The developers of the proposed development at 1114 Beacon Street (the former ApGuJung) will host a community meeting on Tuesday at 7 pm at the Women’s Club of Newton Highlands (72 Columbus St.) to discuss their vision for the project.
Developer Ron Simons originally proposed a four-story, 42 unit development. The project has been reduced to 22 residential condo units with 4,000 square feet of commercial space. The planned access/egress has also been revised.
Development can be scary in Newton, but this seems to be exactly the kind of project that can attract broad support.
It’s a reasonable number of proposed housing units going in to a parcel that has not been well used for years. And, Four Corners has always seemed like it has a lot of buried potential. With a bit of housing, it would be one of the most walkable community areas in the city, close to groceries, shops and parks.
I am hoping that the emerging details of the proposal prove to be thoughtful and well-considered. Off the cuff, though, this seems like a pretty good idea.
Too bad that the developer felt the need to compromise so much.
This does feel reminiscent of what ultimately happened at the Philip Neri site. The developer scales back even before there is a chance fully vet the original concept. We’ve entered an era where list serves, email campaigns and, yes, blogs, can create a perception of insurmountable opposition well before most members of the public have even heard of it.
This is a very inappropriate site for a multi unit building project.
For all of you Newton residents who agree with me please take note. There is a 237 page Zoning Draft Reform proposal available on the city website.
In it the city reforms the existing residential and village zone standards.
Take a look at the zone R3. This is known as Residential3.
On a 12,000 square foot lot a developer could build a 20 unit apartment building without a city council approved special permit. The idea is to speed up the development process anywhere in a R3 zone, most of these zones will be close to transit. The approval process will be deligated to an appointed Planning Board.
This proposal is a significant ‘game changer’. Residents take notice you could find one of these built next door to you.
Why is this site on Beacon Street — across from Walgreens, half a block from Whole Foods and within easy walking distance to two strip malls, near multiple restaurants, one of the city’s best parks, walking trails, farmers market and an elementary school — very inappropriate? And what on earth do you consider appropriate?
I’m also curious what you consider “appropriate” for that kind of parcel? Or do you think we should just ban all development and declare the city closed?
The purpose of zoning is to let developers and owners understand what can be built on a given property. It’s a guide. Going through a 24-member city council to get just about anything done is a waste of time and money. So when you question the zoning process because “On a 12,000 square foot lot a developer could build a 20 unit apartment building without a city council approved special permit. The idea is to speed up the development process anywhere in a R3 zone, most of these zones will be close to transit.”
I say … well… Yes. That’s exactly what a zoning code is SUPPOSED to do. You can argue the specifics about where R3 should be located (transit-oriented is a laudable goal) or you can argue the size and scope, but this process of requiring everything to go before city council does nothing but provide a platform for the NIMBY among us.
All that said, I’m glad they’re looking at some commercial on the Four Corners property.
I’m within walking distance of Four Corners and support this project. I haven’t followed the process, but this proposal looks like it will work well for the area. I’m disappointed that none of the units are rentals as that’s often a good option for senior citizens, but other than that, it seems like a good project.
For whatever reason, quality restaurants with excellent menus have been unable to make a go of this location, so it’s time to move on and try something new. The abandoned lot is rundown and unsightl, and has been for quite a while now. Why anyone would fight to keep it?
Why would anyone fight to keep it?
I would love to see more housing in the center of the city, glad to see some new housing happening outside of the Washington St and Needham border areas.
Seems like another example of fast tracking new retail space rather than doing anything to encourage more interesting and viable businesses to move into existing retail space in our already-transit-oriented squares, such as Newton Highlands a few blocks away from Four Corners.
A possible counter to my statement is the idea that adding retail supply would lower rents in the existing market, meaning someone other than a salon or bank could move in, but I’m not so sure..
The scaled down development seems much more reasonable and appropriate for the area.
I remember how upset I was when they built that brick monstrosity at 1087 beacon street but I eventually began to realize it was necessary for progress. Four corners couldn’t always remain the same way I remembered growing up when A&P was on one corner (now the current site of whole foods) flanked by three gas stations.
The consultants the city hired told me their recommendation was for newton to use form based codes. I had a long discussion with them about this when they had their space in West Newton. It seemed like a reasonable approach. Did the city reject their recommendation?
https://formbasedcodes.org/definition/
A great location for a reasonable development like this. Four Corners (Norman- at one point it had a gas station on all four corners), is an ideal place for this mix.
@Yuppie: It is my understanding that the retail space in Highlands in particular is owned by a few families with totally unrealistic expectations for rents and tenants. Clearly what is happening on Walnut St. is bizarre to the say the least. I’m sure there are people in this chat with more knowledge than me about the various players but I think we can all agree that Newton Highlands is among the most egregiously underused areas in Newton.
Perhaps some competition in Four Corners would be just the ticket.
I second Greg’s comment about this project echoing the Philip Negri Site.
The city is too crowded. This would ruin the area. No.
When one looks at the new zoning map proposals, and think about the existing homes in the various neighborhoods, one had to wonder- is there a class bias in the new zoning maps? A lot of the area north of the pike, is residential and not that dense, yet has been zoned R3, which is the most “developer friendly” in that it allows the largest selection of building types allowed. Consider for instance, that the historic district in Newtonville is zoned R3. Does it make sense to zone a historic district in such a way as to allow the most building types? a True form based code would not permit such a designation. Am I wrong here?