On Tuesday, April 9th, at 7:00 PM, the City Council’s Land Use Committee will hold a public meeting to discuss critical traffic and parking impacts that would emanate from the proposed 800-unit Northland development project on Needham Street.
Over the past month, I’ve been attending public meetings and robust organizing sessions conducted by Right Size Newton, a citizen organization currently composed of residents and homeowners from Newton Upper Falls and Newton Highlands (stay tuned more more!). This group has serious concerns about the potentially adverse impacts of the project, as proposed. in terms of density, scale and size, pressures on schools, parking capacity, and the impacts on traffic in these two villages. Traffic and parking are two of the group’s major concerns.
I’m deeply impressed by the fact-based passion of RightSize Newton and the serious and mature tone of its leadership. These folks are not your stereotypical knee-jerk, anti-development group. In truth, they hope that Northland or some other developer will develop this woefully underutilized corner of Needham Street and Upper Falls. They simply want a project that is appropriate in both size and scope, and that is not deleterious to the surrounding villages.
RightSize Newton hopes that you and other friends of the Highlands and Upper Falls will come to City Hall on Tuesday at 7:00 PM to learn more about the critical traffic impacts of this development as currently proposed.
RightSize Newton is convinced that the more citizens learn about the development as proposed, the more likely they will share many or all of the group’s concerns.
See this flyer about Tuesday’s public meeting (PDF) and this slide presentation about the group’s major concerns (PDF) about the development project as proposed. Both were developed and cleared by RightSize Newton. You can contact the group at [email protected].
I think right size Newton was able to use “facts” instead of emotions to argue is because the whole proposal “stinks”. It simply doesn’t pass the sniff test.. it smells of the developer “giveaways” when the City has all the leverage in negotiations..
The city’s poor job of negotiating with developers is either incompetence or pro-development stance
This is great. Many thanks!
It’s patently obvious this should be a no-brainer on the traffic issue alone. Completely ridiculous for a project of this magnitude under these circumstances.
And the “shuttle buses” —– more than a joke!
I appreciate some of the Right Size’s concerns about the project but I’m puzzled when they complain that the proposal doesn’t include “enough parking. “
Limiting parking (and only allowing residents one paid parking space) is an established tool for limiting traffic because it forces users to find other ways to get there.
In lieu of parking, Northland plans to offer shuttle buses, discounts on T passes, bike facilities and other established tools that have been proven to reduce single passenger vehicles, which are the single biggest contributor to traffic and greenhouse gas.
Meanwhile the city has established tools that will keep residents from parking in the neighborhood, just as it does in other villages.
These ideas may be new to many of us but city planners are employing these strategies all around the globe.
Any group or person worried about traffic should make limiting parking a priority, not demanding more.
I believe this is very inaccurate:
“We have tried this before
•MBTA bus #59 along Needham street runs a similar route to the proposed “Newton Circulator” route at the same schedule and is largely unused and has not reduced traffic
•The Newton Nexus bus service failed due to lack of ridership”
The Nexus failed because it ran 6 times a day in a large loop and was funded by a Federal Grant. The #59, likewise, is irregular (2 alternating routes), unreliable (66% reliability weekdays) and infrequent (35-45 minutes).
Nexus was 20 years ago, Newton has changed. Many housing developments have gone up or are going up along the #59 since the demise of Nexus (Avalon, Orr, Austin St., ..)
If the #59 ran every 10-15 minutes, reliably and into the night, it could make a big difference. It connects the Watertown Yard bus depot, Newtonville Commuter Rail, # 556, 553, 554 Express Buses, Newton Highlands Green Line, Needham Heights, Needham Center & Needham Junction Commuter Rail. Plus many village shopping areas, and the high schools, libraries, and city halls of Newton and Needham.
Wynn and New Balance funded MBTA improvements. We should ask Northland to do the same.
Also, I don’t understand why Right Size Newton is opposed to limited parking if they don’t want additional traffic? As long as our winter parking ban is in place, Northland residents won’t be able to store extra cars on the surrounding streets.
Even without the winter parking plan there are ways to handle off street parking if it becomes problematic. The city already has a number of parking districts that are limited to one or two hour parking unless you live on the street (or have a guest pass) that were specifically created due to either commuter or overflow parking on side streets. If Northland is looking to limit parking then a new parking district could be defined on the side streets as part of the project to make sure parking doesn’t spill over into the neighboring residential areas.
What Patrick said.
Greg,
If global warming was such a concern, the city would force all new development to be net-zero, geothermal, roof solar panels. Use only x% recycled materials for interiors. Require free parking permits for overnight street parking in northland and only give permits to low emission vehicles.. gas guzzlers can pay for private parking.
If you want to use global warming as a rational for high density, then you have to go all the way.. not just exclude the parts that would reduce profits for the developer..
@Bugek: The city and the city council are doing a lot of work towards reducing our carbon foot print and those efforts should accelerate. (And there’s an upcoming Northland presentation this spring scheduled before Land Use about their sustainability efforts.)
While encouraging low emissions vehicle use is a worthy goal, it won’t reduce congestion. To reduce congestion you need to find ways to reduce single vehicle trips. There’s no one way to do that. But the kinds of strategies Northland is putting forward are the strategies traffic planners are using globally to do just this. I know these concepts are new to some people but yield results.
Folks, please get real.
SHUTTLE BUSES will be a tiny band-aid trying to cover the tremendous wound of more than substantially increased traffic.
(Actually the shuttle buses will make things worse. I remember sitting in traffic behind those large — smelly — empty or near empty Nexus buses, further exacerbating the traffic problem by their mere existence on the roads.)
NEEDHAM STREET which already is a “NO GO” ZONE to some, will be come a “NO GO” ZONE to all.
The Shuttle Bus answer is more than a joke. It is a scam ‘solution’.
@Greg: Does the “limited parking theory” apply to all equally? Take for instance the proposed solar carports at the Library – adding additional parking spaces. Why is the City expanding parking when limiting parking – would just encourage more to find “alternative” and more “environmentally friendly” means of getting there?
As for the “shuttle service” that Northland has proposed. Is this the “robust” shuttle system that has been called into question by the City’s own peer reviewer?
@Amy: I didn’t follow the solar carport debate closely but I do recall some folks advocating for fewer spaces. But sure, it’s the same concept, minus the offer to fund shuttles to the library as part of the agreement.
And yes the council should closely evaluate the Northland’s shuttle proposal and peer review feedback and create tools to reevaluate it later.
Meanwhile let’s not loose site of the fact that you need scale to finance a robust shuttle, which will not be feasible if the project is scaled back.
@Greg — Northland has been unable to show ANY data that suggests that their ridership “goals” for their “robust shuttle” proposal are actually achievable. In fact, in the latest filings, they admit that they don’t think that those metrics are actually achievable. So, since Northland can’t say that these shuttles will work, what makes you so sure that they will (other than wishful thinking)?
It’s not advisable to cross our fingers, hope that the Northland shuttle experiment works out despite no data suggesting that it will and then “creat[ing] tools to reevaluate it later,” after the project is built, since once the project is built, there is no fix for a shuttle program that doesn’t work out, regardless of whether you evaluate it or not…. just more and more traffic and a parking nightmare stemming from an oversized project that was built in an area with inadequate access to public transit.
I had originally thought that Right Size Newton was a kinder, gentler, more honest incarnation of the Newton Villages Alliance, but alas they now seem to be muddying their legitimate concerns with a healthy dose of fear and falsehoods.
Case in point – page 12 of the slide presentation on ‘Senior Citizens and Aging in Place’, which seems to be screaming in bold/all caps text that this development is bad for seniors. As a member of the Newton Council on Aging, I can tell you there is no one-size-fits-all answer for housing for seniors. Newton seniors need a wide range of options, and many are enthusiastic about developments like Northland. To present Northland as being ‘bad for seniors’ is at best misinformed and at worst dishonest.
As @fignewtonville said in an earlier thread – ‘It is hard to have honest and difficult conversations on affordability and development if we are all just making up facts to fit our point of view.’
Yes, there are real, serious concerns with this or any development. But there are upsides, too, that will help with real problems facing our city. Can we try to have a fact-based dialogue about pros and cons, so that we can come up with the best solutions for Newton?
Jim – They have electric buses on the roads in America now. If you want less traffic, you need to move more people in fewer vehicles – or hope for a recession.
Bugek – Transportation is the #1 source of carbon in MA. It’s growth has overtaken the gains made in carbon reduction in the building and electricity sectors.
Lucia,
Since the mbta will never solve this problem in our lifetime, i guess the only solution is to require any company larger than 1000 employees to require at least 25% of its workforce to be able to work remotely…
Also to create congestion toll charge to go into Boston if things are so dire we have to force suburban communities into high density housing…
There are many draconian things Massachusetts could do next year if this was so serious.
Lucia,
In the name of global warming, northland should also have 0 street parking and no private garage within a 10 minute walk… then i would agree that this high density development will take cars off the road… until then its just a “developer talking point”…
@Allison — The page you reference in your comment uses the results of the Newtonville Area Council’s survey of senior citizens that showed that only 5% of them would want to live in a high-rise building while more than 60% prefer to stay in their own home to suggest that having one “age friendly” building may not be the best we can do for our seniors. It also suggests that most Newton seniors (44% of whom have income below $49,000 and 66% below $100,000) would not be able to afford the market-rate rent on these units. Finally, the slide suggests that the biggest obstacle to seniors who wish to stay in their own homes doing so is rising property taxes.
Which of these things are, as you state, “fear and falsehoods?”
I would also like to note that nowhere on that slide or anywhere else in that presentation does it say that Northland’s development doesn’t benefit some seniors or, for that matter that it is “bad for seniors.”
You are right, we cannot have intelligent discussions about difficult topics if we make up our own facts. We also cannot have these conversations if we accuse those that bring up facts that are inconvenient to us of making them up.
Bugek – Unfortunately, I don’t know how to fit an image of a crystal ball in here!
@Leon – here are a couple examples:
In other words, if this development gets built, the city will have to build more schools, your taxes will go up, and seniors will be forced out of their homes. That’s stoking fear.
In other words, Northland is a luxury high-rise rental apartment buildings, and thus seniors (apparently vehemently!) do not want to live there. I’d call this a falsehood. The development proposed by Northland isn’t exactly ‘high-rise rental apartments’. It’s a vibrant, mixed-use community of buildings varying from 3 to 8 stories. Did the survey ask how many seniors would like to live in that kind of community?
The development will, indeed, benefit some seniors as you yourself implied in your last comment. It will provide seniors with some great options that don’t exist today. So why is senior housing one of the ‘main concerns’ listed in the presentation? Why the bold and all caps?
To my earlier point… there are real concerns and there are real benefits to this or any other new development project. Let’s have a conversation weighing the upsides and downsides, and trying to strike the right balance. Groups like Right Size Newton lose credibility when they refuse to acknowledge the benefits.
@Allison — But again, no one is refusing to acknowledge the benefits — you, on the other hand continue to pretend that there are no downsides.
Again, what, exactly, is factually incorrect about the statement that “overrides for building schools, providing services, and financing our pension obligations cause taxes to increase dramatically for those who can afford them the least?” Do you not agree that this is a concern?
Northland themselves have described this development as an “exciting new mixed use development,” do you really think that they will charge below-market rates for their market-rate units?
Do you have data that refutes the Newtonville Area Council’s survey (which, by the way, it is clear to me you attack without having seen it — all the while talking about credibility)? If you do, I look forward to seeing it; if not, I ask again what you see as the problem with the statement that an overwhelming majority of seniors do not want to live in the type of “age friendly” building that Northland is providing (which, by the way, is an 8 story building) — the survey suggests that only 5% do (the 95% that do not appear to be an overwhelming majority).
Is your suggestion that this project, as currently proposed, addresses the needs of our senior community and that no improvements should be made in that regard? If so, then we will have to disagree; if not, then my question to you is why isn’t senior housing one of your main concerns, given your membership on the Newton Council on Aging?
@BobBurke You will have more credibility if you can provide us a single time that you have endorsed a development project in Newton. I’ve searched and can not find a single instance in recent history where you were pro-development let alone something that is large and transformative such as the Northland project. Right Size Newton is just the latest in a long line of anti-development groups in Newton using dog whistles to keep certain people out of Newton – Historic Districts, Naturally Affordable housing, Up Zoning and now Right Sizing. It is just more of the same coming from a small group of people who do not represent the city.
You wrote “These folks are not your stereotypical knee-jerk, anti-development group”. Agreed, they are just your stereotypical anti-development group.
Once AGAIN, ANY hint that a person or organization who might not be hell-bent for leather on the runaway train that is (high density) development in Newton invokes knee jerk blacklisting.
@Jack – Are you calling RightSize Newton racist?
Your comment “Right Size Newton is just the latest in a long line of anti-development groups in Newton using dog whistles to keep certain people out of Newton” certainly says so.
Pl. clarify.
@Leon – my suggestion is simply that the project addresses the needs of a portion of our senior community, and that yes, that is a benefit of the project. Because of the wide variety of personal preferences and required price points for our senior community, we can’t expect that a single development will meet all seniors’ needs. The Council on Aging is also actively advocating for senior housing that is more affordable – most recently the new Haywood House senior housing project (55 brand new 1 bedroom apartments for seniors, 42 of which will be income-restricted affordable units), and an expansion of the Golda Meir House to include 68 new senior apartments (60 of which will be income-restricted affordable units) – and is working hard to develop and share resources to help seniors age in their existing homes.
Please re-read my original comment. I am certainly not ‘pretending that there are no downsides’ to the project.
@Alison – Can you pl. share how many seniors currently rent apartments in Avalon Needham & Chestnut or Woodlands?
My annecdotal information is very very few. And most of them are in transition to something else. Maybe you have more data driven information.
Elementary School enrollment was 5,824 students in 2017. Schools were staffed to handle that. Currently, there are 5,687 elementary students in the schools. By 2024 there will be 5,583 elementary students. That’s a decline of 241 students across the district before the impact of Northland is felt. School enrollment is declining almost everywhere, so this trend only follows suit. Presumably, we have enough teachers still to cover the 2017 levels, and as long as we don’t start laying people off due to declining enrollment, we will be able to absorb these students without increases in costs. All of this information is in the School Enrollment Report posted on the School’s website. They also have their long range facilities plan posted there, which shows the plan to renovate all of the rest of the schools. This plan has been discussed on this blog for a long time, and the old plans dating back many years are still posted on the website. There were plans to renovate our schools long before Northland, and the reason was the condition of the schools. At one time, overcrowding was also an issue, but look at the Enrollment Report. The numbers tell a totally different story, and look at the data they include about project versus actual. They are extremely accurate in their projections. Our enrollment is dropping fast. Unless we want to close a school in the future, we should be attracting families to sustain our enrollment numbers. Additionally, I was just reading an article about Chapter 70 state aid, and it’s a product of a number of things, but enrollment is one of the major ones. If our enrollment goes down, our funding from the state goes down, which means our costs must be cut to balance the budget. I guess what I’m saying is I am surprised more people aren’t looking at the increased kids as a positive impact of projects like Northland. There are always negative impacts of development, but this certainly seems like at worst it should be a neutral impact. Don’t take my word for it. Here’s the link to the Enrollment Report: https://www.newton.k12.ma.us/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=7479&dataid=11332&FileName=NOVEMBER%202018%20ENROLLMENT%20ANALYSIS%20REPORT_Online%20Version.pdf
@Jack. The fact of the matter is that I haven’t taken a position one way or the other on past development proposals because I’ve tried to limit what I say to projects that would affect Newton Highlands, either directly or indirectly. I have limited this frame to our village because I’m an elected member of the Newton Highlands Neighborhood Area Council and feel that I’ll have the most impact by concentrating on my village. I am getting more prone to comment on other large projects in Newton because the pace of how this is all happening is
Your bringing up the “dog whistle” charade makes me bristle because this is exactly what was conjured up against those of us who led the effort for a local historic district in the Highlands. It’s a cheap shot to drive a debate with this type of smear. Imagine implying racist or class motives to Rodney Barker who was a champion of immigrants, civil rights and affordable housing, or to Brian Yates who was almost oblivious to racial and ethnic differences and who rightly won praise for his defense of the”little guy” homeowner or non homeowner in Newton. And if you are going to use the “dog whistle” charge, you will have to lump these two civic leaders into your charge because they did question the size and scope of several developments in Newton and yes they did champion the protection of the “physical” character of old neighborhoods and buildings, but it was this and only this. I never heard racial, ethnic or economic criteria used as a recruiting tool and I certainly haven’t heard this from those I’ve got to know on Right Size Newton.
@Bob: I have a great deal of respect for you so I can only assume you’ve missed these:
How to stop Newton from trying to ‘import poor people’
Private Waban club worries ‘renters’ might be able to ‘see’ children swimming
Letter to the Editor – Philip Neri Project
Apartments in the burbs are ‘reversing the American Dream’
Those are just four examples from Village 14 which I found in 90 seconds. I’m sure there are others here and many more on various list serves and in Village 14 comments too.
Good people can oppose projects or change for good reason, but to deny that there isn’t sometimes an ugly undercurrent at play here too is naive.
@Neil P – I don’t have access to that data, but what I do have (and which definitely more precise than anecdotal data) is fairly recent voter registration data:
Avalon Needham St – 112 of 310 registered voters are over the age of 60 (36%)
Avalon Chestnut Hill – 58 of 170 registered voters are over the age of 60 (34%)
Arborpoint at Woodland – 112 of 310 registered voters are over the age of 60 (36%)
Granted, the registered voter numbers don’t include children, non-citizens, or others who haven’t registered for one reason or the other, and thus the actual percentage of seniors in these three developments is almost certainly lower than 34-36%. Regardless, it is still a significant portion. Seniors do choose to live in these types of apartments.
Thanks Allison for your efforts to encourage that this become a fact-based discussion. The truth is the Newtonville Area Council survey was an online survey with a lot of loaded questions. Even if it wasn’t, as with every online survey, it’s entirely unscientific.
And while Allison is correct to point out that proposed three to eight stories building aren’t high-rises, the Towers of Chestnut Hill are and provide homes to many, many Newton seniors.
Wow. Thanks, @Greg and @Jack for a reminder of the kind of cesspool the V14 commentariat can often be.
@Allison — happy to continue the conversation, but not here.
Just noticed an error in the numbers in my most recent comment and want to correct it here for accuracy. I had mistakenly repeated the Avalon Chestnut Hill numbers under Arborpoint. While those two developments have the same percentage (36%) is the same, the underlying numbers are different. Correct numbers are here:
Avalon Needham St – 112 of 310 registered voters are over the age of 60 (36%)
Avalon Chestnut Hill – 58 of 170 registered voters are over the age of 60 (34%)
Arborpoint at Woodland – 57 of 159 registered voters are over the age of 60 (36%)
@Randy also from the Enrollment Report:
* District enrollment is projected to remain stable around 12,700 students in the next five years.
*Although the U.S. Census Bureau continues to rank Massachusetts low in expected school age population growth from 2000-2030, Newton’s enrollment projections and those of other communities near Boston are not typical of Massachusetts; enrollment in the Newton Public Schools and in many nearby districts continues to increase.
Once you go out more than 5years kids entering K haven’t even been born yet. Avalon with 300 units added 100 kids to the school system yet the potential 1400 unit just among Northland and Riverside are going to have minimal impact. Just doesn’t add up.
The City Council’s Programs and Services Committee and Finance Committee will hear a presentation about the enrollment demography study on Weds. 7 pm.
Rather than speculating on what enrollments will be based on gut feelings, I’m looking forward to hearing the conclusions from people who do this for a living.
@Leon
Greg is just doing his job, and is pretty consistent. It’s companies like Northland who keep him in a job.
@BobBurke
I have nothing but the greatest of respect for you. You are truly one of the “adults in the room”. Newton has benefitted in ways big and small from your advocacy for many years.
However, your Newton Highlands Neighborhood Council has absolutely zero credibility
complaining about traffic, density or most importantly,
the affect that Northland will have on nearby schools.
The NHNAC
along with David Cohen, Cynthia Creem, Srjian Nedelkovic, John Koots – (head of early 2000’s group CORD and current head of Newton Villages Alliance), and former Ward 5 alderman/realtor Christine Samuelson
screwed our local schools, teachers, parents and neighborhoods by prostrating themselves before the Avalon Bay corporation when they were looking for political and community support for their
housing leviathan next to McDonalds. A smaller version of the stop and shop (whom they all fought against in the early 2000’s in lieu of Avalon Bay), is now open next door. Go figure. Some of the traffic issues on Needham St that we are dealing with now could have been mitigated or averted by stop and shop on their dime years ago.
Unfortunately the NHAC, and all of the players that I have listed above, are a day late and a dollar short and simply cannot, nor should not be trusted, as they all took a powder when they had a chance to be proactive years ago. Sorry….
@Greg
The demographic study that city bureaucrats will be pushing isn’t worth the paper it is
printed on. The numbers might be right but that doesn’t mean they will do the right thing. Everyone in city politics, at least on the school side, knew that the Countryside school was overpopulated
when Avalon Bay was built years ago, and they still crammed 51 of the 52 kids that came from Avalon Bay into it and didn’t give the school a dime because it “would create equity issues” -thanks Christine Samuelson.
Leon’s instincts are spot on.
The people who “do this for a living”simply
can’t be trusted to do the right thing.
Anyone that takes these people at their word is a sucker.
Didn’t you used to be a journalist?
Aren’t you at all skeptical?
Trust, but verify. Always!
@Paul: I don’t know how to have a constructive discussion with someone who is unwilling to consider the use of scientific measures (and birth rates, population migration, home sales analysis, etc. are legitimate measurable indicators) because they mistrust government because of decisions made decades ago.
So I won’t try.
Sorry, I meant don’t trust, but verify.
@Leon S-
@Jack is obviously a sock puppet.
with an agenda or agendas. Whomever
He/she/they are representing have plenty to say but want to do it without
coming out of the shadows.
@Newton Highlands Mom,
5 year total enrollment is only stable because the middle and high schools are gaining students that are currently in the lower grades. Once they cycle out, declining elementary enrollment now will result in an overcorrection at the Middle and High Schools then. What I’m saying is that the overcrowding the elementaries saw 4-5 years ago is now hitting the middle schools, and the Middle School students from back then are hitting High School. Once this wave of students passes, there won’t be enough elementary students to maintain the enrollment population levels.
Avalon was built in 2003, has 294 units, and currently has 102 school aged kids, with elementary aged kids 24 in our schools, and 20 out-of-assigned district. These levels would make sense considering the unit mix. Avalon has 6 studios, 90 1-BR, 139 2-BR, and 59 3-BR’s. This means that appx 47% are 2-BR, and 20% are 3-BR. Northland is 40% 2-BR’s, and 5% 3-BR’s. I don’t claim to be a housing expert, but it’s clear from the numbers that the unit mix for Avalon was designed towards families, and is really not a good benchmark for comparing the Northland proposal to.
I agree with Greg that we should wait and hear what the experts have to say. I just like data and facts to drive decision making.
The failed shuttle buses were not here post Avalon and the development at Woodlawn Station. With more and more large developments I wonder if there is a demand for a shuttle now?
And if they swung by the high schools during non bus hours (after 5 PM).
And incentives to use the shuttle instead of taking a car to the library.
And maybe using UBER and LYFT less.
@Greg
We don’t need to have a discussion.
Your readers, posters and especially new residents paying 700,000+ for a home need to be aware that there will be no better advocate for their neighborhoods and schools than themselves. Not politicians, not the Chamber of Commerce and not developers.
Scientific study means nothing if the results of those studies are summarily dismissed, end up in the trash, on shelves, or are ignored.
If there is any cynicism or mistrust of city bureaucrats it is because they have given residents reason to mistrust them. I’ve just laid that all out for you. The Mueller report was just released by people who “do it for a living” also, why all the carping?
Shouldn’t we just trust the experts?
Greg is definitely doing a good job advocating for the chamber of commerce…
He’s consistent and replies with a good balance of snark and professionalism…. if i were a developer, i would certainly want him in my corner..
Although, it would be nice if evey response of his had the following footnote: “paid for by the Newton Chamber of commerce”
Leon, that’s the second time folks have described this blog as a cesspool that I’ve seen. Both times I’ve objected strongly, and I find the term unfortunate and derogatory. The fact is, it is open to everyone to comment, and many folks from the more conservative/smaller development/no development wing post here much more often than others. Even on this particular post, at best it is 50/50, with lots of VERY vocal posts by Jim/Bugek/yourself and many others advocating a point of view of development.
It feels like when certain folks get challenged on facts, if they don’t like the way the conversation is going they start posting about Greg’s job, that this is a cesspool (what the heck does that even mean? Care to define?), that we are all in the pocket of developers, that we are just liberal drones, etc, etc. Greg has a worldview. So do I. Greg’s made no secret of his Chamber connection, and he posts under his own name. Critcizing the blog participants or the blog because you don’t like being challenged doesn’t reflect badly on the blog or Greg, it reflects badly on you…
And for the record, I’m happy to give rightsize newton the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes I think one or two vocal members of any group tend to attach a negative reputation to a cause, but I haven’t even seen that so far, and Bob B. has been a good participant in discussions on this blog for years I think. For the record, I’ve got no idea who Jack is.
Let’s ALL of us take a step back, stop with the rhetorical bomb throwing, and have a conversation vs a shouting match.
A few points:
I thought Allison’s senior voting records were important facts, but I’ll note that I think unit mix is far more important in that regard than anything else. 3 bedroom apartments cry out for families. Ask any developer. The extra rent tends to make it a self section process.
I think the schools are probably going to decrease in enrollment, but there is some catch-up to do on other costs such as pensions and special education costs, so I wouldn’t rest on that particular argument. If overall costs go up faster than taxes, an enrollment decrease only helps so much. And we are putting off large pension obligations regardless.
I think a shuttlebus won’t work and isn’t a serious fix for traffic unless it is frequent and it won’t be frequent enough. Before I put stock in that as a solution, I’d love to see other communities that have made it work.
Finally Amy posted about parking and used the library as an example of inconsistent behavior (expanding parking at the library). But I think she is incorrect because residential use is inelastic and library use is elastic in my view, as we encourage as many folks as possible to use the library and program the space for heavy use, while we limit by unit size and number the residential use of a new building. The library parking spaces should be expanded or shrunk based on demand (we should also push public transportation near the library, but the use of the library as a community resource, gathering space, and overall venue has a higher purpose than parking logistics and lowering traffic on a community wide basis). I kinda think Amy was just playfully poking Greg on that one, but as someone who walks to the library, sees it flood and folks circle for parking consistently, I couldn’t let it go.
@PaulGreen John Morris here. Friends call me Jack or Jackie. Relatively new to Newton when compared to most. Agenda? No. My issue is with Bob Burke and his disingenuous use of his posting authority to publish an advertisement from RightSize Newton while stating that he was objective in his research.
And if we are keeping score at home, I don’t think Bob answered the question on when he has ever endorsed any type of development in Newton. -jack
Back before I was engrossed in good city planning and just was looking to make my life as easy as can be, I wanted a grocery store on Needham St. I thought it would be be great if there was a grocery store I could swing by on my way from gymnastics, Marshall’s, New England Mobile Book Fair, etc. I thought the city was crazy to fight Stop & Shop. Now? Now I think Avalon is well positioned to help Needham St be a wonderful village. Some more housing, a greater variety of stores and reconfiguring the road to feel more village like and it will be there.
Also on Seniors and what kind of housing they want… this is very situational. Having moved both sets of parents from their homes they swore they would never leave… ask them after they can no longer walk up the stairs or they shouldn’t drive anymore or small tasks like taking out the trash or raking leaves becomes too much. Unfortunately, Newton like many places across the country does not have enough options for people to live independantly and easily if they have limited mobility and don’t drive.
@Alicia
Great news. Checkout https://www.avaloncommunities.com/massachusetts/newton-apartments/avalon-at-newton-highlands/floor-plans
Apartments available!
Well there you go @ Jackmorris
That’s not so bad is it? Welcome to Newton.
I would like an answer to Bob’s
question as well. Thank you for asking him. Although Bob was not on the NHNAC years ago, the NHNAC has a history of supporting large developments that aren’t in or near
their own neighborhoods on the north side of route 9 which they protect like lions. The NHNAC recently tried to restrict teardowns
new construction and remodeling by using the politically unpopular and controversial Historical Neighborhood designation. It failed.
The NHNAC were sweet on Avalon Bay
and provided their blessing to the project. Former NHNAC
members including alderman/realtor Christine Samuelson also lent their blessing to the National Development project Arborpoint across from Woodland in Waban. National Development and it’s CEO(Larry Tye?) made donations to either to the NHNAC and/or Brigham House(they are essentially run by the same people). I’m not alleging anything nefarious, illegal, or not aboveboard
and i’ll say it before Greg does, I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but if you are around long enough and pay attention, you do get a chance to see how the sausage is made.
On a side note, as i said on a different
thread that both of us commented on,
I will give Holly Ryan the open
minded consideration that I give any new candidate that I know nothing about. She deserves a chance to make her case.
@Simon – I think you’re implying with that comment/link that because there are a handful of apartments available at Avalon, we don’t need any more age-friendly housing in Newton?
Getting back to facts:
(1) A healthy housing market has a vacancy rate of 6-7%, as defined by units that are unoccupied during a particular time. A handful of available apartments (and actually, if you look at your link again, none of the 1 BRs at Avalon are actually available now… 1 is available in late April, and the others not until late May and late June) doesn’t mean we have enough.
http://www.northeastern.edu/rugglesmedia/2016/04/20/how-vacancy-rate-points-to-an-unaffordable-housing-market/
(2) Newton’s senior population is expected to grow by several thousand in the next 10 years. The issue of limited age-friendly options for seniors will become a larger one in the years to come. We need to plan and build for that demographic shift.
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/87541
A flavor of vacancies at The Merc at Moody and Main and the market rates in Waltham, our neighbor, but without the same excellent public school system. Interested to learn what the market rates will be for Newton.
NEW Latest Changes
In the last day
Unit 516
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available May 7
$2,795
Up $35
Unit 405
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available Apr 27
$2,790
Up $35
Unit 207
Studio | 640 sq ft
Available Jun 4
$2,825
Up $35
Unit 510
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,209 sq ft
Available May 10
$3,825
Up $25
Unit 410
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,209 sq ft
Available May 18
$3,810
Up $25
Unit 402
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,213 sq ft
Available May 23
$3,745
Up $25
Unit 515
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 713 sq ft
Available May 7
$2,700
Up $35
Unit 406
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available May 26
$2,815
Up $35
Unit 307
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 799 sq ft
Available Now
$2,740
Up $35
Unit 317
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available Now
$2,815
Up $35
Unit 312
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,122 sq ft
Available May 28
$3,605
Up $25
Unit 206
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 805 sq ft
Available Jun 5
$2,760
Up $35
Unit 412
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,122 sq ft
Available May 26
$3,635
Up $25
S 1 – Studio
Unit 207
Studio | 640 sq ft
Available Jun 4
$2,825
1b 7 – 1 Bed, 1 Bath
Unit 515
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 713 sq ft
Available May 7
$2,700
Unit 307
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 799 sq ft
Available Now
$2,740
Unit 206
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 805 sq ft
Available Jun 5
$2,760
Unit 405
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available Apr 27
$2,790
Unit 516
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available May 7
$2,795
Unit 406
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available May 26
$2,815
Unit 317
1 Bed – 1 Bath | 761 sq ft
Available Now
$2,815
2b 5 – 2 Beds, 2 Baths
Unit 312
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,122 sq ft
Available May 28
$3,605
Unit 412
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,122 sq ft
Available May 26
$3,635
Unit 402
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,213 sq ft
Available May 23
$3,745
Unit 410
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,209 sq ft
Available May 18
$3,810
Unit 510
2 Beds – 2 Baths | 1,209 sq ft
Available May 10
$3,825
Prices may vary depending on lease length.
We get our prices directly from The Merc at Moody and Main.
Market rates fluctuate with the market. Until our region collectively addresses our regional housing shortage, market rate rents will be high.
The only way to achieve lower market rates rents is by building more, not fewer units.
This is basic supply and demand economics.
@ Jack. I never intended for my research to be what you term “objective”. I posted this solely to bring increased public attention to the concerns that Right Size Newton I was reporting what they think not what my own viewpoints as a relative newcomer to the Northland debate are. And, you will also note that I don’t attack the motives of people that I disagree with. I wouldn’t want to and don’t really have to to make my points. But you should know that Right Size Newton and not me, articulated the concerns I noted such as:
(1) The size of the project and concomitant effects related to parking and traffic, impacts on the Upper Falls village community, etc.
(2) The fact that they aren’t knee jerk opponents to development, but folks that really want to see development at the Needham Street site, but at what they feel is a more reasonable size and scale.
A side note on this: You claim this is a “disingenuous” move on my part to help Right Size Newton “advertise” its cause and positions. I’m not about to concede that it was “disingenuous”, but I readily hoped that it might at least spark some lively debate before tonight’s meeting at City Hall. It seems to have done so.
There’s a bigger problem here that wiser heads than mine might want to wrestle with. My post is the first time that folks on both sides of this issue have come together to debate this in any formal no holds barred manner. There’s been a lot of passion and pent up emotion on both sides. Here’s my point. We’ve been like ships passing in the night. There have been a lot of consultant reports, power point presentations etc, but nowhere have people on both sides been able to get together to wrestle with the nuts and bolts of the proposals, impacts, etc. I worked in Rhode Island for 4 years where we had an established process in place that did just this. There’s a way to make these processes far more inclusive and geared to problem solving than the ways they are currently structured. I think Newton would benefit from looking at options such as this.
@Bob: One of the challenges with our land use process is how long it takes.
Northland hosted many, many, many, dozens of community meetings over more than a year before filing with the city this year (I remember Setti Warren hosting one in 2016 in the Marshalls Parking lot). They met with area councils, neighbors, business owners, seniors, groups like Green Newton, etc. etc.
There was also the whole months-long Needham Street Visioning project, which at its core was about what the community thought this area should be like in the decades to come.
Folks who could be characterized as being on “all sides” today attended many of these meetings. It could not have been more thorough, inclusive or exhaustive.
Unfortunately — and to no one’s fault — many others are just now beginning understand/learn/absorb the project and feel frustrated now.
Could there a different way, as you suggest? Probably. But I don’t know what that is. At some point you need to let the city council to either approve or deny it. Talking is great, adjusting a plan based on feedback is great. Negotiating the best project is great (and that’s a step the council has the power to do).
But deciding yes or no on the special permit needs to happen too.
@Allison,
Your comment seemed to imply we have little options in Newton, when in fact we do. I was simply pointing out that we do already have apartments available, albeit some what expensive!
Coucilor Lipof is advocating for Seniors in that location, and I think that it’s a great idea too. It doesn’t look like the developer wants to go that way. And with 800 or so units in mix it simply does not fit.
I agree with @greg that Northland has made a very strong, concerted effort to sell the citizens of Newton on this concept. They have been doing this for years. And guess what….
If they were successful, there would be no RightSize Newton. This post would not be over 50 comments deep.
And while we focus our attention tonight on a traffic plan that has a greater chance of failure than success, no one wants to address the proverbial 10k lb elephant in the room….
800 units approved all at once is like going all in on ZipCar 10 years ago. Statistics at the time said it should work. Why own a car when you can share?!
And guess what….ZipCar is now a shell of what they were then.
Personally I’d love to see Newton and Northland agree upon a PHASED approval process.
If these mitigation strategies work…approve more units. Or revise for more dedicated housing for the aging. More affordable housing. More dog parks. Whatever.
I’d be fine with 1,000 units. Just not all at once. The sniff test you’re all seeing is that the risks of going all in NOW outweighs the benefits.
Even the most successful marriages starts with an extended period of dating if not cohabitation.
Maybe I’ll start a splinter group….NotAllAtOnce Newton. 🙂
@Leon Schwartz
You were amazing at the Land Use hearing this evening. You presented effortlessly. So much energy in that room this evening. The audience in the chamber was abuzz. You absolutely nailed it. Newton is currently besieged by these kind of projects, and you offer a voice of sanity. Please, please, do consider running for council this coming election.
What Simon says 🙂
@Alison – thank you.
My comments do not relate to the Northland development, and I would not want them to be construed as support or opposition.
Enrollment reports should only be used to predict how to accommodate school enrollment within the lifetime of the report. They are a terrible instrument to use for long term planning. Examples of the failure of enrollment reports:
1. The Comprehensive Plan in 2007 stated that no substantial change in school enrollment was expected in the near future.
2. One of the deciding factors in developing the academic wing of NNHS was an enrollment report that ended in 2014 that stated enrollment would be 1800 students at that point. It now is over 2000 students.
3. Programmatic increases in all the schools in the last 25 years are one of the major drivers of overcrowding in the schools that haven’t been rebuilt. Most of Newton’s schools are not equipped to deliver a 21st century education, which is dramatically different from a 20th century education. Decreased fertility rates and even enrollment will not solve the overcrowding problem in these schools.
Millennials: People act like this generation wants to sit around cafes sipping lattes for the next 25 years. Many are now in their 30’s and have the same aspirations as I did at their age – a nice community with good schools to raise their children. The empty nesters leave their homes and Millennials with kids move in. In my ‘hood, five homes have turned over in the last 2-3 years and 4 of the 5 homes have been replaced with families with preschoolers.
Fertility: I just don’t know what to say about this one except it made me chuckle. So it’s 1.91. Does that mean my 2-year old grandson counts as 1.0 and my 12 week old counts as .91. Or is the .91 the baby that’s due in July? Fertility rates do not relate to who is going to move to Newton. Young people who work in and around Boston and have kids are going to move to Newton, Brookline, and Lexington in larger numbers than other communities.
Baby Boomers: When I was 55, I filled out surveys about where I wanted to live in my old age and stated emphatically that I intended to stay in my house for my full life. I’m now 70 and what I “want” or “prefer” really doesn’t matter. In my future, it’s what I will “need” for housing, and the fact is that currently, there’s nowhere for me to move to in Newton. Nowhere. If I have to move out of Newton, moving from the house is the least of it – I lose my community, my friends, my civic involvement, my faith community. Moving from Newton would present me with an overwhelming loss that’s difficult to contemplate.
“The only way to achieve lower market rates rents is by building more, not fewer units.”
Not happening in the New York metropolitan area. Only economic gentrification.
If you want lower market prices, there are only 4 things you can do in Newton.
1. Wait for a recession
2. Increase the crime rate
3. Lower the school standards considerably. (Technically, over building housing could do this)
4. Jack up property taxes considerably
And by the way, why would anyone vote against their interests. If my retirements assets are tied up in my house valuation am i supposed to work until i die or force my grandkids to go into college debt because “fairness”.
Would you ask your boss to lower your salary so a low income less educated individual can get get hired to get a bettee job. I’m sure your family would think appreciate your “social warrior”
This whole “we must lower our property values” so others can live here is total BS. Unless you are a millionaire, your responsibility is to your own family first.
Btw, this response was not “bought and paid for by the Newton Chamber of commerce”
@Jack. Some loose ends. You asked if I had ever supported any large and new development projects in Newton? The answer is an emphatic yes. I was proud to organize folks to testify in favor of the Howard Haywood Senior Citizen Affordable Housing development at a public hearing last summer. I was representing Our Revolution Newton an affiliate of Our Revolution Massachusetts (ORMA), the follow on grass roots organization to Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign. I also supported the Engine 6 Pine Street Inn proposal in Waban, but was admittedly more muted on this than I would be today. As area councilors during that period we tried to stay within the boundaries of our respective villages. I did, however, convey my thoughts to Mayor Setti Warren.
Also, it should be stressed again that Right Size Newton folks have no problem with an ambitious development program at this site, or with Northland as the developer. It’s the size of the development and the impacts of a project this large on parking, traffic, schools, the Upper Falls community, etc. As I stated in my original post and as many Right Size folks made clear last evening, they are not anti-development. They don’t want to turn Newton into some kind of museum where change comes only grudgingly or not at all.
And jane Frantz: As a member of the earlier silent or forgotten generation, I so identify with your feelings as a baby boomer.
Neighborhood involvement is key in keeping the small city character of Newton. These monster developments will add the projected 15, 000 more people to the city, but at what cost. If the monstrous proposal and zoneing changed is passed, the character of West Newton and Washington Street will forever be lost. West Newton, Auburndale, Needham Street, parts of Waban will look like a congested Boston neighborhood. I urge people to join Bob Burke, Peter Harrington, and David Donahue in fighting this monstrous development. They know the facts.
@virginia gardner: I respect concerns about our changing neighborhoods. But can you please define what you mean when you write “the character of West Newton and Washington Street will forever be lost”?
What are the specific elements of Washington Street that you worry about losing? I’m asking because what I mostly see are blocks of tired buildings and businesses struggling from a lack of foot traffic. Being clear about what characteristics we’re trying to preserve would really help advance this discussion.
Virginia,
This is really hard to br against bring labelled or carbon pulluter. This way, they can bully people into silence…
When you cant argue facts, the cards come out
Virginia… sorry, auto complete ruined the last post.
Its really hard to push back without being labelled a racist or carbon polluter… we are being bullied into silence
Exactly right. When you disagree you are labeled. Why they do this I’ll never understand
@Virginia
Surely you are having giggle when you say that “I’ll never understand”!
Perhaps these building are tired, just like you? They need renovating, you need Re-invigerating!
Clearly I’m dissalutioned. If you don’t follow suit you shall be too! Yes you will be labeled. Anti development for sure!
That’s what happens around here. They label you to shut you up. They are quite effective at it too.
Appears now they want to talk “Character”. Please don’t let them silence you. I don’t think you are in the minority – they will tell you otherwise!