no actual rental prices or indicator of how much salary they expect residents to contribute to rent. I suppose the restricted rate is dictated by the state but for the other “market rate” my math: $105k income/year, paying 50% towards rent, yields $4300/mo rent for a two-bedroom, which seems like market rate for new construction in Newton.
This morning’s event was exciting for Newtonville and for all of us. Thanks to all who came – including (and especially) the Chamber which strongly supports the creation of housing because they understand the impact a housing scarcity has on dampening economic development.
@DavidM – the affordable units in this project will be a mix of incomes 80% of AMI or under.
There are many in Newton who would love to sell their big old home and move to a market rate unit in Newtonville. I talked to a lot of seniors (more of them were home during the day) who represented the lion’s share of people I talked to at the over 3000 doors I knocked. They desperately want us to enable the production of housing for them in Newton, so they don’t have to leave friends they’ve had for 50 years. I also can’t ignore the 38-year old who, with his young children playing in the background, asked me if we could step outside his home on a cold fall day to talk. He asked me to please help make a place for more young people (his age) to move to Newton as well.
My favorite professor in Planning School taught the “housing course”. He told us that the housing market is no different from other products. If you want to bring the cost down you have to increase the supply. The need for housing in Metropolitan Boston is so huge that it will be hard to produce enough to move the needle. But – the Globe reported a couple of months ago that rents are starting to stabilize in Boston, if not dip slightly because of all the work Mayor Walsh is doing in this regard.
The Austin St. Liaison Committee has met twice and they are representing the community well. It was exciting to see how quickly the building will go up (I know that the speed of creating this building was one reason why this project was selected). Hearing how the modular units will be put together on site was fascinating. They will be videoing the process and it will be “must see” for all the kids (young and old) to see.
Susan, I’d like to echo the sentiments of the 38 year old you mentioned. The older folks who’ve been here forever are holding onto all the “affordable” single family housing. I suppose this is because of a perceived lack of quality multifamily housing, or a disparity between what these folks are willing to pay and what’s available on the market.
Artist housing initiatives are something the city should think about too. Places like Cambridge and Somerville have progressive programs to ensure young creative types can help enliven the local arts scene. It seems to me that Newton’s arts scene, while sophisticated, is not particularly exciting for millenial tastes.
@Susan
Please don’t speak for all of Newtonville. There are plenty of us that wished this day never came.
Remember that 50% of your Ward voted you out of office when given the choice. Don’t forget that.
You don’t represent my views and many others.
@yuppie scum – is it a crime for older folks to want to stay in their homes? For many of us, the disparity is not between what we’re “willing” to pay and what’s available – it’s what we can *afford* to pay.
I’d love to find someplace in or near my village that was on one level and didn’t require climbing stairs, while still having a 2nd bedroom for when my son comes to visit, but those are few and far between, and I’m not going to find that for less than what I’d net selling my current place.
@Greg I have a full time job, I’m quite certain you know that.
@Councilor Norton: I wrote that it was possible Councilor Auchinclos and you had “other commitments” but also that your “absence was noticeable” because it was.
Here’s hoping to see you at the groundbreaking! And then again at the ribbon cutting.
@Paul – sorry you feel that way. In the Nov 2017 election, I am honored that I won every precinct in the city, including the 4 precincts in Ward 2. I’m aware that not everyone voted for me. I hope to win back your respect during these next two years.
@yuppie scum – the point that our seniors made to me is that there is no housing to move to in Newton – that is why they stay in their big old homes. There simply isn’t enough multi-family housing in the city.
@susan
>the housing market is no different from other products. If you want to bring the cost down you have to increase the supply.
frankly that’s ridiculous. land is the one thing they’re not making more of so you can’t just increase supply like making widgets. sure you can build up but it’s expensive. also, people from all over the world love to park money into the american RE market and be absentee landlords or just leave the houses empty! it significantly drives up Newton prices and what little housing stock we can generate is not going to satisfy a global market.
also, contrary to your argument the population in Newton was HIGHER in the 70s so we have more housing per person now than ever! what changed is people want more space. people on my block have 3 or 4 people in 4000+ sq ft, which is crazy and yet not uncommon. even a budget minded family of three will turn up their nose at 1200 sq ft that 30 years ago housed a family of 5!
And WHAT IS THE RENTAL PRICE ON THESE APARTMENTS? no one can be serious about moving there without knowing the rental price! of course people gush when you tell them “it’s new and affordable”–we all want that! But in reality the rent will probably be like $4 to $5k a month and subject to annual increases–not retiree friendly.
And while the 33% “affordable” rental units are reserved for 80% of the Boston-Cambridge-Quincy Average Median Income (AMI), Newton median income is much higher making the true cutoff more like 50% of Newton median income for the affordable units.
The actual 2017 numbers are: if you make less than $62k and get picked in the lottery you win affordability. Otherwise market rate is targeted at $116k+ incomes. If you make $62k to $116k then you can buy a coffee at starbucks and look at the building.
to be clear, I don’t oppose this development. the building seems like a good fit for the space. i just take issue with it being called “affordable for all” and people being mislead to think they can afford the “market rate” because the city practically gave the developer the land.
Meredith, Susan, I’m taking an economist’s view of the situation when I say “willing to pay” – I suppose I should have said “willing or able.” Of course it’s not a crime to want to live somewhere that you want to to live.
After the first liaison committee meeting, there appears to be some major problems with Board Order violations. Has Mayor Setti jumped the gun here to facilitate his campaign efforts before his tenure ends? Does this tactic serve the better good of our community? For me this photo op session appears unethical. Some of the violation have to do with the pedestrian plaza, and tree plantings. Others include non conformance for garage exhaust, too narrow parking stalls, relocation of trash pick up facilities, commercial space size reduction and use of lower quality store front materials to reduce costs. This first liaison committee meeting does not bode well for the success of this project. Setti should know better.
Susan Albright, thank you for being a Ward 2 Councilor at-large who champions building housing. (Thank you to Marcia Johnson too.) I’m glad you noted that you won every precinct, including in Ward 2. You represent many more ward 2 residents than some believe or claim. I know many who wholeheartedly support the Austin St development and welcome it’s addition.
Colleen, you may not be familiar with the system – but the things being discussed at the Liaison Committee are not “violations”. There is a process for any special permit where changes are requested. If they are deemed minor enough the developer asks for a consistency ruling. Consistency rulings are judged by the Head of the Inspectional Services Department. The head of ISD asks the Land Use Committee for advice on whether or not the members feel the changes are consistent or not. If they are consistent the changes move ahead. If they are deemed not consistent, the developer has to figure out a plan B. This is the process.
@David M … sorry, but who said it was “affordable for all”? My comments about housing costs being market driven are taken from experts in the field – I didn’t make them up. I’ll agree with you that we are not creating any new land anywhere – that was a shrewd observation on your part. That’s why it is incumbent on us as stewards of this scarce resource, to use it as efficiently as possible.
Susan, are there minutes or other materials available from the Liason meetings? I’d like to review them. Also, if you could tell us when and where that committee meets, I’d appreciate it.
I agree with you 100% on the process, but I also have every intent to hold the developer to its promises, as I’m sure you do as well.
Speaking of which, what happens to the money the developer paid in Ground Rent. Can you discuss how that is working? Are those funds being used for the Walnut redo?
Who is currently on Land Use? Is the new committee picked yet?
Some of the changes have not been approved and indeed. Are violations. Members of the Newtonville Area Council have attended meetings and are most concerned with the current violations. For anyone who wants to learn more about Austin St. simply go to the web and look there.
Colleen:
Several members of the NAC read this blog. Perhaps they could specify what they are concerned about?
I’m very confident the community and the council folks, as well as the mayor will be consistent and fair with the project team, and except the same treatment in return. Our planning department is well-staffed and has done this before.
Before we get into another back and forth on Austin Street, let’s start with those facts.
At this point whether you supported the project or hated it, it is going to happen. So I hope all of us can work together to make it the best project for the Village as possible.
And for the record, if the developer tries to squeeze out of things, they deserve every bit of delay and increase in cost they get. Which is why I think they will be careful not to do that. Trust but verify though is a good tactic for us all… ;-)
I believe January 10 is the next meeting.
1. there is a gas line on the south side of the street that no one knew about – so the trees that were to be on the south side have to be moved to the north side of the street. the gas company simply demands it.
2. At the next meeting, the developer proposed planters with shrubs instead (in addition to moving the trees to the north side of the street). No one liked the shrubs. So – at the next meeting the developer proposed a choice of planters with larger trees. People liked that but the discussion then focused on the type of planter – with the decision that the planning department insure that they are consistent with the look and feel of the walnut st redesign.
3. the next problem was the developer wants to change the shape of the underground parking lot to a rectangle rather than an L – with good reasons for this.
4. If the underground parking changes shape this then effects where trees can be planted on the plaza.
5. The developer proposed moving the trees along the side of the plaza along bram way – which led to a discussion of whether or not these trees would affect the use of the plaza (I’m concerned about this as are others) if/when the plaza extends into bram way.
6. This led to a discussion of whether or not the city would be willing – and under what – circumstances – to close bram way to make the plaza bigger.
7. At a prior meeting, the developer said they would be solar panel ready but may not put on solar panels because the incentives are going away. However – there was an objection from the committee about this – and at the next meeting, the developer said they would put on the solar panels because they found a way to make it work to run electricity for the building. ( I think i have the details right but the minutes will make things clearer.)
Below is a link to all this.
I want to say that there was no hostility on the part of the developer, the city ,or the members present. Rather this was all about problem-solving. These kinds of things happen and they can be sorted out. They offered to bring the landscape architect to the next liaison committee meeting to discuss the issues that were raised – as well as the architect.
The next meeting is Jan 10 – they meet at city hall – all are welcome. Jake runs the meetings and gives people not on the committee a chance to speak at the beginning.
http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/planning/current/austin_street_project.asp
This link takes you to the Austin st page and has an archive of the liaison committee meeting minutes.
Sorry, fignewtonville – I forgot about your question on the money. There has been no change that the money received for the project will go back onto Newtonville. The walnut st redesign has its own funding source in the CIP.
no picks yet for the new land use committee. This will be finalized before Jan 1. This is the job of the new Council Pres.
@Susan,
Was the board order that loose that changes to the parking configuration would not need to go back to special permit granting body? Or are these discussions merely exploratory? The Parking arrangements was somewhat controversial!
simon – the number of parking spaces is the same – it is just the shape of the underground garage. That is why this becomes a consistency ruling. If the Commissioner of ISD finds the change in shape INconsistent then the developer has to ask for an amendment to the board order. In regard to consistency rulings – the land use committee is merely is advisory to the Commissioner.
Susan, thank you for the responses. Very helpful.
Completely understand about the gas line, I’ve seen that before. I’m a bit surprised that wasn’t known earlier, but that happens.
Can you confirm that the utility polls now in front of the building will be going away or shifted to the back of the site? In other words, are the drawings accurately depecting what the building looks like?
If not, with no trees in front of the building, we’ve got a really fugly site now. I can point out examples of this problem with actual addresses if folks want.
In terms of the money coming back into Newtonville, I’d like to stick a pin in that to discuss later.
Again, thanks.
After this, I have to leave my computer….
The poles (I believe there are 3) will go away. (yippee). This job is a city responsibility and they are well on the path for this aspect of the project.
I think i left you with the wrong impression. There will be a row of large planters in front of the building on the south side (where the moved trees used to be). These large planters will have large trees in them. The pictures looked pretty good – they should be online – although I think i noticed that the last set (Dec) of minutes were missing from the archive.
I duly note the stuck pin. Have a good weekend. Got to get going on the latkes.
Councilor Albright: Thanks so much for taking the time this week to provide these updates. Very informative.
That is great news on the poles. I realize folks think I was crazy about this, but sidewalk width and obstruction has a big role in how people end up viewing a building and the stores within it. Sometimes it is cozy (think Nonantum). Othertimes, it is horrible and make you feel crowded. (Needham street)
As for the planters with trees, I’d recommend against them, or at least be cautious. Hard to maintain the trees. Who is responsible for the landscaping long term? The city? Or the building? (don’t feel you need to answer immediately, just asking so I don’t forget)
And thank you again.
@Susan, the DEVELOPER called the complex “affordable for all” in the same presentation that showed trees, an L shaped garage–the plan the city approved.
Now we’re in the “oh turns out we can’t do that and you can’t make us” stage of the project whereby no one claims it’s affordable, can’t have trees, change the shape, etc. and no one has the guts to tell the developer to do what they proposed or start over. All to typical of we’ll show you pretty pictures for approval then build what we want!
Sadly this sounds like it’s going to be in my portfolio of images we’re promised vs what we get: https://imgur.com/a/DpB58
fignewtonville – the developer will be forever responsible for maintaining and replacing, if necessary, trees – and all landscaping – which are part of the Council Order.
so if I’m reading this thread right, the associated picture with the pretty trees is now pretty much bogus, right?
Here is some recent news about parking on Court St. where a new 36 apartment structure replaced 2 large Victorian homes. Some of the new residents are asking neighbors to rent out parking space because the condo parking is very expensive. This will be a big issue at Austin St and Washington Pl where there is insufficient rental parking and the costs are separate from the unit rental fee. The allotted parking is 1.2 per unit.
thinking about this some more…..I find the fact that this project would move forward with no trees to be pretty depressing……but unless its cutting them down, i don’t see much interest in trees in the garden city…..
Denis – there will be trees. In fact, there will be more trees than originally planned, according to the most recent developer presentations. On this past Tuesday night, the developer told the Land Use Committee that they will most likely be able to keep the trees in the plaza as originally planned -because there will be enough depth to plant ornamental trees. This was the only item not decided on Tuesday night. The Liaison Committee will be meeting with the developer and the landscape architect in January (the 10th at city hall) and the plaza will again be discussed. If you are able – join us for the discussion.
Congratulations to Councilor Albright on securing the developer’s commitment to MAYBE do what they proposed.
Colleen, it sounds like the economy is working. Renting spaces results in more efficient use of land, less space devoted to car storage and pavement, new revenue for property owners nearby. Pressure to own fewer cars might mean less traffic and lower living costs (lower rent) for people who are able to get by with less parking.
David M:
Every project is a back and forth once you get past the planning stages. Would you have rather had them plant trees on top of the gas line?
I’m not saying you are wrong to be sceptic. It does require a watchful eye to make sure the trade-offs aren’t just in favor of the developer. But Susan seems to be doing just that.
Let’s give it some time and discussion. I’m hoping to attend the meeting next month.
Given the incredible price increases of the Court Street condos, I hold little hope that Austin Street will be in any way, shape, manner or form available to folks like my wife and I, long-term now senior residents who live on a fixed income. What do I mean by incredible price increases? How about $1,238,800 for a condo the developer told the city would be $720,000. That is an increase of over 72%. A 1BR which the developer told everyone would sell for $360,000 went for $580,000, over 61% more. Even the ‘affordables went up between 18% and 24%. So please let’s not pay any attention at all to what the developer says the units on Austin Street will go for. I can always hope…tis’ the Season of Miracles!