Principle Group launched their Washington Street community input sessions earlier last week at a visioning session. Participants placed dots on posters of black and white drawings of different configurations of buildings – red, don’t like and green, like. They also wrote comments on maps of the area and on the drawings, then met with small groups to come up with 3 Points of Common Agreement and 3 Points of Divergent Ideas to share with the larger group.
Photos of the 30 posters, including 3 of each type so all participants could write on the same ones, used in the visioning session for Washington Street, along with their colored dots and comments, are posted here. The posters themselves are up at the pop-up Public Design Street Studio at 1239 Weashington Street, next to Sweet Tomato’s in West Newton Square.
These are called Character Districts. They range from rural to urban – CD1 to CD5 including combination districts. I’m not sure why certain ones are even included, such as purely residential districts (CD3.1 and CD 3.2) and residential districts with limited commercial (CD4.1 and CD 4.2) because there is no plan for them on Washington Street.
CD 5.1 is a large, low building surrounded by parking, such as the present Whole Foods at Four corners. It’s totally out of date and ugly.
CD 5.2 is a row of 1 to 3 story commercial and residential small buildings next to the street. Kind of a mix of the two with mostly residential separate from commercial.
CD 5.3 is a block of ugly, boxy 3 story mixed use buildings on the street, with parking and some residential in an alley configuration in back. It could have promise at some point along Washington Street if the buildings were configured and designed differently and green space and plazas were added. Although it does rely on parking on the street.
CD 5.4 is a block of 6 story mixed use buildings along Washington with set back 5th and 6th floors, some parking and 4 and 5 story residential buildings in back and along the secondary street. No openings, plaza or green space. It also relies on Street parking.
CD 5.5 is a block of 5 and 6 story mixed use buildings with some breaks in between, limited parking and several residential building in back. Again no plazas, green space and relies on street parking.
CD 5.6 is a solid block of a 5 story mixed use building that continues in back for a block on both sides along secondary street creating a U with parking in the middle. It is not only ugly but adds nothing at all to a streetscape.
CD 5.7 has a 14 story mixed use building with 3 and 4 attached buildings to the left on the block. After a break 5 and 6 story buildings complete the block and are on the secondary street.
One fallacy of these drawing is without including it in the descriptions, labels or color there is no way to tell if any green space is included. It seems green space and plazas were left out of the designs.
Yes, the city plans to rezone the residential areas between Washington and Watertown Sts. This will enable dense housing development. Residents will not support this effort which was discussed at the 3:00 pm group meeting on Sat.
Colleen – I don’t remember seeing you there yesterday, pardon me if I missed you. I heard something very different at that session. The staff particularly focused our attention on residential neighborhoods and asked the people in the room what they wanted. Continue with buildings of the same size? Within that size, building allow 1-3 units or only 1-2 units? These were all questions that were asked. There was no pronouncement about what “the city” will do. Looking forward to seeing you there today.
How has the discussions on school overcrowding been going?
Are we still pretending its not going to be an issue?
I would love to see the developer offer a free 30 year lease on space which could be used to accommodate school overcrowding… or perhaps pay a high density tax to cover the extra services the larger population will need
Someone wrote “MCI Newton” on CD 5.6 [u shaped building] – best comment of all!
I must need eyeglasses. I’ve yet to see an honest depiction of this development with the typical congested traffic on Washington St. or the lengthy backups on Walnut (both ways). The sketches always show a couple of cars or bicycles leisurely making their way through the intersection– never the long lines stuck sitting through several red lights.
Pedestrians seemingly strolling about — not the students frantically trying to navigate this hugely busy intersection & loud honking horns in background. What time/day of the week is this supposed to be?
And how about all the empty parking spots in the sketches- say whaat?? I stopped frequenting the shops on Walnut St due to all the congestion & lack of parking (not to mention the meter maids waiting to pounce). Do these stores actually make a profit?
How about showing a realistic picture of the view FROM a window in this development, i.e. the Mass Pike at 7am or 4pm —- GRIDLOCK. “Unbridled growth” was recently cited as a reason for Boston having the “worst traffic in the country.” Unfortunately, Newton has this same “Vision.”
I don’t think the Principle group get that the main reason young people move to Newton is for the excellent schools and they can’t afford the proposed luxury apartment buildings.
At yesterday’s session, we asked about schools and public transport and traffic and the quantity of number of proposed new luxury apartment units and parking and elders and preserving existing building instead of tearing down old ones and the existing abysmal conditions of the roads in Newton and the responses seemed to center around national modeling and population trends and steering the questions away from what was being asked to what was being envisioned.
Extremely frustrating.
Lisa do you data to back that up? I’m sure it’s a significant reason and historically it’s been a big driver. But I encounter many young people who move here — or wish they could move here — for proximity to jobs, friends, family, quality of life, open space, etc. (A decade before we became parents, my spouse and I moved here because we loved to canoe and wanted to be close to the Charles.)
Lots of child free young people have good paying jobs but aren’t necessarily ready to buy a house and don’t necessarily want a garage and a yard.
What you call “luxury housing” is more appropriately called “market rate.” By it’s very nature that means there’s a market for it. You may not like developers but they’re not stupid. They don’t set out to build something no one wants.
@Greg “But I encounter many young people who move here — or wish they could move here — for proximity to jobs, friends, family, quality of life, open space, etc. (A decade before we became parents, my spouse and I moved here because we loved to canoe and wanted to be close to the Charles.)
Lots of child free young people have good paying jobs but aren’t necessarily ready to buy a house and don’t necessarily want a garage and a yard.”
I’ll ask you the question you asked Lisa. Do you have data to back that up.
I’m just not buying the: if we build it, young childless professional who shun cars for bicycles, Uber and public transit will come flocking to Newton”. Not going to happen, in my opinion.
Oh and by the way, lots of young people are flocking to Brighton….perhaps it is access to the Charles.
@Claire: I share the concerns folks have about the potential for school crowding, gridlock and other impacts from increased density.
Those are real issues that need thoughtful remedies and planning.
But when I don’t understand it when folks say they don’t believe there’s a market for the types of housing that’s being proposed as an argument for opposing these projects.
There’s a market.
If there wasn’t, then developers wouldn’t want to build them and bankers wouldn’t finance them.
It doesn’t matter why people move to Newton. The question is this: how will the city address an increase in student population if there’s a significant increase in enrollment as a result of the increase in housing? I’m all for rebuilding Washington St. but I’d like to see a proactive approach to resolving the enrollment issue than a reactive one that involves putting modulars on elementary schools.
All demographics are likely to move into units anywhere in Newton for the reasons mentioned above, but we’re putting our collective heads in the sand if we say families with children won’t be part of the story. This is a request for some vague outline of a plan. Will H-M will be available if need be? Will a northside elementary school be rebuilt to accommodate increased enrollment if it comes to pass? I just want to know that the schools are on the radar screen, and high up on it, and I’ll be happy with the rebuilding of Washington St.
I wondered about the relationship between re-zoning and schools a while back. As far as I recall we have the Fair Housing Act that prevents the city making zoning decisions based on number of kids that may or may not go to a school as it would be discriminatory.
Perhaps in the context of Washington St it might be different, as its only a study?
Here are some statistics:
Source: http://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/newton-ma-population/
In 2018, Newton has:
Vacancy rate: 5.6%
Median rent: $1,733
Renter-Occupied Units: 8,987
Owner-Occupied Units: 21,911
All told, the developers are proposing to add between 2,836 to 3,063 additional apartments (that we know about) and expect to get double what the median rent is currently.
Are people really thinking through how this is going to impact our community?
I went to that popup location yesterday afternoon skeptical of what I would find – My biggest concern was this
Any design project needs to start with a budget – I understand that someone has purchased all this land and wants to develop it – But who pays for parks and sidewalks and benches and road diets and bike lanes and bike stands and running adequate gas, water/sewer and electric and police details and wear/tear on roads …. and so on.
Someone here posted that Newton historically has lost $$ for each new unit developed.
To my surprise, going to that popup office was actually helpful. I learned that their job is to make a sound recommendation to the city for what makes the most sense for Washington Street. And they actually have an economist on staff to crunch the numbers.
These design reviews (la la land as you called them) and gathering of public comments and preferences are only a small piece of the work they are doing to figure out what options really make sense.
I was able to tell them that I live just steps away, and although not opposed to development, I love where I live just as it is – And really have NO pain points. Not parking, Not traffic. — I felt that they were really interested in what I had to say and that they had not heard a lot of that.
So, after visiting, I understand better what they were hired to do and feel better about it.
@Greg “But when I don’t understand it when folks say they don’t believe there’s a market for the types of housing that’s being proposed as an argument for opposing these projects.”
Don’t tie my belief that Newton will not attract droves of young professionals as anti development. I challenged your assertion that “many young people who move here — or wish they could move here — for proximity to jobs, friends, family, quality of life, open space”
And I asked you for the data to show that is wrong. Young professionals will live without a car and rely on Uber and the T for all of the quality of life attractions that Boston can offer. They aren’t and I believe won’t be clammering to move to Newton.
My assertion is supported by this article that was previously posted. It says in part”Today’s inward migration is driven by the quality of life just as much as the outward migration was decades ago, he said. The talent pipeline feeds into urban Boston, as college graduates prefer to live and work there. Companies will do what they can — even if it means higher land prices — to capture their desired workforce. I find it interesting that Korff doesn’t seem to have many other developers competing to develop in Newton. I know that the standard answer to that is that Newton (Residents and CC) are anti-development. I guess Korff has cracked that code
https://www.bisnow.com/boston/news/state-of-market/the-burbs-may-bring-value-but-some-boston-developers-simply-dont-care-88823
I went to that popup location Sunday afternoon skeptical of what I would find – My biggest concern was this
Any design project needs to start with a budget – I understand that someone has purchased all this land and wants to develop it – But who pays for parks and sidewalks and benches and road diets and bike lanes and bike stands and running adequate gas, water/sewer and electric and police details and wear/tear on roads …. and so on.
Someone here posted that Newton historically has lost $$ for each new unit developed.
To my surprise, going to that popup office was actually helpful. I learned that their job is to make a sound recommendation to the city for what makes the most sense for Washington Street. And they actually have an economist on staff to crunch the numbers.
These design reviews and gathering of public comments and preferences are only a small piece of the work they are doing to figure out what options really make sense.
I was able to tell them that I live just steps away, and although not opposed to development, I love where I live just as it is – And really have NO pain points. Not parking, Not traffic. — I felt that they were really interested in what I had to say and that they had not heard a lot of that.
So, after visiting, I understand better what they were hired to do and feel better about it.
What they really need are 2 economists- so they can get 3 different answers.
For what it’s worth, the Newtonville Area Council has now launched its own survey to collect input on the Washington St. project:
http://newtonville.org