In recent years more and more houses that get sold are knocked down and replaced by something bigger and newer. Historically that only happened with smaller modest houses on bigger lots. Recently nicer and newer houses have regularly been knocked down. That trend appears to be have just hit a new extreme.
According to the Boston Globe the potential buyer of this $2.7 million, 13 room house on West Newton Hill wants to make the deal contingent on having the option of knocking it down.
That’s a beautiful house! I pass by it and always thought it was so lovely. I would hate to see it go.
One thing that is frustrating about a lot of these knock-downs is that their replacements don’t really suit the character of the neighborhood. Not long after I moved to West Newton (2005) there was a large new 2-family townhouse build on Webster and I thought they did a really good job keeping with the old New England aesthetic with a classic colonial style feel and shutters. But I’ve noticed that the newer tear-down replacements (in the past 4 years or so) have a much different look. There’s a pretty big new 2-family off Webster that looks like it belongs in suburban California. Maybe the house it replaced was beyond repair, but I wish it was at least replaced with something that fit the feel of being in an old neighborhood.
What an awful situation for the seller.. lets put the seller in financial ruin because a few neighbors think the house looks nice.
Current taxes are 25k a year, after tear down i assume the taxes could double.. think of all the exta services that could provide.
If i read correctly, the neighbors want to change the rules, the buyer and seller have both acted in good faith and are following existing rules…
One thing that struck me in the article is how expensive the house is to maintain. My initial reaction was “Oh no! what a shame to tear down such a beautiful house!” but then I read how much money the owner has had to pour into it – and the costs are anticipated to continue:
That puts things in a very different context. Much as I’d hate so see a beautiful home torn down, and hope that the replacement fits in with the neighborhood, it is unreasonable to expect buyers to be willing to make that kind of ongoing financial commitment.
It is really quite simple: if it is not your house, it is not your business.
Just another example of the [Kravitization ](http://bewitched.wikia.com/wiki/Gladys_Kravitz) of Newton
Was this house in the proposed but rejected by a majority of the neighbors West Newton Historic District? Is it in any of the Federal Register Historic Districts in the area?
Yes this house was in the proposed local historic district, and was one of the initially feared teardowns. The plan is to demolish this home and develop two houses on the lot.
The house and grounds are lovely.
Unless we who admire it have the means to purchase it and desire to maintain its beauty, it’s disappointing but none of our business except in passing.
I like the Kravitz reference.
Marti and Elmo, your neighbor’s intentions do have an impact on your neighborhood and you have every right to be concerned. The key legal concept in play is “average reciprocity of advantage” which places limits on our neighbors but also limits on us, to protect us all. Councilor Lisle Baker says “Reciprocity analysis also forces us to disabuse ourselves of the notion that land’s primary function is to enable its owner to reap profits.” So when you buy into a neighborhood in Newton, you have a basic assurance that your neighbor won’t decide to install a toxic waste dump because that’s the best money maker, and they can expect you won’t either.
38,288 sq ft of property and only 2 replacement houses? How come so few? In my neighborhood they would squeeze in quite a few more. Why is W Newton Hill treated differently? Where are all of the advocates for increased density? is this too close to home for them?
Bob
Based on FAR requirements, you could probably build a 20,ooo sqft building. Imagine how many homeless, recovering drug addicts, reformed prisoners, refugees or other causes championed by liberals in Newton.
Of course, since its would be out of place in terms of historic architecture, it doesn’t belong here but they will of course supports its location “somewhere else”…