Let’s take a step back from whatever specific projects are being proposed at the moment and try to answer a more general question about “development” in Newton.
What shape would you most like to see for the next 25 year’s of Newton’s physical property development?
For the last 200 years, Newton’s built environment has constantly changed with every generation and no doubt will continue to change. The pace of that change has definitely slowed way down since the building of the mill villages, the wholesale conversion of farm and open land to housing, the coming of the railroads, etc. Make no mistake though, the city has constantly changed and will continue to. In the last generation, in my end of the city, both Needham St and Route 9 have undergone radical transformations. Before that Newton Corner was wildly expanded, the Mass Pike came through the northern end of the city, before that hundreds and hundreds of houses were built in Oak Hill Park as a single project, etc, etc etc.
So here’s my question. In your ideal world, what will be different in the physical Newton 25 years from now. Get into specifics if you can. What if any new housing will there be? What form will it take? Where will it be located? What about commercial development? What new commercial space will there be and where will it be located? How big? How high?
I would like the primary focus be to bring in companies to newton, if that requires hundreds of housing units then fine..
We need the business tax to sustain the future of Newton and to support the increase in growth of potential housing units
Newton not be in the business of social engineering, let the market determine the mix of housing required to attract businesses.
For example, if Google wanted to build a engineering office in Newton and it required to build 500 luxury condos priced at 1million plus then great.
To summarize the above, i woukd like newton to become like the suburbs of silicon valley such as menlo park(facebook), mountain view(google), cupertino(apple)
These towns have great schools, low crime, endless number of companies wanting hq there, housing growth which supports the growth of employees and sky high property prices. Why should high prices be a dirty word?
If something is in demand, it will be expensive. It applies to everything in a non communist country.
After living in the Bay Area for a while and still visiting family there often, I really think the soulless Silicon Valley suburbs are terrible. That depressing stretch of El Camino Real with one strip mall after another and cheap looking housing that all looks the same yet has ridiculous prices, strong car culture…hard pass.
Silicon Valley has had a severe housing crisis for decades that just keeps getting worse. My college friends who moved there for jobs and now recruit young grads are unhappy with it – not just for the reasons MMQC cites, but because it’s hard to find housing that even a family with 2 earners in well-paid technical positions can afford. I’d much rather see Newton become another Brookline than another Silicon Valley!
Amen. There was a house in Sunnyvale, CA that went for over $2 mil earlier this year. It was less than 900 square feet. That’s why you have full families renting out garages in lieu of apartments because it’s all they can afford or young professionals living out of their cars. Let’s not aspire to be like that.
On the defense of silicon valley prices: the area has created endless oppotunities snd wealth for folks who have worked hard all their life.
Some people were lucky, some worked hard, some became very successful and many gave up a could not afford it and left.. in other words..”life is not fair”
Btw, if the solution to attract alot of business tax to Newton was to build city subsidized affordable housing then i would totally support that too. But affordable to who? A single income family software engineer or a single family account.? Let the market decide this choice
Low crime, great schools, 8 miles to boston downtown will never be affordable RELATIVE to prices in Boston.
Either increase the crime or make the schools worse or pray for a long recession
Anyone who feels strongly about affordability can:
-rent out rooms in their house cheap to a deserving family
– build an accessory unit and rent out below market
-buy a multifamily or condo and rent it out below market for a loss
-vote for more progressive candidates
-do none of the above and stop shoving it down other peoples throats
No takers on my original questions?
I’ll bite, Jerry! I would like to see mixed use development, but ones that fit the aesthetics of their neighborhood. Not a bunch of buildings that look like those apartment buildings by Russo’s because those are all over the place. Our villages have character, let’s not lose that! I’d like to see new trees and flowers. NewtonServes has lots of flower-planting service projects…we could have more. My concerns now are schools and empty storefronts, so I’d like to see those questions addressed.
I don’t care for what I see called mixed use. The buildings have residences on top of retail, and it seems that this allows for wood frame construction which is a fire hazard and not as long lasting as steel beam construction. The buildings I see going up in Waltham and Watertown just don’t look well architected and the materials look rather dull. They are just boxes stacked up. I’d rather see apartments and commercial separated. Or steel beam construction with 2nd floor office and 3rd 4th residential with nothing above 4 stories. These buildings would be built to last. Something about the new buildings just look, like built-to-last-30-years-or less.
There’s an apartment building on the corner of Washington and Walker that seems well built, isn’t crowded up to the sidewalk, has some trees. It’s a box, but it’s angled from the street in such a way that makes it feel less box like. As a matter of fact, I bet most people don’t even notice it, because it blends in well. That’s the model I’d like to see.
What I want isn’t about physical construction.
I want a mixed community. Mixed in age, race, income, and whatever other measure you want to use. I want a place where I don’t need to live and die in a car, but have a choice about how to get around. I want a place that lets me age here, lets my kids move back here, but also is a place where I can feel the vibrancy around me.
I want to hear different languages, I want to see the 20-something on a bike zipping by, and the person in a wheelchair safely crossing the street. I want public spaces that are inviting and attractive. I want to sit outside on a warm day, drink coffee and be able to speak with others around me. I want to get to work and get home without it leaving me defeated and drained.
“What I want isn’t about physical construction.” Really, Chuck? Can’t say I buy that based off either things you’ve said on V14.
*other, not either
The physical is a means to an end. We need to change the physical landscape to achieve the goal. We can’t have a street with 4 lanes and make it safe to cross. We can’t have communal gathering points without the infrastructure.
How does that look? Does it use brick or wood? Does it mean 20 story towers? All just a means to an end.
“to achieve the goal.”
What’s the goal? Whose goal? Does everyone agree on the goal?
I was just referring to the vision I have for the future, that was the question asked. You’re free to not agree with it.
I like Chuck’s vision, with the additional criterion that it should all be handicapped-accessible, including within 2 days after a snow storm.
Streets within a half-mile of T stations and commuter rail stops with a mix of four-story apartment buildings, double- and triple-deckers, and single-family homes. Four-story buildings in our village centers, starting with Newton Centre, with, perhaps, an 8-story apartment building thrown into the mix.
At least the half-mile of all roads leading to schools with grade-separated mixed-use paths, suitable for walking, pushing a stroller, wheeling a wheelchair, or biking.
No intersection of a main road and a side street with an opening greater than 32′. No side road greater than 28′ wide, or at least some section of 28′ width every few hundred yards.
Bus-only lanes (at least during peak periods) on 128, 90, and 9. Peak-price tolls on 128 and 90, with funds dedicated to transit. Congestion pricing on Needham St. and Centre St. Green Line extension on Needham St. Right-most lane on Rte 9 eastbound turned into a frontage road, from Langley to Hammond Pond Parkway.
Mixed-use development along the D-Line from Waban Station to Riverside, with more intense development along the Green Line becoming less dense as it goes north.
Two new neighborhood elementary schools, a middle school, and a magnet/exam high school.
Half the current off-street surface parking in the city.
Connection among Oak Hill, UMass-Mt. Ida, and Wells Ave.
Also, no park-and-ride parking at Riverside.
Well since people are posting mostly fantastical things, I would like to see the Pike completely covered with green space, trees, and buildings. How does it happen? Details. I don’t do implementation. I’m a vision guy.
Just make it so.
I like Chucks vision too, its practical and provides work-life balance.. those high level goals are not ‘pie in the sky’ and probably achievable in a 25 year time frame
.. except for the ‘affordable part’. Any town that exhibits the traits just outlined which have low crime, good schools and close to Boston would be so high in demand no amount of supply would create affordability.
As demand increases, new units would be created and would be sold ‘at market’. I don’t forsee any developer building thousands of ‘speculative’ units which could cause prices to drop.
The one way I can see prices coming down would be for Newton to allow houses to be built on 1500 sqft lots. Builders could build a 2-unit multifamily home (NY Queens style) and sell it for 700k in TODAYS market. Effectively 350k for a 2BR 1000 sqft home which is affordable today.
Transit along the Framingham-Worcester line that runs as regularly as the Green Line, more light rail than heavy rail. Rapid transit above Route 128/95 and Route 9. Leaving solid older buildings in place to give the community character, renovating the interiors when necessary. Preserving existing green space.
Otherwise I agree with Chuck’s point that physical development will not do what I would like to see in 25 years. The massive wave of physical development now proposed threatens the social and economic diversity that has made Newton a good place to live. The sheer scale of development proposed along Washington Street will overwhelm existing transit, which is geared largely to rush hour, not all-day travel, as well as further clog existing bottlenecks such as West Newton Square and Auburndale Square.
Regarding affordable housing – this is a national trend that building more units won’t solve.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/17/average-house-price-times-annual-salary-official-figures-ons
Software engineers ( of which I am one ) we’re making 60-100k a year in 1995! Before the internet bubble. Since then, the range has gone up to 70-120k. There’s some guys – founders of startups who might get lucky and have options – who skew that balance higher. But in general wages, including tech wages, have been relatively flat compared to housing costs. This reflects the nati9nal inequality trends. Newton building so called affordable housing will not make much of a dent in this phenomenon. It’s a macro economic issue.
Or, I should say international, as the link I provided was foe Great Britain.
The stats are similar in a western capital based economies.